Author Topic: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.  (Read 82186 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #420 on: September 04, 2017, 03:36:26 AM »
Well, this is a Lynch film alright. I don't understand anything.

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #421 on: September 04, 2017, 03:39:20 AM »
It's puzzling and upsetting that they completely wrote Annie out of existence.

Bebpo

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #422 on: September 04, 2017, 03:45:45 AM »
What's frustrating is that at first glance the dream theory holds up. I saw on gaf someone said the dream has good cooper and evil cooper, the real world cooper is a mix of both. They go to the Palmer house and it's owned by the person who owns it currently in the real world. The only bit that doesn't make sense with that is it sounded like the last dialogue was Sarah saying Laura from inside the house? And Laura's scream of course.

Couple of questions of my own.

1. Why can't the ending just be that the time period Laura/Cooper went into in ep18 is even further in the past before Sara Palmer owned the house? Hence the What year is this?

2. So I thought after evil cooper got shot they took BOB out of him mid-season and he was BOB-less evil cooper for the 2nd half. Why did he still have BOB in him?

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #423 on: September 04, 2017, 03:54:11 AM »
What's frustrating is that at first glance the dream theory holds up. I saw on gaf someone said the dream has good cooper and evil cooper, the real world cooper is a mix of both. They go to the Palmer house and it's owned by the person who owns it currently in the real world. The only bit that doesn't make sense with that is it sounded like the last dialogue was Sarah saying Laura from inside the house? And Laura's scream of course.

Couple of questions of my own.

1. Why can't the ending just be that the time period Laura/Cooper went into in ep18 is even further in the past before Sara Palmer owned the house? Hence the What year is this?

2. So I thought after evil cooper got shot they took BOB out of him mid-season and he was BOB-less evil cooper for the 2nd half. Why did he still have BOB in him?

The lady said the house was previously owned by Mrs. Chalfont. Her own name is Alice Tremond.

http://twinpeaks.wikia.com/wiki/Mrs._Tremond

I don't know what any of this means. Perhaps the purpose is to just generate a million different theories on the internet..

pilonv1

  • I love you just the way I am
  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #424 on: September 04, 2017, 05:22:41 AM »
Loved it. Only realised with less than 10 minutes to go that they hadn't done anything with the Audrey storyline and then realised why. Very excited to watch it again.
itm

Bebpo

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #425 on: September 04, 2017, 05:33:53 AM »
Audrey storyline = she had conflicts in her head and then woke up
Jerry storyline = he was high
Dr Jacobi storyline = he is crazy and sells shovels to idiots, the end
Nadine storyline = she buys a shovel and tells Ed he can see Norma, the end
Richard storyline = runs over a kid, escapes, coop kidnaps him, gets electrocuted, the end
etc...

Like despite the slower measured directorial approach and multiple scenes spread of tons of eps, a lot of the subplots were extremely simple and nothing. I feel like the show pretends to be a lot more clever than it actually is by obscuring things. The side-stuff (drug dealer kids for instance) reminded me of all the pointless/weak side-stuff that brings down S2. I'd put S3 about on par with S2 overall but far below S1.

I think my favorite characters in the show were the casino guys and the assassins. Favorite scene was probably the Polish Insurance shootout and maybe some Gordon/Albert stuff. As much as I hate on Lynch as a writer sometimes I love him as a comedic actor. He's hilarious.

Dennis

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #426 on: September 04, 2017, 09:34:29 AM »

Dennis

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #427 on: September 04, 2017, 12:13:58 PM »
I like this take below. Wrong I am sure but it sounds as good as anything else you could think up.

https://www.reddit.com/r/twinpeaks/comments/6xyfrp/s3e18_theory_there_are_5_universes_3_of_which_are/

Joe Molotov

  • I'm much more humble than you would understand.
  • Administrator
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #428 on: September 04, 2017, 12:54:29 PM »
1. Why can't the ending just be that the time period Laura/Cooper went into in ep18 is even further in the past before Sara Palmer owned the house? Hence the What year is this?

