Digger

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    40

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Digger

  1. Posted

    5 hours ago, marblize said:

     

    Man, I literally don't see how you reach the concluding disappointment of this quote from the start of this quote. It's a really interesting interpretation that makes sense, that i have not seen, and that I have not thought of. It reads as fun and valuable exploratory curiosity but you spin it into begrudging empty digging. wtf!

     

    edit: wait, are you mocking others who came up with this theory or is this your theory?

    It's my theory, but Lynch and Frost have not given me enough info to give it any legs.

  2. Posted

    28 minutes ago, BonusWavePilot said:

    @Digger
    Well, if owed is not the concept to use, then by what measure can the choices in the series be disrespectful?  Otherwise it can be contrary to expectation, but the notion of respect doesn't come into it.

     

    Of course Twin Peaks is as open to reading and critique as anything else, and of course artists can offend or their work can miss the mark.  My point is that if you and a creator have different ideas of where that mark is, do you think you have a right to demand that they move to meet your definition?

     

    "These are characters and a world that has been pored over, examined and loved for over 25 years.  The characters, place and feel have been internalized.  I believe an audience can have expectations and opinions."

     

    Sure - there are a lot of us who really like this thing.  I don't agree that this means we ought to have any say over how it is made.

    It's already been made.  "Owed" was never my word it was yours.  I also did not demand anything.  As for the disrespect, I go back to the pet metaphor, making an animal believe it is going to get something you withhold from it is disrespectful.  You know it wants the food or the toy, and you are enjoying its reaction, and then continuing to promise and withhold is disrespectful.  I also saw many of the scene choices as going nowhere and revealing nothing, so that seems like a waste of time, also disrespectful.  You can disagree, of course, and find those scenes valuable.  I didn't enjoy, for example, Dougie.  Now I have tried to make it meaningful.  I have decided Dougie was Cooper's chance at happiness, and that by creating the tulpa he has given up a part of himself and allowed that part domestic bliss and no Blue Rose wackiness or giant evil entity insanity.  That Coop gets a happy ending.  I have very little in the show to back this up.  I don't know if new Dougie has much awareness of the world.  He said only one word, "Home."  Is he able to do and say more.  Dougie one was not a great husband, was that because he was made of the vices evil Coop was made of.  Don't know.  No explanation.  INformation deliberately withheld.  Disrespectful.  You'll never know, and I've not given you enough information to understand.

  3. Posted

    18 minutes ago, Jake said:

     

    I strongly disagree with this! The actual creators, Frost and Lynch, can choose to include what they think the audience wants, or not, but the audience themselves are absolutely not part of the creative team. They are literally not part of it - we were not consulted on the script or asked for feedback - and we also aren't in any figurative sense that I believe holds water. 

     

    You said the audience wasn't "owed," but then declared that the audience was in fact part of the creative team, which is worse(!) because the implication is that the audience is entitled to its wishes being made manifest by the people actually creating or financing the show, on equal terms with those people who are actually taking huge risks and exerting huge effort to make this series real! Give me a break. 

    Not really what I meant.  All of the discourse over the last 25 years between the work and the audience and the audience and themselves shape its viewing and understanding.  In this sense the audience is the artist or creator.  We have shaped it's popularity, its interpretation, given it meaning, importance and relevance.  Twin Peaks is a situation very different from other media in that it has been gone for such a long amount of time.  The closest I can relate it to are comics.  Some characters have existed for decades.  An author can upset an audience by making, what the audience views as unwarranted changes, toss out lore and history, or rework it in a way that goes against reader's interpretations and understandings.  Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

     

    I don't think an audience's specific wishes are helpful, an audience doesn't know exactly what it wants, often it wants the exact thing it had before that they loved so much, which is impossible because it too has changed.  That same audience wants to be surprised and enthralled.  But, what Twin Peaks is now I don't think is only what Lynch and Frost created.  

  4. Posted

    4 minutes ago, BonusWavePilot said:

    I guess part of what makes me want to argue this is the idea of Lynch being 'disrespectful' or similar, as it raises the question, what are we owed?

     

    I don't actually have an answer just at the moment, but I think the idea of viewing this as a contract between Lynch and his audience is an interesting one.  What do we owe, for that matter?

