LostInTheMovies

Anyone who has the blu-rays should check out the "video postcards" feature on disc six. There's a ton of them but the essentials are Richard Beymer (talking about ayahuasca with a surprise guest), Don Davis (just a nice, poignant visit with the late actor), and ESPECIALLY Al Strobel, who shares the story of how he actually lost his arm which is pretty amazing (that sounds like an incredibly glib thing to say but when you hear the story you'll see what I mean; it's not so much about the accident as the experience he had afterwards).

Also, if were talking about justifiable investigations, forget about crossing the Canadian border...shouldn't they be investigating Cooper (and his supervisor!) for kidnapping a disabled person, imprisoning him without charging him, and denying him his antipsychotic medication for days on end?!?

This is often classified as the worst episode of the show - I guess because it introduces Evelyn & Little Nicky - but I actually think it may be one of the better episodes of the mid-season (which admittedly isn't saying much). Basically because of three scenes (two of which are really the same scene): - Ben's home movies. Just a nice reminder of the Twin Peaks mood that's hard to find in this stretch. - Hawk's Lodge speech. Plays like a throwaway but it's actually the most cogent explanation of Twin Peaks' spiritual ethos we may ever get. I particularly like to dig into the "dweller on the threshold" concept which is often misunderstood. It's not about overcoming some cackling villain, it's about overcoming one's own shadow-self. - Denise's debut. In theory this could have been such a one-note character but Duchovney just nails it.

Incidentally, that's a series wrap on Doesn't even reappear in the film. Maybe in 2016? Certainly ending it w/ Ernie Niles is not exactly going out with a bang.

It also makes it seem like, just maybe, they were trying to cast doubt upon Cooper's speech to Sarah Palmer at the beginning of the episode. Which I think they may have been trying to do anyway, but it gets lost in the shuffle (especially since the show itself seems to embrace the same brand of repression/denial with its zany wake scene). The funny thing is, Cooper's take on Leland doesn't make any sense even on its own terms. On the one hand he says it wasn't Leland who did "those things," it was Bob, it was all Bob, etc etc. Then he goes on to say that Bob is now gone forever. Huh? If Bob is a completely seperate entity who controlled Leland like a puppet, why would Cooper then believe Bob is gone just because Leland is dead? I think the writers were trying to cast some doubt on Coop's wisdom but it gets bungled. I'm also not sure if we're supposed to doubt everything he says (including his vindication of Leland) or just the part about Bob being vanquished. Here is an interesting quote from Tina Rathborne, who directed this episode (as well as Laura's funeral): "My episode needed to have been an explosion - an unexpected rocket that was launched that would carry us through - and the FBI firing Cooper is definitely not that. It's more about him saying goodbye than it is recommencing from a story standpoint. It didn't feel powerful enough to regenerate the audience's feeling of 'where's the puzzle?' The emotion had gone out of it for me. When I did my episode I was not very compelled to see the series to the end. Laura's funeral scene was really a huge, emoitonal well, whereas Leland's wake I felt was pretty incidental, emotionally. So to me the two of them aren't in the same realm. The death of Leland carries the same weight as Laura Palmer, yet her funeral was not played up for any humor. The old brothers fighting in the wake sticks out to me as strange, which was a precursor to a lot of over-the-top humor. It feels like one of the moments where Twin Peaks changes." (Reflections: An Oral History of Twin Peaks, by Brad Dukes) Sometimes, watching this stretch of the show (and reading how embarrassed the actors, writers, and directors were/are by their own material), it feels like everyone was on a train heading over a cliff and nobody knew how to put on the breaks. There seems to have been a terrible lack of communication/conviction about where the show should be headed. Consequently, I feel very frustrated with the creative decisions that were made but also a bit sorry for everyone involved.

Fair warning, so I don't set false expectations: mine is a minority opinion (although the finale is considered by a great many fans to be the best episode). It also depends on one's taste for Lynch. Both the final episode and the film are the most off-the-wall Lynchian pieces of Twin Peaks by a wide margin.