They stopped at a modern Valero with contemporary gas prices, tho.
©@©™

Dennis

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #429 on: September 04, 2017, 01:06:46 PM »

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #430 on: September 04, 2017, 01:06:57 PM »
Everything was Lynched


To recap, Lynch brought back his most famous and beloved work after 25+ years of people asking him to bring it back. He does so, but strips everything about it people loved, then ends the series by erasing the events of the series and doing another cliffhanger. When they never even addressed the FIRST series ending cliffhanger at all.

 :doge

Eh they did, Dooplecoop was a huge presence this season as was actual Coop's return from the Lodge.

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #431 on: September 04, 2017, 01:12:25 PM »
"I can't wait to see how Lynch wraps this up!"

spoiler (click to show/hide)
[close]

Dennis

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #432 on: September 04, 2017, 01:16:01 PM »
If you need a wrap-up just delete episode 18 from your mind and let episode 17 be the conclusion. Well, maybe minus the very last moments of 17.

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #433 on: September 04, 2017, 01:20:21 PM »
Stolen from 4chan.

Quote
last scene was a dream
laura in 1989 is the dreamer
cooper asks what year is it
laura's mother calls out to her from the waking world
laura recognizes her mother's voice and realize she's dreaming
she screams and wakes up back in 1989 the morning they would have found her body had cooper not had changed the past

Apparently the "Laura?" in the final scene is Sarah Palmer in the first ep, but slowed down/distorted a bit.

Bebpo

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #434 on: September 04, 2017, 01:23:45 PM »
Why did Cooper even feel like he needed to go back and save Laura unless the lodge people/giant told him he needed to do that during his stay? Just seems kinda unnecessary when things were fine in the current time. Felt like he was doing it because the "gods" told him that was the plan he had to follow, but then it just fucked everything up so #godsbetrolling?

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #435 on: September 04, 2017, 01:27:10 PM »
Huh? When did Audrey go into a coma in S2? I guess if that's the case than ep16's ending makes more sense. She wakes up. The end. I don't remember her going into a coma though and I only watched S2 a few months ago?

There's a throwaway line that Audrey went into a coma after the bank explosion in the s2 finale.

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #436 on: September 04, 2017, 01:32:21 PM »

2. So I thought after evil cooper got shot they took BOB out of him mid-season and he was BOB-less evil cooper for the 2nd half. Why did he still have BOB in him?

BOB clearly went back inside Mr. C in that instance. The blackface guys don't take BOB out, he comes out as a result of them feeding and will naturally go back in unless something else happens. It is interesting though they foreshadowed how Mr. C would be defeated/killed that early in the season, though.

Dennis

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #437 on: September 04, 2017, 01:32:29 PM »
Why did Cooper even feel like he needed to go back and save Laura unless the lodge people/giant told him he needed to do that during his stay? Just seems kinda unnecessary when things were fine in the current time. Felt like he was doing it because the "gods" told him that was the plan he had to follow, but then it just fucked everything up so #godsbetrolling?

I think Cooper is a nice person who wants to genuinely save Laura Palmer from an awful fate. But the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Bebpo

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #438 on: September 04, 2017, 02:13:20 PM »
Huh? When did Audrey go into a coma in S2? I guess if that's the case than ep16's ending makes more sense. She wakes up. The end. I don't remember her going into a coma though and I only watched S2 a few months ago?

There's a throwaway line that Audrey went into a coma after the bank explosion in the s2 finale.

But if she's been in a coma since S2 end, how did she have Richard?

Joe Molotov

  • I'm much more humble than you would understand.
  • Administrator
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #439 on: September 04, 2017, 02:45:55 PM »
Huh? When did Audrey go into a coma in S2? I guess if that's the case than ep16's ending makes more sense. She wakes up. The end. I don't remember her going into a coma though and I only watched S2 a few months ago?

There's a throwaway line that Audrey went into a coma after the bank explosion in the s2 finale.

But if she's been in a coma since S2 end, how did she have Richard?

Evil Cooper raped her in the hospital.
©@©™

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #440 on: September 04, 2017, 03:03:11 PM »
Huh? When did Audrey go into a coma in S2? I guess if that's the case than ep16's ending makes more sense. She wakes up. The end. I don't remember her going into a coma though and I only watched S2 a few months ago?