    It seems many believe we owe unwavering allegiance and lack of judgement.   I don't think owed is right word.  Any artistic offering is open to reading and critique.   Why is Twin peaks any different.  I don't think one could argue artists can not offend or disrespect their audience, or that work can miss the mark, or be bogged down or too dilute.  These are characters and a world that has been pored over, examined and loved for over 25 years.  The characters, place and feel have been internalized.  I believe an audience can have expectations and opinions.  The audience who have followed this work for so long are, in my opinion, part or the creative team as well.   

  5. Posted

    5 minutes ago, UnpopularTrousers said:

    I understand why people would hate the Bob hulk smash. It's cartoonish, anti-climactic, and somewhat flippant with aspects of the series. I think you're absolutely right that it doesn't take certain aspects of the lore all that seriously. It took all the most superficial elements of good versus evil and neat resolutions and ratcheted it all up to an extreme. The plot resolution it provided was deliberately shallow.

     

    While I did get some satisfaction out of seeing all the pieces fall into place, I would have been pretty unhappy if the series ended right there. But it didn't. Instead, by pushing that stuff past the breaking point, it felt to me like it shed itself of the plot machinations and asked the viewer to look back on the series not in terms of how the plot got us to where we are but in terms of the ambiguities and flaws in characters that would have otherwise gone unexamined. I liked how it left me feeling scattered and how even the most blatant comic book fight doesn't truly extinguish evil, because evil exists in shades of grey in everyone. The dualistic nature of Lynch's work is about how people are made of contradictory internal elements and not how opposing external sides are at war. It was a pull the rug out from under you approach, but I think it was with a point and a purpose.

     

    So I don't think it's that Lynch didn't care, I think its that he cared about different things than you. Which is totally fine. You cared about the plot and the lore, and I think he wanted to show that he considers those elements to be disposable and metaphorical and pushed them aside to focus on the signified rather than the signifiers. 

    Did it work? Is that a strong enough reason to flippantly toss aside the importance of lore and plot you have invested significant energy in dissecting? Well, you seem to think not and honestly I think you could make a pretty strong case. But I don't think it was a fuck you. It was merely a shift in focus.

     

    I have trouble with this reading too.  What was Lynch then focusing on?  It seemed mostly mood and tone, and usually the same mood and tone (uncomfortable, strange, withheld) is that 18 hours worth of compelling?. It wasn't really character he was focused on, because we didn't spend enough time with most of them to know them any better or much at all.  The new characters appeared for brief scenes sometimes 5 or 6 episodes apart. Their storylines were disjointed or dropped.  I also don't think it accounts for Lynch often in the character of Gordon Cole winking at the audience and basically saying I know what you want to see but instead here's a french woman.  I know what you want to know, instead Hawke tells us we don't want to know about it.  One might just roll with it, but the disrespectful interpretation whether intentional on Lynch's part or not is still obviously valid.

  6. Posted

    The sex scene was especially weird because there was no context for it.  Diane had said they had only kissed once before, and the kiss in the car didn't seem overly sexual or romantic, Coop told her to do it and she did.  Them having sex in the motel seemed weird because they were on the trail of something or heading into another world.  Why would you stop at a hotel to have sex (for the first time).  Neither of them seemed very excited about the prospect or during the act.  I don't think it is them.  I guess Diane could be covering his face because it reminded her of the rape, but why would she continue, surely Coop would stop and comfort her.

  7. Posted

    4 minutes ago, WickedCestus said:

    The idea that David Lynch is in any way interested in creating a TV series simply to be antagonistic or say "screw you" to his audience is absurd to me. Why would anyone bother creating art, let alone such personal, creative, difficult-to-parse art if their only goal was to make others mad? Dude puts his life into this stuff, and it's clear when you listen to him speak that he holds within himself a deep love and respect for humanity, and some sort of desire to share something with all of us. These interpretations just read completely hollow to me. I understand being upset that the show didn't resolve properly (I was kinda bothered by Episode 18 at first), but I don't think there's any need to devalue the work like that.