An exchange between Cooper and Maj. Briggs that was scripted but then cut from this episode: *** 13. EXT. CAMPSITE - NIGHT Surrounded by towering Douglas Firs, Cooper and Major Briggs sit by their campfire - putting MARSHMALLOWS on sticks. FISHING GEAR dries against a tree. The remains of their dinner, TROUT BONES and HEADS, lay on tin plates. COOPER Major this is a fascinating concept. The other side of love is not hate - but fear? MAJOR BRIGGS Absolutely. And fear is the absence of love. COOPER For yourself as well. MAJOR BRIGGS All perceptions or conditions must begin with the self. They put their marshmallows over the fire. COOPER So when I let fear into my life, I'm not loving myself. MAJOR BRIGGS You are in direct contradiction to a state of loving acceptance; incapable of it. Direct denial. COOPER Major Briggs, if I may ask a personal question ... do you love yourself? MAJOR BRIGGS Very much. Cooper's fascinated. He rotates his marshmallow in the fire. COOPER Then it stands to reason that Leland Palmer didn't. MAJOR BRIGGS One could draw that conclusion. (http://www.glastonberrygrove.net/texts/) *** Later Cooper's line to Briggs is a bit different; instead of saying Bob could be out there, "looking for another victim to inhabit" (which reinforces the idea that the host is purely a victim) he is supposed to say "searching for prey" (which could mean looking for another host or looking for a victim through his host). Briggs also has a scripted - but not delivered - line in response, saying "to think about it that way, to fear it, imparts power to evil." This is interesting to me because it suggests that the scene was revised to make Bob more explicitly an external ghoul, and to avoid reference to the just-ended mystery. It's an unfortunate loss not only because it casts Leland/Bob in a more ambiguous light, but also because it explicates a theme - fear as the opposite of love - relevant not just to season two, but Fire Walk With Me as well. Hawk's speech in the following episode is also surprisingly crucial to the big picture of Twin Peaks. It plays a bit like a throwaway and is often forgotten but I think it really gets to the heart of the show's themes, in a way that some of the more "dramatic" mythological presentations do not. The "dweller" concept in particular is key to many things that have unfolded on the show already.

Agreed with both these points. And ep. 17 is just barely ambiguous enough that you can kinda ret-con with FWWM in mind. We'll get to this more when the movie comes up, but it always strikes me as strange when people try to claim that it "abandons" or "ruins" the series or whatever. I mean I get that in the sense that it is tonally and stylistically very different. But thematically/narratively I think it - and the finale - rescues the show. If Lynch hadn't largely replaced the script in the finale and gone on to make FWWM, I feel like often the Lynch/Frost relationship is misunderstood. Lynch is seen as the one who brought in random elements, while Frost kept the show grounded. While there's some truth to that in terms of storytelling conventions, it was more often Frost who brought in narrative turning points and game-changers, and Lynch who would attempt to keep Twin Peaks rooted in certain key elements and to find ways to incorporate the new additions into that framework. This might be because Lynch was used to the bounded restraints of two-hour cinema and the painted canvas, in which you can let your imagination go wild within fixed limits, whereas Frost was more a TV guy, seeking to expand within an open-ended universe while hitting certain serialized bullet points (he's also a novelist at heart, which generally allows for a more expansive narrative). Despite all the missteps and mistakes along the way, I think that Lynch/Frost dynamic is one of the things that makes Twin Peaks so memorable and that Frost's dramatic decisions - some made for the right reasons, some not so much - are really important in this. If Lynch had his way and the mystery went on forever without resolution, the show might have been more consistent but it could not have reached the same high points that resulted directly from this compromise. Personally, I'm more concerned with power than perfection, so I'm glad it went the way it did. Controversial as this may be to say, I would rather have the killer's reveal episode, the finale, and Fire Walk With Me than several more s1-caliber seasons (which would have been impossible anyway: Twin Peaks would have been cancelled the same or perhaps even quicker if it hadn't solved the mystery). Fortunately, with 2016 coming up, I get to have my cake and eat it too.

And just to be clear, I love the supernatural stuff on the show and I think it elevates it to another level. But it should amplify the human drama, not motivate it. This episode is the first time where it really feels like that cart is getting put before the horse.

It's weird, because in interviews Frost presents the situation much more ambiguously than it plays (it's certainly interesting that he only co-wrote this episode, after tackling the reveal solo). He says things like was it ancient vampire-type legend or was Leland just insane? Or that Twin Peaks is about how people are capable of great evil as well as great good. And he's not just saying this after the fact, he said it at the time. Is it just supposed to be allegorical on an abstract level? Because if so, that doesn't work in a world like Twin Peaks which is semi-realistic to begin with; you can't simply cleave the "real" from the metaphorical the way you could with, say, Dracula. Ultimately, there really is no other reason - you go that route, you open up that can of worms. The specific handling of Bob feels like somebody trying to slam the lid back on that can. Which is what bugs me about this episode. It's as if it was written by two different writers or sets of writers - one that came in and made Laura's killer her incestuous father, and then another that came in and tried to layer the "Exorcist" angle on top of that. But if Bob could be anyone, and if Bob himself is the totally responsible figure - in other words if Bob, not Leland, is the premise - why bother to make Laura's killer her father? Nobody was holding a gun to Lynch/Frost's heads forcing them to choose Leland. The more you think about it, it just plays like they don't have the courage of their convictions. (Edited for clarity/length after posting)

