Twin Peaks: Classic or Dud?

(SPOILERS if you haven't got around to watched the show in the past two and a half decades. I hadn't until recently.)

This show is a mix of the ridiculous and the sublime! I was 11 and didn't watch it when it came out. My partner and I are halfway through s2 right now. We were really hooked through the Laura Palmer storyline but after they decided to resolve the central mystery seven episodes into s2, it is hard to maintain the same enthusiasm. None of the remaining storylines seem very compelling. (I'm hoping for an epic man vs. owl battle, though.)

The creativity and craft were amazing at times, and it managed to have some really powerful suspenseful moments at times. We wanted to binge-watch all of s1 really fast, even 24 years after it came out. At the same time, the show's failings are almost spectacular. Using the same actress to play Laura Palmer and Maddy Ferguson, on the 'Tale of Two Cities' premise that two people who are not identical twins could look so much like each other as to fool someone who was close to one of them, was pretty hard to swallow. Similarly, it was pretty obvious that 'Mr. Tojamura' was a woman disguised as a Japanese man. The French Canadians from BC who speak with what sound like awkward imitations of Parisian accents are pretty ridiculous (see also: the Mountie who wears ceremonial garb on the job).

More fundamentally, it was fairly obvious to us who killed Laura a few episodes before it was revealed on-screen. I suspected him from early on because his behaviour was so odd but the whole 'Bob' thing was an effective misdirect for a while. Was it harder to tell in 1990/91, when people waited a week for each episode?? It was a little unsatisfying that the answer was basically just revealed to Cooper by various visions (but I'm a big Sherlock Holmes fan). I'm not really sure what to make of his character: they started out by really emphasizing his masterful deductive skills (with his deducing people's backstories just by observing their body language etc) but these seemed to become much less significant as the series went on, with Cooper relying more and more on dreams, messages from outer space, visions of giants. I'm not sure I get what the 'mythology' of the show is yet, how the fantastical elements are all supposed to work. Maybe it comes together eventually.

Judging by what I've read, Frost and Lynch didn't decide who the killer was until ABC told them they had to solve the mystery... so, after s1?

Ah, interesting. Like I said, I just thought he was suspicious early on but we thought it was obvious that he was the killer a couple of episodes before it was revealed (in s2).

And I mean, a lot of people were suspicious early on. We wondered if Donna had an angle.

This gets at something about the show, though, at least the Laura Palmer storyline: it doesn't work like a 'good' mystery should, where clues are presented and the viewer is given enough information to deduce the killer but in such a subtle way that hardly anyone will be able to. (As soon as they start giving real clues, we could figure it out right away.) What was interesting was that it managed to be compelling viewing despite this.

The plotting doesn't aim to be remotely plausible in a real-world way; not his style. (Much like Vertigo and its lookalike-females-of-mystery trope.) It's a dreamscape, not a policier. I don't know if Lynch has ever said anything about AC Doyle-type mysteries, but he wouldn't make one.

I believe they knew in season 1 that her father was at least sexually abusing her. Consider Audrey's season cliffhanger where after following Laura's footsteps she ends up in bed with her own father.

WHAT IS GOING ON IN THIS HOUSE?

At the same time, the show's failings are almost spectacular. Using the same actress to play Laura Palmer and Maddy Ferguson, on the 'Tale of Two Cities' premise that two people who are not identical twins could look so much like each other as to fool someone who was close to one of them, was pretty hard to swallow. Similarly, it was pretty obvious that 'Mr. Tojamura' was a woman disguised as a Japanese man.

neither of these rly strike me as failures, for reasons morbs gets at. the mr. tojamura thing is not exactly the show at its best (tho ben kissing mr. tojamura's toes is quite an image) but the dissonance between the disguise's fakeness and its success feels as deliberate as all the other dissonances. laura/maddy meanwhile is classic uncanny, to me, plus it teems with signs. may remember wrong but also i don't think it ever fools anyone except dr. jacobi, from a distance, with a wig.

otm that coop does v little actual detective work, obtains all his breakthroughs through portents, etc.. (i like when he gathers everyone together in the roadhouse and ben horne says "would you like us to hum?") he also fails to prevent pretty much everything you might consider it his job to prevent. he is not really a detective tho because yeah it is not really a mystery. he is more like an angel.

show def has spectacular failings.