There's a throwaway line that Audrey went into a coma after the bank explosion in the s2 finale.

But if she's been in a coma since S2 end, how did she have Richard?

Evil Cooper raped her in the hospital.

Yup.

Bebpo

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #441 on: September 04, 2017, 04:21:17 PM »
Ewwww.

Tasty

  • Senior Member

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #443 on: September 04, 2017, 04:46:41 PM »
Just realized we never got to see Ben Horne interact with anyone except his secretary and Jerry.  :-\

Quaker

  • Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #444 on: September 04, 2017, 07:12:13 PM »
...a revival series where everything is promised to be explained...
Did anyone actually say this?

Dennis

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #445 on: September 04, 2017, 07:16:32 PM »

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #446 on: September 04, 2017, 07:46:54 PM »
...a revival series where everything is promised to be explained...
Did anyone actually say this?

Kyle MacLachlan did before the season aired, more or less, but I'm not sure why anyone would take his word for it. There's so much done in editing. Like, the ending scene was one of the first things they shot for this - if I was Kyle and that was the case, then I'd have assumed that scene was at the start of the series. If that was the case, and Episode 17 was the true end, then a lot of plots did get wrapped up (more or less.)

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #447 on: September 04, 2017, 07:47:22 PM »
At the very least, Big Ed and Janey-E got unequivocally happy endings, so that's something.

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #448 on: September 04, 2017, 07:55:59 PM »
dog

ZephyrFate

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #449 on: September 04, 2017, 08:46:48 PM »
I liked the finale. The "new world" Cooper and not-Laura exist in now is devoid of music, and the atmosphere is palpable because of it. Cooper not being Cooper anymore cements that. The mood struck when they both walk up to the Tremond/Chalfant's home is incredible, too. Those names are callbacks, too.

toku

  • 𝕩𝕩𝕩
  • Senior Member

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #451 on: September 05, 2017, 01:13:02 AM »
Just realized we never got to see Ben Horne interact with anyone except his secretary and Jerry and Frank Truman and Sylvia.  :-\

FTFY

I think I've become more at peace with the ending once the initial shock and overwhelming feeling of bleakness subsided. Reading the various discussions/theories/speculation online helped. It definitely got people talking. I think part 18 is actually better than 17. 17 started out awesome with Cole giving us backstory about Judy and then tensions kept building up as Doppelcoop got to the sheriff station. But then it just became a ludicrous comic book cartoon with One Punch Man battling volleybob. Maybe that was the entire point of 17, to give the most over the top fanservice resolution Lynch thought the fans would want only to completely subvert and turn it inside out? Seems like the entire series was an exercise in fucking with our expectations.

What bothers me the most is Annie being written into nonexistence. I get it, maybe Lynch didn't come up with the character, maybe he didn't like her. But asking the audience to pretend that she never existed while shoehorning the Coop and Diane romance is a bit much. I honestly don't care about Coop+Diane, my emotional involvement in the relationship between those two characters is unearned. Heck, the Janey E and Dougie relationship is more real to me, and one of them is a vegetable/tulpa.

Too many things just feel retconn-y in the season, and that's my biggest regret about it. Like, how am I supposed supposed to buy that Judy is a primordial elemental evil when in FWWM Jeffries is talking about her as if she's a person? I always got a feeling that Jeffries was protective of Judy if anything.

Another gripe is that there are many unresolved and undeveloped themes. I wish we'd actually glean some insight into what was Doppelcoop's motives, what his endgoal was. Why was he looking for Mother/Judy? I did like how Doppelcoop, much like good Coop, thought he was the man with the plan but was ultimately helpless against the transdimensional beings of the lodges. Like when he entered the White Lodge seeing him caged and helpless, he was as much of a threat to the Fireman as an ant is to a person.

But, all in all, this was definitely a trip. People will be talking about Twin Peaks for a very long time, again.

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #452 on: September 05, 2017, 11:05:00 AM »
I'm overall happy with the ending, and I pretty much have been since my first viewing. The very last scene kind of reminded me of the last moments of Phantasm II, which is always a good thing.