     

    The more I think about this finale, the more I appreciate it. A lot of that is thanks to the discussion on here, and giving myself some time to reflect. Even with my expectations set to "this is gonna be strange", I was still surprised by the ending. Distilling the story back to Cooper and Laura, and Coop's final attempt to save her. It's just incredible. That final scream is absolutely haunting. 

     

    Yeah, I'm not so sure about this.  It's like playing a joke on an animal or a child, maybe you're not doing it to be mean, maybe you think it is funny.  Lynch and Frost antagonized their audience in almost every episode, the only time I thought it was funny was when Coop was in the coma and someone said something to the effect of "He may never come out of it." That was all the audience needed waiting for Dougie to wake up and then have him in a coma for the rest of the season.  He wakes up in the next scene.  You got me Lynch.  I mentioned a bunch of the other trolling in previous posts, so I won't rehash them, but ask yourself this did any of the Candie scenes or Jacoby scenes serve any purpose, move the story or reveal character or plot, and when plot was revealed was it often rushed and unsatisfying.  

     

    Take Freddie, we are introduced to him in an exposition dump he gives to James.  Now imagine instead of that we get to see this happening on screen asshole Freddie in his sad life, gets a visit from the Fireman.  Revelation! We witness his attempt to buy the glove and tension! he can't seem to get it, then wham, the glove is real and has real power as we see him clock the teller.  Maybe he tries to go back to his old life; it sucks, he heads to Twin Peaks and now we see the town through his eyes, we see the inhabitants we missed through him, we see how they've changed,  and we have him set up in a heroic arc so when his showdown with BOB comes it means something.  Isn't that more interesting?   Take some time with any of the characters, Jerry Horne and his bizarre 500 mile journey, Ben Horne and his new mistress- was the a reason we had those scenes or met her husband one time?  Audrey is introduced near the end of the season, can't seem to leave a room, leaves the room, dances and wakes up somewhere?  Tammy Preston spends her time vamping, giving knowing looks, or confused looks (a shame because I loved her in the book) and the reason she's important is because one time Cole said she was top of her class and impressive- did we get to see her be impressive?   Episode 18- lots of driving and empty stares.  What does Coop know or not know?  What was Diane seeing when she was having sex?  Why were they having sex?  Is that why they were at the hotel?  Why does Diane not react to seeing herself?  Was she switched when Coop came back?  All of those are fun questions that won't be answered, but really don't need to be mysteries.  Would you rather have those questions answered or more dialogue at the roadhouse which may or may not be real and may or may not be about characters we've seen (but under different names)?  What was the greater or deeper meaning of any of that?  Is questioning it devaluing it, or placing the appropriate value upon it?

  8. Posted

    I have to think of the dream and dreamer as a metaphor.  The dreamer is any of us filtering, making sense, making judgements of the world through our own experience and senses when these same events can be viewed completely differently by anyone outside of us.  As dreamers we are creating the world we live in and imagine it is reality and that we know reality, when all we know is OUR reality, and our reality is mutable and inconstant. "The past creates the future" and Cooper's latest journey add another wrinkle in that time and destiny are dreams, if they can be changed then the one who does the changing is the dreamer, but like a dreamer has little control on the full effects of any decision's outcome.  If time is inconstant reality is only one of an infinite possibilities.

     

    If the series is an actual character's dream than it is all but worthless.  No character has agency or importance, no encounter, mishap or mistake has any meaning.  There were never any rules, and there need not be any logic.  The only meaning that could be derived is possible insight into the dreamer, but even then is it a reflection on the core of their being or the pizza they had for dinner?

  9. Posted

    I'd forgotten about the cell phone seed.  I guess Mr. C. was doing actual magic with his technology, maybe he made those devices himself like he made Dougie and Janey-E which would explain their bizarre functionality.