Maybe Lynch is a fan of Jeremy Brett's The Master Blackmailer, where Sherlock Holmes solves a crime by having nightmares and visions.

closest doyle's sherlock comes to visions is probably "the devil's foot", where he doses himself with a fear-stimulating hallucinogenic drug to... check if it's a fear-stimulating hallucinogenic drug or not. visions confirm.

never saw that brett movie but did see the last vampyre. that series went in weird directions at the end. faithful in a way.

Yeah, it was Jacobi that I was thinking of. (Other people were strongly reminded of Laura but did not exactly mistake one for the other.) I guess he was at a bit of a distance.

I think at the time I first watched I went through phases of suspecting and not suspecting the correct killer - it seemed like a good explanation but there was so much weirdness going on in the show that I just didn't know whether I should expect the logical answer to be the correct one. Now that I think back on it though, the way the show misdirects you fits perfectly with the themes -- the idea that there's some grand evil conspiracy plot coming from somewhere outside (all the stuff with Leo and One Eyed Jacks and the vague sense that there's something "bigger" going on) is almost a critique of our failure to apprehend that the evil could have been right there in her home, like what I was saying upthread about it being so unfathomable for many people that a father was doing this that supernatural explanations become preferable.

I distinctly remember deciding (correctly) that I knew the killer, and then thinking "no, that's too dark for a network TV show in the early 90s, it must be someone else."

I believe they knew in season 1 that her father was at least sexually abusing her. Consider Audrey's season cliffhanger where after following Laura's footsteps she ends up in bed with her own father.

IIRC there's a scene pretty early on where Leland dances with a photo of Laura, breaks the glass and cuts his hand, and then stains Laura's image with his blood... The second time I watched TP this definitely felt like foreshadowing, but if they really hadn't decided who the killer is until later on, then that was quite a fortuitous scene to include!

But yeah, it wasn't really a mystery you could solve by paying attention to clues, the show was surreal for that, plus there was a bunch of red herrings that ultimately meant nothing. For example, early on it's hinted there's something sinister with Mike and Bobby, because they share their names with Bob the evil spirit and Mike the one-armed man, but turns out they had nothing to with Laura's death, and the name connection is never explained.

he has murdered innocents. he has engaged us in subterfuge and red herring-- a fish i don't particularly care for.

I was super convinced it was Andy for a while

lol

Walks into the station the next day with "FIRE WALK WITH ME" stuck to his forehead.

IIRC there's a scene pretty early on where Leland dances with a photo of Laura, breaks the glass and cuts his hand, and then stains Laura's image with his blood... The second time I watched TP this definitely felt like foreshadowing, but if they really hadn't decided who the killer is until later on, then that was quite a fortuitous scene to include!

Yeah, this was one of the things that made him seem suspicious. Hurting 2 OTM about the 'conspiracy' misdirect. Tuomas also OTM about Mike/Bobby.

With all the red herrings, unexplained supernatural shit, competing storylines, and bizarro twists (Andrew Packard has been alive this whole time??), what this show makes me think of most at this point is a predecessor to Lost. (I could see the obvious influence on Veronica Mars at first but that show was comparatively way more of a tightly crafted mystery series in the traditional sense.) I feel like it has some similar strengths and weaknesses, although at least this doesn't drag on for six seasons of bullshit. Easy to forget now how gripping Lost used to be!

If I've never seen Lost, would it make sense to go back and start now, or is it a "you had to be there" thing? I know the ending was famously disappointing. Not that I'm looking for a show to take over my life, mind you, just people were such evangelists at the time but I feel like that's evaporated since the finale, whereas other big shows of that period still have people going "Oh, no, you have to watch that."

(and I would say Twin Peaks stands that test, even with the always-difficult problem of recommending a show where you have to explain "You'll probably want to give up somewhere in Season Two, everyone does, but stick it out til the ending, it's worth it!")

My stock recommendation for anyone curious about L O S T: watch just the first five seasons and pretend that it ends really bleakly.

If you want this experience, then, yes, definitely: http://www.theonion.com/articles/poor-bastard-who-just-started-watching-lost-in-for,30378/

2xpost

stick it out til the ending, it's worth it

OK, I needed to hear this.