That said, I do have a couple of gripes, probably shared with others.

1) Audrey. Although I've found myself flip-flopping on this, I still mostly wish that Audrey had more to do. Originally, I wished she had a scene after her "wake up" scene, but I've kind of come around to that being a cool enough ending for her character. She wasn't really important in the latter half of season 2, so I've come to accept that she was relegated to unconnected side story status. With that said, I wish that maybe her appearances were spread more throughout the season, or that there were a few of them in the first half. I dunno--I guess it fits with how the other "unimportant" TP characters were dealt with. They all got arcs across 3-4 episodes or so, generally in episodes grouped pretty closely together. Maybe this complaint isn't so much about Audrey as it is about these characters felt like afterthoughts kept around for old TP flavor.

2) I think we needed one more meaty Sarah Palmer scene. Maybe even just an extended take of her smashing Laura's picture with her maybe doing something else "lodgey." This is ultimately forgivable since the final scene plays with the expectation of encountering Sarah again, but really, Grace Zabriskie has been amazing and I wanted to see her chew on some scenery one last time.

          2a) Maybe an unfair bitching point, but I really wish Ray Wise had more than one scene in The Return.

3) I'm not terribly fond of the Judy-related retcon-y info Gordon is describing at the beginning of 17. I know it at least jives with FWWM, but I'm not sure if it does with the original series. Either way, it was an exposition dump that was really unnecessary to the plot at that point.

4) This totally could have been like 10 episodes. None of that Richard Horne stuff ended up being important. None of that Caleb Landry Whatever stuff ended up being important. None of the Shelly's daughter stuff ended up being important (we never even saw Shelly or Bobby's reaction to her apparent death--or even found out if she actually died). I'm forgiving of giving the old fan faves tossaway plots in order to score some nostalgia points and feels, but this season introduced a bunch of new characters that ended up not having a point or being entertaining, and then gave them more screen time than those old faves. I guess we at least got that awesome home invasion scene from Richard Horne.

5) I'm still unsure about the coordinates Mr. C wanted and what his goal was. Was he really looking for Judy, which seems like the most likely scenario given the white room sequence where the Giant changes the Palmer house to the police station as a trap. I know you shouldn't apply logic or thought to a Lynch story, but wouldn't Bob have noticed that he was living with Judy during that period that he killed Laura Palmer?

Overall, I loved the season, and I even liked the shaggy dogginess of a lot of it. It would just have been nicer if the dog was less shaggy in some areas and shaggier in others.
serge

Joe Molotov

  • I'm much more humble than you would understand.
  • Administrator
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #453 on: September 05, 2017, 11:19:00 AM »
Final scene should have been Cooper arm wrestling Judy for the fate of the multiverse.
©@©™

demi

  • cooler than willco
  • Administrator
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #454 on: September 05, 2017, 11:55:11 AM »
So is it ok to like LOST now now that Twin Peaks went the same road?
fat

Dennis

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #455 on: September 05, 2017, 01:42:40 PM »
So is it ok to like LOST now now that Twin Peaks went the same road?

No.

And comparing Twin Peaks to LOST  :trigger

fistfulofmetal

  • RAPTOR
  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #456 on: September 05, 2017, 02:26:59 PM »
My girlfriend actively hated it and thought it was a bunch of pointless nonsense.

I shrugged and was happy to just see Sheryl Lee again.
nat

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #457 on: September 06, 2017, 11:00:36 PM »
So is it ok to like LOST now now that Twin Peaks went the same road?

Nah, Lost promised answers since day 1 (and ended being a big lie), Lynch was forced to even resolve the killer plot line and admited he wanted to focus in town shenanigans.

Happy with the ending because I expected a bigger shitshow and is actually pretty coherent for lynch.

Quote
Mark Frost also promised resolution and a real conclusion. Maybe he failed to mention it was for his book and not the season.