Because people are discussing the dream's role in solving the case, this is probably a good time - and place - to bring up the "European version" of the pilot. To summarize for first-time viewers - all of the dream imagery (Bob, Mike, the Little Man, the Red Room) - was not conceived as part of a dream sequence at all. It was shot for a contractually-obligated closed ending to the pilot episode, in case ABC did not pick it up as a series. It could then be released as a theatrical film, or at least a video feature, in Europe (hence the reason this alternate ending is called the "European version"). Lynch and Frost didn't take this obligation very seriously, and Lynch was basically unleashed to cook up whatever crazy concoction he felt like doing. He gathered a bunch of random elements together and assembled a transparently goofy denouement to the mystery in which (spoilers for the stuff in the "European version" that didn't make it into the dream sequence, though it's resolutely not canon/pertinent to the rest of the series) It was basically an excuse for Lynch to riff with people that interested him. Al Strobel, who plays Mike/Phillip (i.e. the One-Armed Man) was actually just hired as an extra for that scene in the elevator. It was supposed to be a one-off joke reference to the one-armed man in The Fugitive. Lynch pulled him aside, with some handwritten dialogue, more or less spur-of-the-moment to record the "fire walk with me"/"convenience store" speech for the alternate ending. The story of Bob is even better (can't remember if this was brought up on the podcast; apologies if so). Frank Silva, who plays Bob, was a set dresser working on the crew before two random events created the character of Bob out of thin air. First, Lynch overheard another crew member telling Silva "be careful moving that prop or you'll get stuck in the bedroom" and he had a vision of Silva, in his naturally long silver hair and personal jean jacket, crouching in the corner of the bedroom. He rushed into the room and had the cameraman shoot a quick shot of this image, but had no idea how/when he would use it (this shot is in the European version when Sarah remembers Bob in the bedroom, but it was re-shot for Sarah's vision in episode 2). Later on, he was shooting that scene where Sarah Palmer sees the vision of the necklace and jumps up screaming. Accidentally, Silva was caught in the reflection of a mirror behind her and Lynch was so excited by this coincidence that he decided Silva would play the killer in the alternate ending and he shot that footage with him saying "catch you with my death bag" and "I will kill again." Lynch quickly shot the Mike/Bob alternate ending during breaks in the production of the pilot. Later, while editing the pilot, the Red Room sequence came to him in a sudden flash. Supposedly he then sketched out the dialogue with Frost and shot it as an additional part of the alternate ending, where it sticks out like a thumb and feels like a total non sequitur, albeit a cool one. The Red Room sequence in the European version is basically what you see in episode 3, only a little bit longer and with an opening title that reads "25 Years Later" (which explains MacLachlan's old age makeup). This whole alternate ending (the Bob/Mike scenes and then the Red Room) lasts about 20 minutes and turned out so memorably - particularly the Red Room parts - that Lynch & Frost later decided to write it into the series as a dream sequence. With this, Bob and Mike became actual characters as well. Only retroactively were these scenes mined for narrative "clues," which is why a lot of the stuff in ep. 17 feels forced/desperate. But it's pretty fascinating to consider that had the contract not demanded an alternate ending, Twin Peaks would likely have no Bob, Mike, Little Man, or Red Room at all. Leland was planned as the killer from the beginning (according to both Lynch and Frost) but the supernatural iconography surrounding the mystery arose through a combination of pressure, improvisation, and accident. You can watch the "European version" here, in very low quality (it's available in great condition on the Gold Box DVDs & Entire Mystery blu-ray set). At this point in the series, it doesn't spoil anything, if it ever did:

Just listened to & enjoyed the podcast. I mentioned this above, but I'm definitely on board with the idea of following Leland for much longer than two episodes. The thought really only just occurred to me the other day, but it could be sort of like Lost Highway where Leland himself is slowly starting to realize/come to terms with Bob. This would subtly shift the show's center of gravity, and I can't imagine it would have reversed the ratings slump but it would at least have allowed the show to go in a really compelling direction and exit the stage gracefully. Oh well. For all its other flaws, the rest of the second season builds up to the finale, which is probably my favorite episode so all's well that ends well.

