Page 29 of 54
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2017 12:53 pm
by cdobbs
Mark Frost said way back when the new series was announced that it would have a definite resolution, which could mean various things, but one of them won't be another series of Hail Mary cliffhangers to try to get another season. I take the comments about possibly continuing to mean that barring another nuclear blast that wipes out the town, it will still be there, and they could always theoretically return to it.
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2017 8:41 pm
by dadaistnun
Apparently, the music in Bad Cooper's resurrection scene is
Moonlight Sonata slowed way, way down. And mixed with monkey screams.
From that scene until the end of part 8, I'm not sure I moved a muscle. Absolutely riveted and terrified. The "holy shit!" look my wife and I exchanged when it was over made us erupt in that weird laughter of relief. Just beyond words. This whole series thus far is such a gift. I've laughed harder that I have in a long time, and been more creeped out since who knows when.
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 3:06 am
by J Adams
Not a "Twin Peaks" fan, but think the operatic "Fire Walk With Me" is brilliant, and one of DL's top 4 films. I've watched the first 6 episodes of the new series, and I would gladly erase them (and all of the original Twin Peaks series) from the face of the Earth in exchange for "Fire".
After initial great interest in the new series, I am bored by Dale Cooper (and Kyle M.), uninterested in unlocking any "mysteries", but delighted that Lynch seems to be doing whatever he wants. I've stopped watching, but will binge watch it when it is over.
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:56 pm
by solaris72
Quot wrote:The mind boggles at the possibilities that Part 18 has in store.
Is Lynch going to wrap it up, are have there even been discussions of a Season 4?
Kyle MacLachlan thinks
"chances are good" (as far as Lynch/Frost's interest, that is).
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 3:41 pm
by flyonthewall2983
If Showtime is game for it might be another matter. Aren't the ratings pretty low?
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 5:28 pm
by Robin Davies
J Adams wrote:Not a "Twin Peaks" fan, but think the operatic "Fire Walk With Me" is brilliant, and one of DL's top 4 films. I've watched the first 6 episodes of the new series, and I would gladly erase them (and all of the original Twin Peaks series) from the face of the Earth in exchange for "Fire".
You stopped at the wrong time. Please watch episodes 7 and 8. They might change your mind.
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 6:05 pm
by domino harvey
flyonthewall2983 wrote:If Showtime is game for it might be another matter. Aren't the ratings pretty low?
When's the last time anyone was talking about a Showtime series? They'll renew it in a heartbeat just for getting their name out there alone
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 6:06 pm
by knives
Masters of Sex?
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 6:12 pm
by mfunk9786
I do think that if this season winds into a sense of “normalcy” among the characters and the town of Twin Peaks, it would make a lot of sense to have a more straightforward (well, for Lynch) additional season to keep things going and perhaps mirror the first season with another mystery to solve.
But every new episode of this show has been a blessing, so I’m fine with whatever everybody does
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:30 pm
by captveg
Ratings are low, but streaming subscriptions are high.
Variety article
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:31 pm
by carmilla mircalla
I think it's fine the ratings are low since Lynch already got everything made with his desired budget and this season was basically done as a one off.
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:34 pm
by swo17
Although it doesn't bode well for this happening in the future, either for Lynch or for someone else of his ilk.
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:38 pm
by flyonthewall2983
swo17 wrote:Although it doesn't bode well for this happening in the future, either for Lynch or for someone else of his ilk.
That's the rub, especially with what's happening at a place like Netflix now, cutting shows off after the first season.
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2017 3:16 am
by mfunk9786
Maybe when Showtime sees how many of these people unsubscribe as soon as Twin Peaks is over, they’ll either be desperate to get more made or spiteful toward those who are only interested in them for one thing (my Ray Donovan is up here!)
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2017 4:22 am
by Peter-H
I sure hope this season ends up having hauntingly beautiful scenes like this one, and isn't just about weirdness.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QBl-BuEIV8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2017 4:24 am
by mfunk9786
It hasn’t been “just about weirdness” so far, so I’m not sure why that would even be a concern
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2017 6:53 am
by tenia
If you get caught up by the new season, sure.
