Twin Peaks Actually Explained (Youtube)

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

LateReg
Bookhouse Member
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 5:19 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Actually Explained (Youtube)

Postby LateReg » Wed May 20, 2020 11:03 am

Joel Bocko's videos really are the cream of the crop. His latest few on Lynch's collaboration with Mary Sweeney are particularly good.
I'm always interested in Joel's thoughts and look forward to his video focused specifically on The Return. But I read something in print a while back with him and someone else (sorry, I can't remember the article), and I noted that there were a few areas where I felt he was perhaps, well, not seeing some of the more obvious themes/plot points the way I did. I wrote them down to ask him about them, but never did, though I remember comments regarding Bob as mere plot baggage, and a discussion about the rapes of Diane and Audrey that did not take into account that DoppelCoop is acting on Cooper's suppressed desires, and how that serves as part of the investigation into Cooper's psyche. There was something similar with Richard as well. At any rate, I look forward to see where Joel is at in his analysis.
User avatar
AXX°N N.
RR Diner Member
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 8:47 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Actually Explained (Youtube)

Postby AXX°N N. » Thu May 21, 2020 8:16 am

I cannot believe this topic has only two pages, considering that thousands and thousands of pages have been produced on TP theory/interpretation on this board.

I am not saying that this guy is correct on every single detail (or that this is the only perspective on the show), but some of his discoveries are just astonishing and some of the the evidence he presents simply cannot be dismissed. The implications of his videos (there is a second one, that deals with Senorita Dido, Candy and other things that were left out for the first one) are HUGE and undeniable. Why aren't they discussed?
Personally I think the attitude he has that he "solved" the show is toxic. Lynch's tweets are flooded with comments about how Twin Perfect has "solved" his show, as if that was ever the point. Twin Peaks Actually Explained has given people the means with which to hammer the nail they want to into the show, remove the autonomy of the artist, declare it dead and done and position themselves rhetorically and figuratively above the material. I said it before, but I'll say it again: he did the same thing with the Silent Hill franchise decades ago, and because this was before some maturing on his part, was even worse about it then, acting like he was the sole owner of truth re the franchise, and condescending to anyone who disagreed with him.

It's the fanboy impulse to take ownership away from the creator. He's just gotten a bit more humble about it, but it wasn't compatible with video games that took inspiration from art films and was meant to be somewhat abstract, and it for sure as heck is not compatible with actual abstract art. It's content for the market that cares more about content referentialism than the content itself, like watching a Game Grumps playthrough.
Recipe not my own. In a coffee cup. 3 TBS flour, 2 TBS sugar, 1.5 TBS cocoa powder, .25 TSP baking powder, pinch of salt. 3 TBS milk, 1.5 TBS vegetable oil, 1 TBS peanut butter. Add and mix each set. Microwave 1 minute 10 seconds. The cup will be hot.
Rhodes
RR Diner Member
Posts: 198
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 8:35 am

Re: Twin Peaks Actually Explained (Youtube)

Postby Rhodes » Fri May 22, 2020 7:21 am

Yes, I understand that this guy is very annoying to a lot of people.

But the messenger should be separated 100% from the message. Even if we completely discard the claim that the television-angle is the crucial one and that he has found the ultimate key, he still provides so, many, many, many interesting insights (or even just theories, doesn't matter) that seem to be ignored here.

Just his technical analysis about radio waves, electricity, the working of a camera or a projector, the depth of his analysis (especially because he connets it with very specific quotes from the creator) is so impressive.

It seems like just because he is a huge twat, people don't want to accept even elements of his analysis!
enumbs
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2015 4:44 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Actually Explained (Youtube)

Postby enumbs » Fri May 22, 2020 7:28 am

Yes, I understand that this guy is very annoying to a lot of people.

But the messenger should be separated 100% from the message. Even if we completely discard the claim that the television-angle is the crucial one and that he has found the ultimate key, he still provides so, many, many, many interesting insights (or even just theories, doesn't matter) that seem to be ignored here.

