s03e06 — The Return, Part 6

@vk526866: ahaha))

@polya_raevskaya: 🤣

After watching it the second time, I overestimated, of course, the series. These were the emotions of a man who still couldn't get what he dreamed of.

@AlinaKipr: Sex and violence are things that were in this world before we came into it and will be for a very long time after we leave, right up to the disappearance of the last representative of the animal kingdom. Strangely enough, they define the history of mankind. Throughout his existence, man continuously multiplies and destroys his own kind.
From the very beginning of his work, Lynch uses "sex and violence" as a kind of keys to the viewer's perception of reality. Add in the manipulation of fear and you get the Lynch we love so much. Moreover, the director's methods have already gone beyond the cinema screen and extend much, much further.
What you (as a viewer) see in the Twin Peaks murders is only "savoring" violence, most likely indicates the impossibility or unwillingness, at least for a short time, to free yourself from the anchors that have firmly chained you to this cast of reality accessible to your senses.

@mswildangel: You're right, of course, that cruelty and evil in people have always been at the center of twinpix, but this season it's really something very... Voyeuristic. there may sometimes be something in meat for the shock effect, but the fact that the heroines are already half-naked in several of these scenes is well. especially against the background of the general tone towards the female characters so far (tammy.)

@Simamoto: That's the way it's always been.

@Guarin: Unfortunately, Lynch may bring Cooper back in series 17-18, at the end. God forbid, of course)

@GeorgeSugarov: He wasn't fooling anyone. If you're aware of the history of Twin Peaks, Lynch DIDN'T direct the entire series. According to Frost and Lynch, Laura's killer would not have been discovered, and the series would not have been so long. But the ratings took everything out of their control and into the hands of the TV channel that made the decisions. In Fire Walk With Me, Lynch tried to fix this, which took him quite far from the warm lamp atmosphere of the series, which you all cherish here. But, nevertheless, that's where Lynch's Twin Peaks is. And if you've watched Missing Pieces, you might realize that Lynch's vision is very different from what everyone sees as Twin Peaks.
And to say that Lynch deceived everyone is at least strange, since it gives you away as a person who is completely unfamiliar with his work. The new season is Lynch. The quintessence of Lynchian Twin Peaks. It was the sequel 25 years later that he wanted to tell, not what anyone expected from him.

@Arumi: I mentioned cheating only in response to the fact that "Lynch outsmarted everyone," that's all. Because what kind of trick is it to pour a sprite into a bottle of Coke?
I know all these stories, right down to which episodes Lynch shot, it's not the point. You say Lynch's vision is different from what "EVERYONE SEES as Twin Peaks." How is that even possible? There are two seasons of Twin Peaks, which are actually Twin Peaks.
The situation is as follows: Lynch, Frost and the channel (JOINTLY) produced Coca-Cola in the 90s, which the whole world loved, however, according to Lynch's vision, the drink should have been somewhat different. And now, years later, the drink is back. In the same bottle labeled "Coca-Cola". We take a sip... and there's not a cola, but a sprite. Sprite is cool, but isn't it logical to expect that there will be cola in the bottle? Sorry for that stupid comparison :) What I want to say most of all is that Twin Peaks is not a Lynch project alone, like his full-length works. Lynch's films are designed for a narrow audience, unlike Twin Peaks, which is a global phenomenon. Hence, it is not surprising that a huge number of people are completely prostrated by the third season, because this season is, yes, entirely Lynch, Lynchian Twin Peaks, as you put it, but the world just fell in love with Twin Peaks.

@GeorgeSugarov: Lynch didn't plan the first two seasons the way they came out. Here's the second season that the channel pushed through, if you remember. Because the ratings and the plebs were asking for a solution and drama, a cozy flannel Twin Peaks.
On the topic that the series is not a Lynch project alone. I didn't say he was the only one running the ball. He did it together with Frost in his own special way. And, again, if you remember, when the channel began to introduce its own rules after the announcement of the filming of the third season, it was precisely because of the pressure from these very fans (some of whom are now outraged by the lack of a lamp) that Mark and David took over the reins again. So in this case, it's very wrong to say that Lynch beat everyone in a thimble.
Twin Peaks was different from everything that was done on television back then, and it's different now. Lynch said he's NOT making a TV series, but a movie. The kid said, I'm sorry, the kid did.
Either TP will be like that with Lynch, because Lynch is LIKE THAT, or Twin Peaks won't be Twin Peaks. Twin Peaks cannot remain the same after 25 years as it was in the first two seasons. It's strange to expect Lynch and Frost to drink Coke in a bottle, or even something that can be taken on the chest. I do not know how you managed to convince yourself that the new season would be something predictable when Lynch finally got full control, which he did not have in the second season, leaving it due to disagreements.
And the fact that a huge mass of people are prostrated... Well, I don't know. All 6 episodes have a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes so far :) So those who shout "them*I didn't understand", "game" and "when the action starts" can either stop watching, as I'm sure it will only get more wonderful, or they can just relax and start enjoying the new Twin Peaks as a special art form.