But otherwise, "just weirdness" is also my feeling so far. Haunting weirdness, sure, but I dont feel much of any momentum going forward.
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2017 8:35 am
by mfunk9786
Imagine wasting so much of so many people’s time just for some weirdness. Lynch and Frost certainly owe the cast and crew a sincere explanation of their thought process.
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:56 am
by oh yeah
I thought Part 8 was monumentally good and the kind of thing people will be discussing decades from now, and I do very much like the 7 hours before it, but I still vastly prefer the approach and overall product of the original material - series and (best of all) FWWM. As much as I love Lynch and as obvious as it seems to me that the finest episodes of the original series were directed by him, I just think Twin Peaks was somehow generally much more interesting and engaging under the confines of network television than it is (thus far) in 2017 as a prestige drama with full creative control.
Of course, this preference also just has a lot to do with my own disinterest in the kind of anything-goes mentality and lack of aesthetic rigor (relative to FWWM, BV, LH, TSS, etc) of Lynch's digital-era output. Part 8 was not only the the best part of the season thus far, but also perhaps the first one that I felt was as visually stunning as Lynch's celluloid work. The original series (and even FWWM) had a kind of warmth and passion and pathos that really helped immerse you in the setting and story - but the new episodes are typically quite cold and detached, in a way that doesn't always seem necessary.
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2017 2:11 pm
by flyonthewall2983
If nothing else, 8 put away any lingering doubts as to what Lynch could do with digital storytelling for me at least. Now if only he could do something with it in the wider aspect ratio, something he hasn't done (as far as I know) since Lost Highway.
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2017 2:16 pm
by Robin Davies
This season feels like an 18 hour Lynch movie which is a truly wonderful thing - especially if he's sincere about not making any more movies.
The desirability of a season 4 would entirely depend on how this season ends so I'm not even thinking about the possibility. Let's savour this one while it lasts.
Personally I felt the first two seasons were compromised by the other writers and directors (good though some of them were) and Season 3 has felt like a vast improvement.
I got plenty of warmth and pathos from several scenes -
from the end of the opening two parter where the sublime music wraps around James and Shelley, from Dougie's tears when looking at Sonny Jim, from Ben and Beverley searching for the mysterious hum while seething with sexual tension, and from the appalling hit-and-run incident (though the reactions of the onlookers seemed a bit forced - but that was also true of the very first episode of Season 1).
Granted, some of the pathos derives from our own nostalgia for the original series, the sense of the passing years in our own lives and the mortality of the actors. I'm sure the eyes of many Peaks fans moistened when they watched the scenes with Catherine Coulson and Warren Frost.
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2017 2:53 pm
by tenia
Yeah but for instance :
was Dougie crying while looking at Sonny Jim because of looking at his child or because his child had something to do with the Black Lodge since he can be seen blinking backwards ?
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2017 7:01 pm
by terabin
There are so many aforementioned beautiful sequences - short films within the film - in the new season that I don't need a traditional narrative with forward momentum. I'm enjoying getting on Lynch's wavelength - receiving what there is to receive.
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2017 11:06 pm
by flyonthewall2983
Getting both at the same time isn't bad though. Within all that wonderful and terrifying imagery I did feel like it was serving a larger purpose towards what had been established up until that point. I really liked episode 7 for pushing the story, but I also don't feel that 8 was done as to be something clearly on the opposite side.
Re: Twin Peaks
Posted: Sun Jul 02, 2017 5:59 am
by mfunk9786
Yes, getting rather tired of the whole “Lynch could beat me over the head with a sock full of nickels and I would just appreciate seeing the world through his eyes for as long as he is brutally flogging me” schtick. This season has been around the middle of the road with regard to how obtuse Lynch’s work can be, and he is on the palatable, mainstream end of the spectrum of avant-garde filmmaking. Nor is this an accomplished, thoughtful filmmaker being “weird for weird’s sake” or spiteful toward his audience. These are all totally invented ideas that very likely play no part in the actual creative process here. No medals will be distributed for being the most zen about the new season of Twin Peaks, I assure you