Just his technical analysis about radio waves, electricity, the working of a camera or a projector, the depth of his analysis (especially because he connets it with very specific quotes from the creator) is so impressive.

It seems like just because he is a huge twat, people don't want to accept even elements of his analysis!
Maybe you could paraphrase or provide a time-code for a part of his analysis you find impressive or even undeniable, and then we can discuss that specifically?
Snodgrass
New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:17 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Actually Explained (Youtube)

Postby Snodgrass » Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:32 pm

Some evidence in support of the twin peaks as a meta commentary on TV theme:

S2E1, 1:05:13. Right after the Major's dream revealed to Bobby, there is a meeting at police station. In the beginning coop looks "real". As the scene progresses there is an obvious shift in video quality at exactly 1:05:39. He now looks like he is on tape. During the montage the murder as coop knows it is recounted. Coop and his monologue now appears to be trapped in a TV show as the camera pans over a grid of doughnuts. If you watch this a few times you can't unsee it.

Even Andy is trapped. Then he gets pissed at Albert and we snap back into reality.

I always thought this scene was peculiar. One night I watched it on repeat and tried to figure it out. I then thought it meant that twin peaks was a slipping in and out of fiction, as if the murder details were not real but the town of twin peaks does exist.

Then the twin perfect video surfaced and it put that scene in perspective.
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Lodge Member
Posts: 3136
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Actually Explained (Youtube)

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Thu Jun 04, 2020 6:26 am

Some evidence in support of the twin peaks as a meta commentary on TV theme:

S2E1, 1:05:13. Right after the Major's dream revealed to Bobby, there is a meeting at police station. In the beginning coop looks "real". As the scene progresses there is an obvious shift in video quality at exactly 1:05:39. He now looks like he is on tape. During the montage the murder as coop knows it is recounted. Coop and his monologue now appears to be trapped in a TV show as the camera pans over a grid of doughnuts. If you watch this a few times you can't unsee it.

Even Andy is trapped. Then he gets pissed at Albert and we snap back into reality.

I always thought this scene was peculiar. One night I watched it on repeat and tried to figure it out. I then thought it meant that twin peaks was a slipping in and out of fiction, as if the murder details were not real but the town of twin peaks does exist.

Then the twin perfect video surfaced and it put that scene in perspective.
Sorry, but that’s just a result of the remastering process. When the episode originally aired, there was no difference in quality. You see this a lot if you watch remastered versions of older movies. They remaster the scenes from the original unedited negative. But any shots that involve in-scene edits (fades, effects, superimposed images) tend not to get upgraded/remastered. They just use the series edit. The original TP didn't have too many fades/effects, so this isn’t an issue most of the time, but this particularly long and noticeable shot definitely “fell a victim” to this trend. The Garland Briggs “jungle throne” sequence at the beginning of Episode 20 is another example.

I’ve never heard a good explanation for why the people handling the remastering process couldn’t just upgrade all the raw elements and then recreate the edit. I get why that would be difficult for the Briggs sequence, which has a lot of moving parts, but it seems like it shouldn’t have been that hard in Episode 8.
User avatar
sylvia_north
RR Diner Member
Posts: 428
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 1:41 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Actually Explained (Youtube)

Postby sylvia_north » Wed Jun 17, 2020 1:02 pm

Catch his Response To Critics video, too. I think he addresses all the complaints in this thread.

I was with this guy every step of the way, I started even finishing his sentences. Excellent construction of his argument, exhaustive references to Lynch himself. I appreciate his impersonation to clearly demarcate where he’s quoting, it’s not a good one but whatever, I’ve heard pro audiobook narrators put on different voices a lot worse.