     

    Episode 17 was a lot very quickly.  I remained convinced the pacing for this season was way off.  Much time was spent accomplishing little, never giving us enough time with the characters to know or connect to them.  The reveals happened in flashes and spurts and rarely when they were earned.  instead it is in exposition at the wrong time- Cole explains who Judy is and what Cooper's mission was, finally and only partly, to the only other two people in his Blue Rose splinter group in the penultimate episode when he has had that information and more since season one.  Episode 18 then arrived to remind me of the things I disliked about this season.  Long sequences of people staring expressionlessly into the distance.  Vast stretches of nothing happening in the service of creating mood?  no indication of what is happening, what people know, or what they think about it.  It seemed like a good deal of time-wasting.  I am compelled by the idea of Carrie/Laura, but I feel sure if there were a season four it would be consumed by the new Dougie Jones, boring Becky, magic drug dealer, and an exploration of Odessa, and when answers are finally given it will be in one episode at the end when a character tells us things he's known since the first episode, and it will be resolved in a sequence much shorter than the nonsense scenes.  

     

    Were there great moments this season, yes, and when they happened it was easy to forget the filler in between.  Then the filler came back a stayed for too long.  

  10. Posted

    It's hard to know what Leland was or would have been, having been inhabited by BOB since he was a child.  BOB in evil Coop is a different entity.  In evil Coop he doesn't hide (although Coop does not always seem aware of his presence- see the "I'm glad you're still with me scene early in the season).  Evil Coop and BOB seem to be working together BOB happily feeding off the mayhem Mr. C provides. It also seems he lend Mr. C some kind of power or enhancement with his presence, and possibly helped him create the tulpas in the first place.  

  13. Posted

    7 hours ago, Cleinhun said:

    I think it's plausible that Diane has just never met Dougie, given that she doesn't like Janey very much. 

    I got the feeling Diane helped bad Coop set up the Dougie thing.  Diane went from "Fuck you, and I can't even tell you if Briggs was mentioned" to "Here's a lot of personal information."  Dougie was set up with many enemies, if Diane hates her sis, then here's a way to get at her, much like what was done with Bill Hastings and his wife.  It seems impossible that Diane wouldn't know what her sister's husband looks like.  She knows his name, and the couple has been together for ten years.  

  15. Posted

    7 hours ago, pabosher said:

    Digger, and I say this honestly as nicely as I can: life’s too short, friend. Watch something else if you don’t enjoy this. I did that with Breaking Bad - watched a season and a half, hated all of it, and have been much happier knowing I never have to watch it again. 

    Yeah, I wish I could, but I would like resolution.  What happened to Annie?  What's going to happen with Dale?  Can Bob be vanquished?  I want answers to these questions, so I continue watching only to get strange back rubs and mediocre pie.

  16. Posted

    11 hours ago, BonusWavePilot said:


    "...very difficult to think he is not making specific choices to an end."
    Of course!  So given that we presume there is some kind of plan afoot here, it seems like a massive, Byzantine effort to have this many plot threads and interesting moments in service of nothing more than withholding some notional other version of the show that only exists in the expectations of the audience.
    ...


    I don't see how we'll ever get a version of this show where the pace moves along snappily without distractions or strangely drawn out sections or disturbing mood-pieces, because Lynch has no interest in making such a thing.  Maybe someone will make an edit after all the episodes have come out that is closer to what you are after, but I can't imagine it would be a better series at that point.

     

    This argument doesn't make sense.  the "version of the show that only exists in the expectations of the audience" is standard plotting, this season it's battle of the Coops and what is up with the lodges.  When plot happens it is in service of this storyline.  Unless you're arguing that Lynch is at the reins and will do as he pleases, but that seems only to reinforce the audience taunting.  Twin Peaks is being treated like it's a variety show with random seems and different acts loosely connected to one another with a purpose only to create a mood and not coherence or motion.

     

    I'm done arguing this.  I see a little of what you're saying, and I'm OK with some distractions and disturbing mood pieces, but the ratio of these to actual plot and development is off.  We're 13 episodes in and new plotlines are introduced when old ones are stuck, ignored or retread.  I believe the authors know what they are doing and it feels disrespectful.  Albert's response to the rude french woman was staring and silence, is that a payoff or a surprise, is that out of character?  A hit and run we see witnessed by dozens of people gets little to no response for days when it seems like that would be a huge deal in that town.  Andy doesn't question the truck owner and never seems to follow up on the meeting he was supposed to have.  Dougie Jones is barely functional and he is pushed along a life that isn't really his, no one attempts to help or understand, the doctor checks his heartbeat, and remarks on how he's lost weight, the end?  If Dougie has had episodes like this before there should be some sort of treatment plan or more testing or something.  Cole sees a giant black hole in the sky and strange figures (also witnessed by Albert) and they never talk about it for us to see.  Bill Hastings is ignored for four episodes and then suddenly we find out he was into the supernatural and had an encounter.  Was the Candie fly swatting scene amazing enough to take time from any of those stories? These are the big questions and the main plot, and moving them along or clearing them up is purposefully avoided, Lynch makes nods to this obfuscation in almost every episode.  It seems disrespectful to me.  Perhaps it is supposed to be funny.  I don't find it so.  