My full thoughts on this episode can be found in the ep. 16 thread (because I expected to be "off-the-grid" which isn't going to happen until tomorrow...I think). But briefly, this is, um...quite an episode. And the wake scene is...something else. Take that as you will. Ok, I'll be less cryptic: this feels like one hell of a jump-the-shark episode to me (stick with it, though, newbies, believe it or not the best is yet to come though rough seas lie ahead). Nonetheless, I've noticed that a lot of first-time viewers actually quite enjoy the relaxed pace and wacky humor of this episode (even if they feel the decline later in season two) - this has been particularly notable on introcasts I've listened to. This whole patch of episodes becomes easier to handle, I think, when you have a community to discuss/make fun of it with. Anyway, if you're looking to dig into analysis of what you just watched, here is Part 2 of my video series (I left the link for Pt. 1 in the ep. 9 thread, but of course it can also be found through this link). It goes up to the wake scene in this episode. Keep in mind, if you watch further entries, that I use the disc's episode numbers (so this episode would be episode 17 by my count). I have designed the videos so that they can be watched by first-time viewers, nonetheless very minor spoiler warnings may be in order. First off, if you haven't seen Vertigo (1958) & Laura (1944) and don't want to know about plot twists in them, avoid watching chapters 6 & 8. As far as Twin Peaks goes, chapter 11 discusses how the show handles the Palmers from now on which I don't consider particularly spoiler-y but may be worth mentioning for those who want to fly completely blind in season 2. And chapter 9 opens with a montage including context-free clips from Fire Walk With Me and The Missing Pieces. I think it's pretty spoiler-free, but if you're really skittish about seeing/knowing anything ahead of time I'd say wait and watch these when you're done with the series and film. Journey Through Twin Peaks, Part 2 - The Center Cannot Hold explores the process behind Laura Palmer's creation, her and Maddy's links to the classic films Vertigo & Laura, the abandoned Marilyn Monroe screenplay by Lynch & Frost, the Secret Diary by Jennifer Lynch, the events of episodes 9 - 17, and also how details of Twin Peaks & the previous work of both Lynch & Frost leads up to the killer's reveal. People seem to be enjoying these videos so hopefully Rewatch forum folks do too. Here is the line-up/description for Part 2: http://thedancingimage.blogspot.com/2014/10/journey-through-twin-peaks-part-2.html And this is the first video of Part 2 if you want to jump directly in. It's called "Who is Laura Palmer?": The videos can be watched in order or out of order as you see fit, and are divided into relatively short chapters for convenient viewing.

I'm kind of hoping one of you likes it and the other doesn't. It's that kind of episode, and would definitely make for an interesting discussion. Looking forward to listening to it tomorrow...

I think it could work but the show's center of gravity would have to change. It would have to become more about Leland slowly coming to grips with the existence of Bob, rather than Cooper's hunt for Bob. Think Lost Highway. Of course this approach probably would not have been terribly successful with audiences, but then I think Twin Peaks was doomed no matter what. I can't envision any scenario in which Twin Peaks lasts more than two seasons. If they don't reveal the killer, viewers tune out (as indeed they did very quickly after the season 2 premiere). If they do reveal the killer, viewers tune out (because the show was established as WKLP at its core). It was really a lose/lose situation so the only question becomes, how could they have gone out more gracefully? I've always had a hard time sussing out how Frost really felt about this. Apparently he and Lynch were on the same page about not revealing the killer in season 1. But Frost's comments during season 2, and his later comments as well, reveal that he was ready to wrap up the mystery once the show was renewed. His main reservation about the whodunit was that it distracted viewers from the show's other factors and would potentially alienate the audience if it wasn't solved (he was right about the latter point; people forget how early the ratings - and worse, the reviews - turned a corner). Also for Frost, the show was always about the whole town. He even disagreed with Lynch about how the project was initiated - he claims that they had designed the town first, and than the murder mystery entered as a way into the story, whereas Lynch says it all began with the image of a body washing up on shore. And obviously the fact that Lynch went on to make a prequel about Laura speaks volumes about his viewpoint on the show vs. Frost's (whose next project will be a novel called The Secret Lives of Twin Peaks, covering all the different characters and stories of the town over 25 years). Frost has described Twin Peaks as "a Dickensian story about multiple lives in a contained area, that could go on perpetually." Lynch's first Log Lady intro states "It is the story of many, but it begins with one...Laura is the one." So with all that in mind, it seems that Frost was ready to move on from the mystery and launch the show in a new direction. What's hard for me to figure out then, is why it unfolded the way it did. As you point out, this conclusion has a rushed, arbitrary, even desperate feel to it. The subsequent episodes don't show much evidence of Frost's own storytelling skills (and indeed he was apparently disengaging to prep a feature film as soon as Laura's mystery ended) and it does feel like Lynch and Frost gave up on the show (Lynch himself certainly did, for a while). If Frost was so eager to move on to other stories, why did he step back as soon as that became possible? I REALLY can't get a sense of this from anything I've read, all I can speculate is that he assumed the show would last longer and that with Laura's mystery over, it could coast for a bit while he worked on other projects. And also that maybe he expected more collaboration from Lynch on the concluding episode and then Lynch's heart just wasn't in it, leaving Frost to scramble with Peyton & Engels to tie up all the loose ends. But that's pure speculation on my part. It does seem notable that Lynch directs every other major turning point and then is completely MIA when Leland dies.