@GeorgeSugarov: Did he promise something to someone?

@Arumi: My God, you just expressed my thoughts!!!! Every single word! I'll sign up, where should I put the seal?))

@Arumi: those who don't like it don't necessarily want "action." Personally, I want at least some sense. Speaking of action, I watched the measured and meditative "The Leftovers" with great pleasure and am ready to review it endlessly. Because behind all this sur, you can clearly see the bone-chilling meaning, and for everyone, it has its own meaning. And here I see outrage for outrage's sake, atmosphere for atmosphere's sake. In general, this Twin Peaks of yours is against the same Remnants as, say, Stephen King against Kafka. Or a mac burger versus a steak from a restaurant.
They'll stop, of course, because the vast majority of those reading the comments are fans. And that's understandable) I'm glad for you guys that you like it. I'm even a little jealous. And I'm probably only watching it because for me, Twin Peaks has been strangely associated with David Duchovny since childhood, even though he was here for 1.5 minutes) Well, also all this HYPE. I want to watch in the hope that one day it dawns on me that the series is wonderful.

@Locus_Locust: If Twin Peaks is a hamburger and Stephen King for you, then I really feel sorry for you. I have nothing more to tell you.

@GeorgeSugarov: And I'll subscribe to your words. Lynch, in his right mind and consciousness, shot Twin Peaks with Frost, and the first episodes make it clear how he conceived it. They are not tightened. They have dynamics and character development. Agent Cooper doesn't walk around swaying with a cup of coffee for the entire first season, and the audience isn't showered with blood even though a corpse appears. This is because all the stories "poor Lynch wanted to shoot something else, but they didn't let him" don't relate to the first series in any way, and he himself says that the problems started later. But "Twin Peaks" arose and developed entirely according to his and Frost's idea.
Now he's creating something that he's obviously more interested in doing, something that's more similar to his creative style in general, and he labels it "Twin Peaks." There would be no label, there would be no expectations and no questions from anyone, but then only connoisseurs of arthouse would watch, who now explain in the comments that absolutely everything that the audience finds incomprehensible, disgusting, prolonged and inappropriate is a manifestation of genius. The problem is that this is not a manifestation of Twin Peaks.

@GeorgeSugarov: I like the season and how it was shot, but you expressed a different position so clearly and reasonably that I can't resist giving you a plus sign))) I'm glad that people come here who... they argue)))

@H_M_Murdock: and the real Daggy's left arm went numb in the first scene with him. It is the one-armed man from the wigwam (I forgot his name) who does not have a left hand. Has anyone else noticed this? Write me, otherwise I didn't see any more comments with this coincidence =/

@OlgaGorbunova: The one-armed man's name is Mike, and we noticed about the numbness in the comments to one of the previous episodes, so the theory is quite valid.

@OlgaGorbunova: The hand on which the ring was was numb

Lynch shot only six episodes.

@mutter_nacht: Or take at least "Fire Come with Me," even with the cut scenes. But you can compare even the old Twin Peaks, even "Fire..." - there are not so many long-drawn-out scenes. The quantity is different, but the dynamics are normal.

@darkling: Have you forgotten about the second half of the second season? Where did they just stuff an incredible amount of secondary storylines?

@Arkane: No, you didn't quite get it right. I'm not talking about the number of scenes (and I agree that there is a lot of unnecessary husk in the second season), but about the dynamics within them. There are too many scenes here that seem to be in slow motion and with pauses between lines. For example, a girl with coffee and a guy with cameras in the first episodes, glancing at a blind woman and knocking on the door in the third, but damn, at least how Cooper won money in a casino. Surprisingly, Lynch did not show all the winnings. In this sense, I recall a good example from the movie "Genius", and how Max explained why it was necessary to rewrite the fragment with love. (http://www.npr.org/2016/06/10/481526795/genius-offers-a-high-toned-look-at-the-editor-writer-relationship - you can find a quote for the word love).
Yes, it should be shown, not told, but it's also a way to stretch the scenes.... Well, personally, I don't see the point in that. Honestly. Of course, everything is imho, and you have the right to disagree.