  17. Posted

    35 minutes ago, Mentalgongfu said:

     

    Sure, there isn't any character development in those particular scenes you cite. And clearly that's not what those scenes are there for.... But we have seen development of characters like Janey-E, Candie, Gordon, Albert, Tammy, and more. There is motion in the plot and in the world in each part, even if some of it is extremely subtle or merely filling backstory or creating tone.

     

    It's fine if you don't like the presentation, but I take issue with the assertion that "things are drawn out to no end but to mess with the viewers." I don't think it's fair to ascribe that motive to Lynch and Frost. The idea that because a viewer doesn't like something, Lynch must be trolling, showing disdain or deliberately messing with said viewer - to me that smacks of arrogance and a preference to believe that your dissatisfaction is the specific intent of the artist rather than simply your own personal reaction. Considering it bad story telling is legitimate, even though I disagree personally, but I am tired of this idea that because some of the audience dislikes the way The Return is going, it must be because Lynch wants them to dislike it, and that he just enjoys screwing with people for 18 vieweing hours. There are much easier ways to troll the public for him than investing 3 years of his life and all the associated effort to make the series happen.

     

    I'd have to argue that we've seen much development in Cordon, Albert, Candie, and Tammy, but I don't think anyone would enjoy that discussion.  

     

    Given Lynch is a filmmaker who has both created and consumed media for decades, that he has studied the craft of it, it is very difficult to think that he is not making specific choices to an end.  He knows what viewers want to see, and what they want to know and witholds it.  In almost every episode this season he (often through the character of Gordon Cole) seems to be looking at the audience and winking (or taunting)- see the giant glass box of nothing watched for who knows how long, waiting for something to appear, the french woman who won't leave so the audience can't get information it wants, the arm wrestling match "Starting position is more comfortable.  You made me uncomfortable when I was here and here.  See how this is uncomfortable.   Starting position."  Motion in any direction is arrested, rewound, rehashed.  Lynch is doing this to the viewer. The viewer is Dougie being shepherded through a world which makes no sense to it, latching onto and repeating the last bit of information it was fed.  We're the dopes.  We're the lucky charms.

     

    It's possible the presentation is wrong.  I believe all 18 episodes should be released at once, or in longer increments 2 hours or four hours at a time.  Maybe the editing is a mess.  I can not tell when anything is happening or if the time frames in each place match.  Yes, perhaps this will be explained in the final installments, but I'm not sure that makes this good.  I know the original Twin Peaks did similar things, it took a season and a half to find out who murdered Laura, but I think in that time we got to know the people and town, saw conflicts introduced and resolved, go a decoder to the strange world of Twin Peaks.  This season seems a lot less charitable in its disseminating of information and (to me) time wasting.

  18. Posted

    I don't think this comparison works.  I have not watched Better Call Saul, but what you describe is not evident in Twin Peaks this season.  Saying viewers want Dougie to be bad ass Coop might be true for some, but saying there has been character development in any of his scenes, or the rude French woman scene, or the various interludes at the Bang Bang, or delivering and painting shovels or the long time spans of people staring dead eyed into the distance don't seem to bear that out.  I am not saying there need to be explosions and murder each episode, but motion in some way, in character in plot, in world.  My point in the original post is that things are drawn out to no end but to mess with the viewers.  Plotlines are ignored for weeks at a time and then resolved off screen, and instead of seeing that (Andy's investigation, the hit and run) we get it 3 episodes later in an expository scene (Hastings interview, Truman and Horne).  It seems like bad story telling and a disdain for its viewers.  