But is a real conclusion and resolution: BOB is destroyed, EvilCoop returns to the Black Lodge to be farmed, Cooper chooses to save Laura and taking a chance with Diane in the alternate universe over having a normal life... And it backfires to an great extent.


agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #458 on: September 07, 2017, 12:17:19 AM »
Still upset about the treatment of Annie. >:(

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #459 on: September 07, 2017, 01:55:29 AM »
Are you fucking kidding me? Cooper was madly in love with her and she is the entire and sole reason he went into the Black Lodge and was stuck there for 25 years! I get that Lynch didn't like her. So what? She was important enough to be included in FWWM. And he still directed the S2 finale, so he OK'd her being the reason for Cooper going in the Lodge. To handwave her away and pretend that such a major event didn't exist completely kills the suspension of disbelief, at least FOR ME. You can disagree all you want, but your attempt to patronize and act like your opinion (much like the way Stro has behaved throughout the thread) is silly.

What was forced, on me, and many other people who felt the same way, is the dumb Cooper/Diane romance out of nowhere.

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #460 on: September 07, 2017, 02:10:31 AM »
The S2 Finale ended with Mr. C mockingly asking repeatedly "how's Annie?" The answer to the question thousands of TP fans wanted to know. That's why. Just like I wanted to know what happened with Big Ed, James, Bobby, Harry Truman, Andy and Lucy, etc. I am not even particularly fond of Annie as a character (although Heather Graham is lovely). But why completely disregard her when her fate was such an enormous part of the story and intertwined with Cooper's in such a significant way? That's not believable and a wasted opportunity. Especially when we get treated with followups with superfluous characters like the giggling German waitress and excruciating scenes of Dr. Jacoby painting golden shovels with little payoff (the entire point of the shovels was to give Nadine some perspective on life to finally set Ed free, which could have been accomplished in many different ways). Bah.

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #461 on: September 07, 2017, 02:22:54 AM »
Fair enough. Guess it didn't matter to me because it felt like something Lynch had to deal with then in spite of his prior un-involvement with the character's creation. So I didn't mind having her ignored completely.

That just sounds fanboyish to me, I'm sorry. Lynch is brilliant, but he is not without flaws. A cohesive narrative is internally consistent. If it wasn't beneath him to explain other character's absences with off-screen explanations and weird teapots, he could've easily explained Annie away with a couple of minutes of dialogue. But I get that certain things are important to some and not to others. The "how's Annie" part was one of my favorite parts of the entire TP saga, it's stuck with me since I originally saw the series when I was a kid. So to me Annie was always a huge part of the mythology of TP, and to have her dismissed so unceremoniously rubs me the wrong way.

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #462 on: September 07, 2017, 02:34:10 AM »
Yes, Annie is the reason Coop went into the Lodge, and therefore the reason Mr. C exists, and without her there is no plot to season 3, so the idea that the only mention she got in The Return was the clip from FWWM is pretty odd. Coop gave zero fucks about her after that and instead fell in love with a woman who screamed at him all the time when he was doing the Dougie. Donna had no real impact on the main plot. Annie was crucial to it at the end.

Where are DoppleAnnie and DoppleWindom? How can you gloss over Annie apparently being released from the Lodge in possession of the ring, the ring being taken by the nurse, and then....you never hear about either of them again? That's a pretty big thing to just ignore entirely. Especially since that stuff came with Lynch leading it up. And then she's erased from Secret History, which Lynch had nothing to do with.

For once I completely agree with Stro in the Twin Peaks thread!  :bow2

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #463 on: September 07, 2017, 02:35:19 AM »
Well, I am not a fan of Nadine (nor of Mega-Nadine, or Shovel-enthusiast-Nadine or any iteration of her), but I can't just will her existence away like that.

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #464 on: September 07, 2017, 07:12:24 AM »
People were saying "Oh, it'd be better when you watch it all at once", but no, it actually gets worse. Yes, it flows better and doesn't feel quite as agonizingly slow, but now you know you're wasting your time with 90% of the show, and the Dougie stuff is WORSE because you know Cooper is fully aware under there, and the Lodge can interact with him in the real world, but instead of having him do anything with electricity, they have him PLAYING SLOT MACHINES AND DOING INSURANCE FRAUD CASES.