His interpretation is as far from “nebulous” as one can get...
and it made me fall back in love with Twin Peaks and its world.
Too Old to Die Young > TP S03
enumbs
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2015 4:44 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Actually Explained (Youtube)

Postby enumbs » Thu Jun 18, 2020 9:03 am

Catch his Response To Critics video, too. I think he addresses all the complaints in this thread.

I was with this guy every step of the way, I started even finishing his sentences. Excellent construction of his argument, exhaustive references to Lynch himself. I appreciate his impersonation to clearly demarcate where he’s quoting, it’s not a good one but whatever, I’ve heard pro audiobook narrators put on different voices a lot worse.

His interpretation is as far from “nebulous” as one can get...
and it made me fall back in love with Twin Peaks and its world.
I wonder if people who are less keen on the Return might be more responsive to the videos. I found season 3 so meaningful on it's own terms that I was underwhelmed and irritated by Twin Perfect's attempt to plaster his own (in my opinion quite limited and unconvincing) meaning onto the show. If I had found the show devoid of meaning however, maybe I would be grateful to have found a seemingly coherent explanation which allowed me to see purpose in the Return as a whole.
LateReg
Bookhouse Member
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 5:19 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Actually Explained (Youtube)

Postby LateReg » Thu Jun 18, 2020 2:08 pm

Catch his Response To Critics video, too. I think he addresses all the complaints in this thread.

I was with this guy every step of the way, I started even finishing his sentences. Excellent construction of his argument, exhaustive references to Lynch himself. I appreciate his impersonation to clearly demarcate where he’s quoting, it’s not a good one but whatever, I’ve heard pro audiobook narrators put on different voices a lot worse.

His interpretation is as far from “nebulous” as one can get...
and it made me fall back in love with Twin Peaks and its world.
I wonder if people who are less keen on the Return might be more responsive to the videos. I found season 3 so meaningful on it's own terms that I was underwhelmed and irritated by Twin Perfect's attempt to plaster his own (in my opinion quite limited and unconvincing) meaning onto the show. If I had found the show devoid of meaning however, maybe I would be grateful to have found a seemingly coherent explanation which allowed me to see purpose in the Return as a whole.
For what it's worth, and maybe I'm just projecting my own feelings here, but I think the problem people have with Twin Perfect's video is that all his eggs are in one basket, and that seems to be the only basket he's interested in. I find no fault in anything I've heard about the video, and I have always included this meta-reading in my analysis of The Return. But for me it is just one component, one layer of many that work in tandem. (The commentary and acknowledgment of Twin Peaks existence as a series ties directly into the narrative's multiple planes of reality, for example.) I'd like to see this person reach out and create a series of essays, each with a different focus, all of which I feel could be just as in depth as this one.
4815162342
RR Diner Member
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2014 9:46 am

Re: Twin Peaks Actually Explained (Youtube)

Postby 4815162342 » Thu Jul 30, 2020 5:53 am

Joel Bocko's videos really are the cream of the crop. His latest few on Lynch's collaboration with Mary Sweeney are particularly good.

Just to keep the positivity flowing, here are a number of other video essays which I think are worthwhile for various reasons:


To Linger With You by Corn Pone Flicks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKYb3Ofj7EY

Overviews by Corn Pone Flicks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyfcCnU ... z_tUpJj2eG

In Focus: The Broom Is Not What It Seems by The Long Take
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psYESfU_Sn0

Twin Peaks: The Universe in Entropy by Flower Guardian
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvZBpHLPuKE

Lost in Time- The Aesthetics of Slow Cinema by Omega Reviews
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRtqKX3nddo


The Corn Pone Flicks overviews in particular are a good example of how to present subjective interpretations in a level-headed, honest and funny way. The last few minutes from his final video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0ak5nUdl7k&t=17m27s) show a greater understanding of what makes Twin Peaks special than all of Twin Perfect's content put together.
I just want to second the recommendation for Corn Pone Flicks if anyone wants some interesting Twin Peaks youtube analysis beyond the garbage in Twin Perfect.

Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Mb3 and 33 guests