    10 hours ago, Mentalgongfu said:

    Thank you. Your view mirrors my own.

     

    I am a big fan of Better Call Saul (which was unexpected, as I was very skeptical when it was initially proposed as a half-hour comedy), but it has faced many of the same complaints, especially in its most recent season. I don't think there are a ton of apt conparisons between BCS and Twin Peaks, but pacing and tone is the big one.

     

    With BCS, viewers complained that 'nothing happened' in particular episodes, when in fact there were major character developments, reveals of the past that set things in a new light, beautiful moments that lent to the depth and understanding of the story and its characters - but because there was little action and no big, game-changing cliffhanger episodes, many people felt like it was not moving. Viewers considered the slower, deeper story development to be more place-setting than actual plot growth.

     

    I think The Return suffers from the same type of complaint. People who were anxious for Dougie to become badass old Coop in episode 5 are even more frustrated and anxious now, just as people anxious for Jimmy McGill to become badass Saul Goodman were even more anxious and frustrated to see his change by the time the end of season 3 rolled around. To put it another way, Breaking Bad is to Better Call Saul as ABC's original Twin Peaks is to Showtime's Twin Peaks: The Return.

     

    And I have found much love for Dougie and The Return in general since I stopped expecting Coop's return to his old self, or anything else to be what it used to be, which, when you think about it, would be the ultimate fan-service cop out anyway. 

     

    But hey, Wally Brando's monologue about his shadow has been my favorite literal laugh out loud moment of The Return so far, so take my opinion with a grain of salt. I just don't see how you can not laugh at the deadpan delivery of a bit like, "My shadow is always with me. Sometimes ahead, sometimes behind... Sometimes to the left, sometimes to the right. Except on cloudy days. Or at night."

     

    As Zoidberg would say, "Now that's humors!"

     

     

     

  19. Posted

    57 minutes ago, marblize said:

     

    The Dougie, FBI, and Evil Cooper threads are all pretty explicitly moving forward. Evil Cooper and the FBI are pretty obviously working towards a goal while Dougie-Cooper is bumbling forward, amassing a following, attracting attention of increasing relevance. Sure, the Fusco's tossed the key to his identity in the trash, but I think that was just a nod to the fact that Dougie-Cooper is on a journey and there isn't a secret unlock code (yet).

    Like the arm wrestling, mostly a holding pattern.  I would think the FBI would have flagged any Cooper info, so I'm not sure the Fuscos throwing the paper away ends that, but we have found out very little about the Cole investigation that we haven't already known.  Dougie's progress is the same, he seems to take steps forward, but recognizing coffee and pie doesn't seem like progress given we're at episode 13, and is that progress really progress or just luck thht one time?  Is he wearing that suit because he chose it, is he dressing himself, does he understand how to pee yet, is he attempting to communicate or only mimicing sounds?  The world is moving around Dougie, and he is kind of like a mascot or good luck charm.   I don't see what makes the Dougie storyline interesting, funny, important or innovative, except that Dale Cooper is inside him somewhere.  Evil Coop has been looking for coordinates since the first episode, and if it ends up they're just Twin Peaks where he first appeared that seems useless.  So, maybe things are proceeding, but so much of the show seems to be making sure nothing moves very far= to me, frustrating.  

  20. Posted

    Didn't this episode feel like too late?  It was nice to spend some time with the original Twin Peaks cast, but mostly what we found is nothing has changed, and with five episodes left I find it hard to be interested in any new storylines, feeling like they will never move or be resolved considering how slowly everything else is moving. Doesn't it seem like this should have been much earlier in the season?  Even Audrey- I have no idea what is going on there, and I can't work up a whole lot of feeling for those scenes given she's just appeared, has had two scenes in 13 episodes, and again, may never reach any sort of resolution.  