Don't take your show from a murder mystery of a teenage girl in a quirky city with some supernatural elements that act as an allegory for abuse to a cosmic battle for good and evil and a primordial evil warping reality and then expect me to to be interested in seeing a man with a toddler's intellect figuring out insurance fraud with the help of an interdimensional one armed man as multiple people fail to kill him Azin humorous ways.

I'm pretty sure you're just a distinguished mentally-challenged fellow that had distinguished mentally-challenged expectations. Lynch, in his imperfect career, has never retread ground. If you thought this was going to be TP TV as usual, you're dumber than Arvie's dad when he decided to not put a condom on. This season was pretty fantastic. Any indulgences were forgivable by the end. There was superfluous material at times, but it was rarely a real distraction. .
« Last Edit: September 07, 2017, 07:21:06 AM by TVC 15 »
serge

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #465 on: September 07, 2017, 03:41:23 PM »
Doesn't seem that the reality resets so much that Cooper and Diane travel to another dimension/timeline. The fact that Lynch/Frost put the Dougie Jones resolution after Cooper alters Laura death is a way to say "this still counts".

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #466 on: September 07, 2017, 05:53:49 PM »
The point of The Return was to be another one of Lynch's meditations on identity. Dougie is central to that entire idea.

It's like complaining about Balthazar Getty in Lost Highway.

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #467 on: September 07, 2017, 06:10:29 PM »
I haven't watched Lost Highway. I read the plot synopsis online, and it kind of sounds like Lost Highway is TP Season 3 Part 18: The Movie?

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #468 on: September 07, 2017, 06:30:59 PM »
I haven't watched Lost Highway. I read the plot synopsis online, and it kind of sounds like Lost Highway is TP Season 3 Part 18: The Movie?

Yes, as I said before:

Part 18 was 4 parts Lost Highway and 1 part Mulholland Drive.

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #469 on: September 07, 2017, 08:35:22 PM »

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #470 on: September 07, 2017, 08:44:09 PM »
Cooper didn't understand/didn't remember the Fireman's message. He didn't remember Richard and Linda  :-\

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #471 on: September 08, 2017, 02:50:36 PM »
Cooper didn't understand/didn't remember the Fireman's message. He didn't remember Richard and Linda  :-\

Cooper forgot a lot of stuff in the original Twin Peaks, including stuff like Laura telling him who killed her. Whatever is that already expected by the Black/White Lodge seems to be mostly unclear. The Fireman warned him about not remembering something in the beginning of season 2 ( Audrey's note) and she was almost killed because of it.

In that note, the Giant/Fireman seems to be genuinely benign compared with the other super natural advisors. Probably that's why he only appeared in the white&albacore room (white lodge?) in this season.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2017, 02:56:19 PM by Boredfrom »

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #472 on: September 08, 2017, 08:28:42 PM »
http://www.waggish.org/2017/twin-peaks-finale/


An interesting take. I don't know if I agree with it or not, but it seems as plausible as just about anything else.

I agree with some stuff (like Judy being in a cosmic trap and being Sarah Palmer, Richard and Lucy being alternate dimension personalities that are goping to overwrite Copper and Diane, the white lodge helping Cooper to get to Dougie Jones, Cooper gaining "enlightment" ). But the Garmonbozia bomb sounds far fetched as fuck (given how little we know it operates), the plan to move to an alternate dimension because how destructive the bomb is it sounds like something from Crisis on the Infinite Earths and the fact that we kind of dont know if the Cooper, Briggs, Cole meeting was with the real Cooper or with the DopplegangerBob, the main antognist is still Bob given that the whole plot still moves around for his search of Judy and how it seems that the white/black lodge were trying to stop him with different gambits.

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #473 on: September 08, 2017, 10:32:48 PM »
I like that theory a lot, and it makes the most sense to me, especially in how it addresses all the different clues and out of order continuity issues. It dots all the i's and crosses all the t's. And it's really not any more far fetched than any other theory nor things that actually happened in the show.

I also think, within the framework of this theory, the orb that the Fireman created and sent to Earth was not Laura herself, but the spirit bomb to be placed within her.