I left my extended thoughts on this episode in the ep. 16 thread (because I had expected to be offline right now). Just wanted to drop in and note that it's interesting, and a bit gratifying to see that people are being tough on this episode. I found it very disappointing the first time I watched it, and that was even without being particularly turned off by the Leland/Bob presentation (as Argobot & others say, I think it took FWWM for me to really realize what a cop-out that was). After all the build-up it was just...wait, that's it?! Yet the episode seems to be a fan favorite for whatever reason. And I HATED how literal they made Cooper's dream. It felt like "the TV world" smoothing over Lynch's can't-define-it-just-feel-it vibe. And don't get me started on Leland casually stepping up as the attorney for his daughter's alleged murderer just so the writer can get him in a jail cell, and nobody around him (even people who don't know about Bob) bats an eye. What an absurd contrivance! Still, I've learned to like things about the episode. They're mostly concept, rather than execution. I like the significance of Cooper's ring (especially amplified by the Cooper spin-off book and a different ring in FWWM). I like the idea that Laura solves her own mystery, though it's poorly executed. I like, in theory, that Cooper gets the answer from "beyond" rather than physical evidence although, again, could they have made it feel less like a deus ex machina? I am increasingly inclined to see it the latter way. I think to a large extent that's what Bob is, that's what allows him to enter and sustain himself in a host: the host's ability to I tend to draw a connection between the two. The hasty, uncomfortable way the show ties up the Laura mystery is both an indication of and a motivation for the subsequent slip in quality. As I put it when discussing the following episode, it isn't just the characters onscreen embracing denial and repression, it's the show itself. In a weird way, all the mayor/Little Nicky/Evelyn shenanigans are the inevitable result of what happens when you try to turn your back on the dramatic momentum of your own material. ^This. I generally like the early part of season two, but one thing it's missing - that season one has in spades - is the conviction that everyone is connected, all storylines have a level of suspense and mystery, and all roads lead to Rome. And yes, the gathering at the Road House really gives you an "Oh yeah, remember when all this stuff felt connected?" sad kind of feeling. Spoiler for Between Two Worlds (the Palmer family interview on the blu-ray, which was written by Lynch): I felt pretty much the same when I first saw the series. But, without spoiling too much, FWWM is a really dark horror movie/psychodrama/art film that recasts the series & Laura's life in a very different light. It's kind of amazing that Lynch made THAT movie out of THIS show (and a lot of fans resented him for it) but the links between the two worlds are there if one looks for them. It's not so much that the film changes the rules as that it makes you realize what the rules really were all along.

I'll be away from the forum for a little while, and when I return we will probably already be in a rough patch of episodes. With that in mind, I wanted to share this viewing chart. It's not recommending you "skip" any episodes - the series is worth watching all the way through - but at least let's you know where you are in the scheme of things, as far as upcoming quality. This is obviously one person's subjective take (I didn't make this chart but I generally agree with his assessment). From what I've seen it reflects the general consensus. In case anyone would rather fly blind and discover the good, the bad, and the ugly on their own terms (as I did on my first run). The only reason I am spoiler-tagging the chart is in case any forum readers want to fly blind (as I did on my first viewing) in terms of quality. There are no plot spoilers - the description contained one but I blacked it out with my beautiful MS Paint skills.