     

    Could someone please explain how this season is "innovation?"  It seems more like evasion and obfuscation.  Early in the season the sluggish pacing and long stretches of static made it seem like the scenes were really only about creating a mood, but then it always seemed the same mood- tension without a release, without connection.  Nothing ever seems to move forward.  Every episode there is a scene where it seems like Lynch is giving the middle finger to his viewers, this epsiode- the arm wrestling scene; we all knew it was a bad idea and that Coop would win.  Coop knew this too.  Coop plays with him- no emotion on his face, returns to starting position, allows the guy to feel like maybe he has made progress, back to starting position, then Coop almost winning.  Lynch seems to do the same with his audience, never moving forward, overall the match is a useless and rigged exercise.    

  21. Posted

    23 hours ago, MarkHoog said:

    I've been enjoying most (but definitely not all) of this season, but this is the first time that I've actively disliked an episode. Sure, it was funny that I could've learned a foreign language in the time it took that French lady to leave Cole's room, but frankly I've had my share of that this season. I'm sorry, but unlike my ability to love and be kind my patience actually has limits. The podcast often discusses the fact that a lot of what we see will/might be appreciated differently once we've seen the whole batch of episodes, so yeah, until then I can't be bothered with whatever's rattling in Sarah's kitchen, Billy's (?) whereabouts and whether the two women in the Roadhouse have any relation to that armpit scratching lady that we'll probably never see again.

     

    The only scene that really grabbed me was the one with Ben Horne. There's was a sad, pensive sort of sweetness to it.

    I'm guessing Billy is they guy Andy went to question- the truck owner who didn't show up for his interview and that the Chuck that Audrey referred to was Richard.

  22. Posted

    Just now, Jake said:

     

    Why are you spending your time here if this is what you're going to post?

    Because I loved Twin Peaks.  I loved the characters and the quirkiness, and I keep trying to like this show, but story just isn't happening.  It's pointless to try to figure anything out because it is purposefully obtuse.  The important things happen off camera and then are related in long scenes of people staring at each other and saying things the viewer already knows (like the Truman/Horne scenes this episode, the Blue Rose scene at the start), or characters saying or behaving in ways that make no sense (the French lady, anybody at the club).  I don't think we've seen any characters make a progression. Characters are acting in ways that don't seem to fit what we knew about them, and we don't get enough time with them or any of the new characters to connect with anyone.  No one acts the way people do, which is unhelpful, some weirdness is quirky or scary or confusing, but if every character is unfathomable, and no rules of the universe are established or explained it all becomes nonsense.  It seems the story teller is purposefully keeping viewers from the story, and will explain some of the strangeness we witnessed in the last two episodes when one character explains it to another.  

     

    I think they probably should have started with the last episode, then a viewer could parse what is meaningful and what is random.  The show seems to me to be really disrespectful of its viewers.  

  24. Posted

    3 hours ago, Professor Video Games said:

    You guys talk about the future Missing Pieces for Dougie's Mitchum Brothers Gym Set conversation, but the scene I want to see is Dougie somehow ordering a cherry pie in a giant box. Did he have a Mr Jackpot moment where there was a glowing light over the cherry pie or did he just Magoo his way towards it (and the huge box) with his boss and some poor barista. I have to know!

    I wondered the same thing.  It sometimes seems like Dougie has more to say when he's off camera.  How did the sex happen, how did the Mitchum brothers get to gym set.  Is he dressing himself now?  Is he choosing that suit?  Does he know how to get to the bathroom by himself now and eat?  

     

    The podcast mentioned the strangeness of giving a 30 million dollar check to him, but everyone seems to be fine with him the way he is.  I have real trouble believing the Mitchum brothers would want to have a meal with him in that condition or take such pleasure in his company.  How did he order the food?  How long did these epsodes last for the original Dougie, why was he taken to the doctor to check his heart and weight?  It seems like they would have some course of action, or more tests if this wasn't a first time happening.  Dougie is so confusing on so many levels.  I don't understand how he fits in the universe, why people react the way they do to him, why he gets no help, why he's constantly forced into work, if he has moments of clarity we don't see, how he perceives what's going on around him.  

  25. Posted

    54 minutes ago, BizzyDQ said:

    I agree that interesting women exist in the story, I'd just really like for their characters to be given more screen time/dialogue. 

    This season Lynch seems to be big on silence and blank stares, and when characters do speak it often seems incomplete, confusing or disconnected with a purpose to disturb, confound, or obscure.