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #474 on: September 08, 2017, 11:47:44 PM »
Yeah, I know. When I watched part 18 the first time it also occured to me that Cooper may simply be a schizophrenic. But all those scenarios make the entire series kind of a waste, I don't think Lynch meant for the entire show to be a dream.

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #475 on: September 09, 2017, 02:56:11 AM »
As far fetched as the bomb thing sounds, the episode before it had a random Brit with a super powered garden glove punch BOB the bowling ball to pieces and kill him for good.

I get you but there was at least some build up about that. There is even a build up with Judy and alternate dimensions. The Twin Peaks´ Genkidama sounds like wishful thinking.


agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #476 on: September 09, 2017, 05:05:05 PM »
The buildup was in episode 8, breh. Also, Episode 1 and 17. "Remember Richard and Linda." The Fireman was aware of everything that would happen, it was all part of the plan, brehs.

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #477 on: September 09, 2017, 05:18:28 PM »
Even with one episode of build that's such an absurd concept.


I wish we got a Ben/Beverly sex scene instead of Diane/Coop  :shaq2


Perhaps Lynch will explain it all on the director's commentary tracks  :crowdlaff

He is going to make a film with the deleted/cut footage if TP: Missing Pieces is anything to go by.

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #478 on: September 10, 2017, 01:17:52 AM »
Rewatched the last three episodes today. The more I think about it, the more I become convinced that the Odessa dimension is a trap set by the White Lodge theory is the correct one. Why else would the Fireman give clues to Cooper about everything in the first episode? He said "remember 430, Richard and Linda, two birds with one stone." It's all clearly a part of some plan and he wants to make sure that Cooper is aware of these things as it will help him in following through with his plan. Now, it seems Cooper forgot about "Richard and Linda," as he seems confused when he reads the note. Or maybe it hit him later, he had plenty of time to think with all the driving he did. I think Cooper is aware that he is in some dream dimension, because he barely bats an eye on the dead guy in Carrie's home. Maybe even because he remembers about Richard, he is aware that he is in someone else's dream.

Now, you may say that Lynch doesn't operate like that, his works are abstract and there are no clear cut answers. That may be true, but let's not forget that he is only 1/2 of the creative force behind Twin Peaks. And it seems to me that the mythology of Twin Peaks, the various beings and their positions on the sides of good vs. evil is Mark Frost's contribution. I'm willing bet that his idea of the plot is a lot more concrete, and was abstracted by Lynch's artistic vision. Maybe we will see when the Final Dossier comes out.

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
Re: Twin Peaks OT: I'll see you again in 25 years.
« Reply #479 on: September 10, 2017, 01:11:00 PM »
Rewatched the last three episodes today. The more I think about it, the more I become convinced that the Odessa dimension is a trap set by the White Lodge theory is the correct one. Why else would the Fireman give clues to Cooper about everything in the first episode? He said "remember 430, Richard and Linda, two birds with one stone." It's all clearly a part of some plan and he wants to make sure that Cooper is aware of these things as it will help him in following through with his plan. Now, it seems Cooper forgot about "Richard and Linda," as he seems confused when he reads the note. Or maybe it hit him later, he had plenty of time to think with all the driving he did. I think Cooper is aware that he is in some dream dimension, because he barely bats an eye on the dead guy in Carrie's home. Maybe even because he remembers about Richard, he is aware that he is in someone else's dream.

Now, you may say that Lynch doesn't operate like that, his works are abstract and there are no clear cut answers. That may be true, but let's not forget that he is only 1/2 of the creative force behind Twin Peaks. And it seems to me that the mythology of Twin Peaks, the various beings and their positions on the sides of good vs. evil is Mark Frost's contribution. I'm willing bet that his idea of the plot is a lot more concrete, and was abstracted by Lynch's artistic vision. Maybe we will see when the Final Dossier comes out.

I think is correct to asume that Frost is the one that gives coherence to Twin Peaks and probably has more insight in the hidden meanings that Lynch himself. I don't agree with the bomb theory, but I can see Frost trying to work some sort of conclusion for the myth arc from this.