This will probably be my final post for a little while (not too long, maybe a few weeks at most) as I am attempting to go off the grid soon, to get some stuff accomplished. For that reason, I'll comment on ep. 17 & 18 (by the podcast's count) as well. Spoilers are only for those episodes. First, this episode. All in all, it's pretty solid. Ray Wise is excellent and our subtle shift away from Cooper's perspective is interesting and very Hitchcockian (at times we are more aligned with Leland in terms of knowledge if not sympathy, which is very different from our usual Twin Peaks pov). But as was the case a few episodes ago, the non-mystery subplots drag. And some of the new stuff that is introduced already feels like we're getting into the pointless/goofiness of the mid-season (I'm looking at you, Ernie Niles). A more fundamental issue for me is that the tone of the episode feels a bit jarring giving what we just saw. Twin Peaks has often varied between playful and ominous but it had never hit us with anything as hard as the Maddy murder. I find it telling that the episode repeats her death scene but shifts the focus outside the house, at a safe distance. It feels like the beginning of a retreat from the core darkness that Twin Peaks had tapped into. Narratively speaking, the end of the previous episode feels like it should probably be the end of the series. That image of Cooper staring into space with the music softly dying and everyone devastate really sums up the series. It would have been a hell of a downbeat ending, but very powerful and very appropriate for what Twin Peaks was up to this point. But of course, American TV shows did not operate that way in 1990 and the show must go on. And in a way, I'm glad it did because the best bits of Twin Peaks are yet to come (granted, Lynch could have gone on to make the prequel after the killer's reveal, but we never would have seen the unforgettable finale). Ok, and now for episode 17: Episode 18 (it's hard for me to type the "wrong" numbers haha...):

Great podcast - I thought you guys did do justice to the episode. Regarding Fire Walk With Me, I was going to say this in reader mail but maybe I'll just say it here and you can quote it (just the first paragraph, I mean) in a few episodes if you agree (it isn't totally relevant yet, since the main story is still going): *** My advice to first-time viewers is watch everything. Even the worst parts of Twin Peaks give you a sense of the whole and inform the best bits. HOWEVER, if your attachment to the show is too casual or fickle to sustain a full watch, and you feel you're about to quit, AT LEAST skip ahead to the final episode (#30 by this podcast/Netflix, #29 on the discs) and Fire Walk With Me. Both will be somewhat confusing, but frankly they are the most full-on Lynchian parts of Twin Peaks so they will already be confusing even if you've watched the whole series. Any journey through Twin Peaks that doesn't include either of these entries in the saga is woefully incomplete, in my opinion. *** As for the idea, mentioned on the podcast, of watching Fire Walk With Me directly after this episode...I've actually heard people recommend this as the best approach. I think it works well after the series (I even personally like watching the Missing Pieces as a gateway between series and film) but I can see how that would work. In particular, experiencing the full horror of Maddy's murder and Cooper's failure to catch the killer and then shifting into the tone of the next few episodes (and especially the ones that come after them) actually makes for a much more jarring emotional transition than jumping right into the movie. Not saying I would recommend this approach myself but I can definitely see how it has a certain logic to it. There will be a fairly big - if cryptic and vague - spoiler for the final episode however. That said, if anyone first-time viewer ends up jumping directly from this episode into the film I'd certainly be interested in hearing your take on the experience. I've never heard from anyone who did this the first time, only people who did it later (although then again, I think I may have run across people who stopped watching after the killer's reveal and the next thing they watched was the film, but usually years passed in between). You mentioned Fire Walk With Me building off the second season but (spoilers for second season),

This was how I felt for a long time. It seemed like the movie is very powerful up to that point and then it just had to follow through on its really grim arc. In a weird way, it felt almost like an anticlimax and a depressing end to a character we've been following for two hours even though we know it's inevitable. And the Maddy scene IS doubly powerful when you see it not just as this horrible murder of one character, but also our only possible insight to the source of the whole mystery we've been watching up to now. That said...

I think there are two later places where this is referenced (not sure if you've seen the rest of the series/film or not so, spoilers if you haven't, but if you have these may be useful reminders):

Ah, I see. I guess the only way to fix that would be if Chris or Jake can change the settings so that the default composer screen does not show html (although weirdly, it only seems to show html w/r/t spoilers).

I think if you quote the entire spoiler you should be fine. Or add a new spoiler tag to something you're already cutting off.

Is there a way to un-"hide" posts? I made the mistake of typing a message from my phone and clumsy thumbs got in my way.