We just started watching the Bluray set weekend before last. I've seen the first season probably dozens of times, and then up through the revelation of Laura's murderer maybe twice. Having only seen the latter half of season two once before, I'm curious to see how it holds up. But I definitely remember that last episode being a keeper.

Sund4r: Yeah, this is the way it happens. If you're finding at least a few things in each episode to be interested in/charmed by then I'd say stick it out as the finale (with Lynch back at the helm) is really fucking classic. But there's definitely a moment where it's more like "fuck, I've sunk this much in, it'd be stupid to stop now!"

re: Lost: lol, OK, I think the Onion has cleared this one up for me

As much as it pains me to do so from this vantage point, I probably would still recommend those first five seasons, with the caveat that, regardless of what the producers say, it's absolutely a shaggy dog story with no satisfactory resolution. The ride was fun for a while, though.

I watched the first 4 seasons of Lost. They were amazingly skilled at making you think something was going to happen and there was lots of good suspense, but honestly I feel stupid now for believing it was going to unfold into something rewarding. I think the naysayers were right mostly.

It has its moments but I'd discourage people from watching it, it just doesn't have enough truly satisfying moments and it is WOEFULLY padded out with people leisurely checking up on each other and pointless mood summation montages.

For Twin Peaks, there are lots of great moments and unlike Lost I don't think it really needed a payoff.

Don't get me wrong: Twin Peaks is flawed but great. L O S T was deeply flawed but fun for a while, but also ultimately a cowardly/hostile work that was completely untrue to its established premises. The producers pretended it was an intricate machine but it was just a box that made noise.

Sund4r you should definitely stick with it to the ending, the finale is fantastic

finally watching this after about 10 years of being aware of it as a major influence on a lot of other stuff i like

it took awhile for me to recognize Sarah Packard while treaming The Hustler on Netflix last night. Is Josie's last name a reference?

We just finished the series last night. Oh my god does that last third or so of season 2 draaaaaaaaaaaag. I've only ever seen it once before and I have a hard time imagining I'd sit through it again. You can definitely tell at what point Lynch took a powder. It becomes turgid and, frankly, really uninteresting soap-by-numbers for such a long stretch. But, wow, that last episode. But in addition to the wow factor, I really appreciate the perversity of Lynch's relaxed pace (e.g. the bank manager doddering around for ten minutes and Andy taking Harry's breakfast order) in light of all the dangling threads and metaphysical urgency.

Having only really listened to the initial soundtrack dozens upon dozens of times in the past, I just finished properly listening to the season two soundtrack and...goddamn. That thing is amazing. It's like a dark, ambient remix of the themes and recurring motifs from the first season. Badalamenti and Lynch are such a perfect pair.

yeah, the season 2 soundtrack is so good! Harold's Theme *swoon*

heard a rumor that Badalementi is still a holdout for the new season :(

Noooooooooooo

i'd like to squash that rumor now. my evidence is that it is unimaginable and it is unconscionable, therefore it cannot happen.

There's been some talk of John Williams taking the reins, so all is right with the world.

lol

Christopher Young could kill as twin peaks composer if it came to having to replace Angelo.

^ i misread this at first and am now imagining Twin Peaks Season 3 as scored by D'Angelo

Josie Packard is in Marco Polo. I cannot escape TP characters lately.

I watched about half of the FWWM deleted scenes last night. Whoever said that they kinda weren't worth the wait was OTM, but it's a bit of a fun trip nonetheless. Seems like it's about half weirdo mystic Lodge stuff and half "Hi, it's your old pal Ed, remember me from tv's Twin Peaks?". Between these deleted scenes and the deleted Wild At Heart scenes, it becomes clear that the Lynch of that era was keen on editing relatively comprehensible scenes down until they were as obtuse as possible. I kinda get why Laura's the muffin now (although it remains to be seen if I'll ever learn what a Great Went is).

First promo shot:

https://twitter.com/DAVID_LYNCH/status/554768700536938498?lang=en

looks like he's hosting a late night show

It's strange, but I really didn't want David Lynch to cave in and do this. Like, just make something else good, ignore the fans who can't let go. But it probably will at least be kind of good since he's making it.