@mutter_nacht: I spit furiously.

@darkling: Thanks for the link! And I agree about the dynamics.

@skagerrak: and I immediately thought about that room with the blind woman. more precisely, about the outer part - the cube, the ladder to it, the pipe, the floating flat face of Briggs - it is very schematic. well, or it's already too far fetched.

@Bisher:

@Bisher: what a good idea it is to accept a child into yourself and that it makes life easier, thank you for it.

@chch93: thank you to the one who finally made it possible to see the responses to the comments and I noticed that at least someone here praised me, and did not bother with my versions. And thank you.

@Pafasan: The waitress, by the way, is from the very first episode of the very first season.

@Pafasan: "a funny scene of some kind is replaced by a tragic one"?
Yes, the whole series is a tough suspense in the Twin Peaks location, which was resolved so unexpectedly and powerfully.

@olga_pe: Yes, but it was a piano in the bushes. If you don't go into the search for deeper meaning, like the Bisher user above, then this scene looked like a piece of a puzzle that accidentally fell into the wrong set. After all, the climax in the plot should come out of the prerequisites for this very specific climax, and not be created from scratch.
But my complaint is not specifically about this fragment, but about the season as a whole. And the fragment is just as an example.

@Pafasan: "if it hadn't been Lynch, such feints would certainly have been viewed critically," I absolutely agree with you. Exploitation of Lynch's big name and Twin Peaks' big name. To be honest, I didn't really like the old Twin Peaks either, although I liked it a little more than the new one. And I perfectly understand how, in the context of his time, he was able to become so popular. Nevertheless, I expected that the new season would be based not only on the old two, but also on what television has become in 25 years. But, alas, the only new thing is inappropriate nudity and "blood-guts-shit." When I would like interesting plot moves or at least unusual camera work, for example. It's very sad to see this. At least the acting is excellent.

@SeraFimaSoynova: because it was there in moderation. There was a plot, but there was mysticism/surrealism. There was a balance. In that concentration, it was intriguing, addictive. And this one has only the second ingredient left.

@lyusya86: There's no need to even read it, there was a scene in the Twin Peaks movie (or in the cut scenes for it) where Cooper flirts with Diana (albeit with a fixed camera on one Cooper). The idea that this is just the name of the recorder is certainly interesting, but it does not fit in with reality. Because in the series itself, in the first episodes, Cooper asked for some things/documents to be sent to him by voice recorder.

@chch93: I agree with the long-drawn-out scenes, but dear friends, wasn't there a lot of this yawning in the old episodes? That's why I watched the second season for two months. No semantic message? Again, this was the case before. Mr. David Lynch has not changed anything in this regard. It's hard to blame him for the pauses if he's made it all his thing a long time ago.
It's just that I personally got used to it by the third season, got used to it...I began to notice the details even more strongly. Everything is in its place with this gentleman. It's just not with the beginning, the denouement, the climax, but... here are some pieces from the middle, and a little bit from the beginning, yeah, come on, great. And I love this kind of violence against my brain so much!
Another thing is that those who were nostalgic for the past stories of Twin Peaks, coffee and cherry pie, don't like what's happening on the screen because it's turned upside down. And I sincerely understand them, I don't like it when my expectations don't meet themselves. You can't judge them for that. The director and creator naturally have to think about their target audience, and take their opinion into account. Categorically declare that he is not obligated to anyone, this video is not for home viewing, but for the public.
Lynch is another matter...not the creator. He is the Creator. And he does what he wants as a joke, but I personally am captivated by the sincere extravagance and absolutely without looking back at anyone, he embodies his most secret dreams this season, while so amazingly beating all modern problems - indifference, stupid advertising and laziness.
In previous seasons, I was mostly kept by the characters, in some places by the idea of human vices, the mystical component and the actors. In the same way, almost everything catches on, except for the slow development of the plot, but you get used to this regularity.
Simply...I don't know. Why waste the precious time of your life on something you don't like? Just turn it off. This is not a spit now, but a wish. I don't think Lynch dreams of being imposed on. He does everything.

@chch93: As the inimitable Faina Ranevskaya said, "People make problems for themselves —no one forces them to choose boring professions, marry the wrong people, or buy uncomfortable shoes." So, give Lynch his shoes, don't torture yourself.