If, as one theory states, Audrey doesn't know Richard is her son, then perhaps he has been introduced to her as "Chuck." Another possibility is that "Chuck" is a nickname for Richard, which is what I am inclined to suppose.
Ben Horne said that Richard never had a father. If Mr C had raped Audrey while she was comotose, she would have thought Wheeler was the father. I am not sure Wheeler would have returned to Twin Peaks to take on responsibility. He was married to his business career.
So...Richard never had a father because Wheeler was far away. Or he is Johnny's, and that is why the Hornes took care of him. Johnny clearly could not act as a father. Why is so tied up now?
Hi again, Jocelyn Rowe; your posts are drawing me in today. I actually thought about Wheeler today, too; however, it was the opposite line of thinking to yours. If Wheeler were the father, he would definitely have come back. Despite how people feel about that arc, Wheeler was hopelessly devoted to Audrey. Also, consider that Wheeler and Audrey consummated their love on the private jet before Audrey was violently shaken and almost killed in a bank vault explosion. Could a fetus have survived that?
Also, to me, regarding Johnny; we first saw him banging his head against a doll house, obsessed with Indians. 25 years later, Johnny's disability seems to have morphed into an incontrollable urge to run around the house and bump into things. He started The Return off by running into a wall and bumping his head there. He's tied up because no one can protect him from himself.
He responded to Audrey "you'd break our contract?" this is not a regular marriage, seems to be some arrangement. She may never have loved this guy. The big mystery is, what was he told on the phone? He's clamming up on telling Audrey what it was.
I see people still assuming Richard is her son. We do not know yet WHO his parents are, only that Ben & Sylvia call him their grandson. That assumption may get quashed later.
If, as one theory states, Audrey doesn't know Richard is her son, then perhaps he has been introduced to her as "Chuck." Another possibility is that "Chuck" is a nickname for Richard, which is what I am inclined to suppose.
Traditionally Chuck is a nick-name for Charles. Richard would be Rich, Richie, Rick, Dick.
If, as one theory states, Audrey doesn't know Richard is her son, then perhaps he has been introduced to her as "Chuck." Another possibility is that "Chuck" is a nickname for Richard, which is what I am inclined to suppose.
Traditionally Chuck is a nick-name for Charles. Richard would be Rich, Richie, Rick, Dick.
He definitely comes across as a Dick... 😉
The big mystery is, what was he told on the phone? He's clamming up on telling Audrey what it was.
I don't know, that's what we're led to believe. I personally feel something is way wrong about this situation though. I almost don't care what he was told on the phone; just that Audrey had to be in the room with him and have this conversation is a huge mystery to me. She wasn't wearing a wedding ring. You say this is obviously a loveless marriage; however, it's worse than that. Something else is happening.
The owls were silent, in the end.
there certainly was a lot of dragged out scenes. Lynch likes to create these moments of impatience in the viewers, I love how with Audrey is the viewer at one point. HURRY UP!
I don't get the obsession with Audrey. There...I said it. She's a great character but I never anticipated her return.
I really loved this episode. Perhaps I'm an idiot for having an opinion, but I thought this summed up why I like being challenged in my media. The moment Diane said "Let's rock." I actually laughed because I realised that Lynch has constantly played with viewers' expectations, and for some reason I keep falling for it. I'm not going to try and force my opinion on anybody, but I can't see anything greatly wrong with the episode. The conversation with Audrey didn't piss me off. If anything, it actually succeeded in drawing me into the world and making me try to figure out what was going on.
PS: Can we stop having these threads? It always comes across to me as "Woah... Lynch did something unexpected/unconventional?! How unexpected! I'm losing my mind here." I'm tired of reading through these. Of course you can have your opinion, but sometimes it can be very annoying to keep reading the same thing parroted again and again. Perhaps I'm just stupidly, blindly following Lynch, but I don't care. This show has been one of the only shows I have seen in a long time that has done quite what it's done. And I love it.
Maybe Richard is Donna's son. Didn't she turn out to be big man Horne's daughter in season 2?
Ben Horne says ''and the boy's parents?'' - I'm guessing he would just say: and Audrey?
Aren't Cooper's key something quite big that actually happened? Isn't Sarah freaking out and having the same background sound that Philip Gerard and some events connected to him/LMFAP had in FWWM a big deal? Really? Also, we have confirmation that the coordinates brings to Twin Peaks, or at least that's what Diane finds out (and wasn't it weird that she was pronouncing the word coordinates in syllables instead of repeating the numbers?). Her phone contact asks her about Vegas and she answers that they (presumably) Gordon and Albert haven't asked yet, which might imply that they already know something. We got to know something more about the Blue Rose and maybe we'll get something else once further details are revealed to Tammy. Audrey is a complete surprise, I get that it might've bummed out someone, but I didn't see it coming, especially not this way, for what little we got of her, she reminded me of Catherine Martell and of season 1-most of season 2 Ben Horne, the one she despised, which is probably a better fit for this story and all in all a smart idea. Honestly I feel like we actually got a lot of interesting things.
It seems to me that behind many people's disappointment there are unreasonable expectations. Expectations of getting immediate and complete answers about Chester Desmond, because the trailer teased them. Expectations of getting back the old Audrey, or at least the one people had imagined/wanted. But in TP and in Lynch's works we never get immediate and complete answers. Sometimes we don't get answers at all. When we do they rarely are straight forward and often come as tiny pieces of a puzzle we have to put together (and sometimes with holes to fill with our imagination). And there's no place for nostalgia in this season. It probably wouldn't make sense (TP has changed, both the show and the town), most of these old characters couldn't fit in this story without some major changes, but even if it did, it's been pretty clear for a while now that nostalgia is banned from Twin Peaks the return. So frankly, I don't wanna sound harsh, but if someone at this point feels like he can reasonably complain about not getting the Audrey they wanted, not getting the whole blue rose-FBI agents disappearing things explained within an episode, or having to elaborate new information that brings new questions instead of giving immediate answers (who are Chuck, Charlie, Billy, Tina, Paul?; what contract and rights is Audrey talking about?), well, honestly I feel that more than blaming Lynch, Frost, the show, Showtime etc you should really blame yourself for not cutting bait like 8 or 9 episodes ago.
Aren't Cooper's key something quite big that actually happened? Isn't Sarah freaking out and having the same background sound that Philip Gerard and some events connected to him/LMFAP had in FWWM a big deal? Really? Also, we have confirmation that the coordinates brings to Twin Peaks, or at least that's what Diane finds out (and wasn't it weird that she was pronouncing the word coordinates in syllables instead of repeating the numbers?). Her phone contact asks her about Vegas and she answers that they (presumably) Gordon and Albert haven't asked yet, which might imply that they already know something. We got to know something more about the Blue Rose and maybe we'll get something else once further details are revealed to Tammy. Audrey is a complete surprise, I get that it might've bummed out someone, but I didn't see it coming, especially not this way, for what little we got of her, she reminded me of Catherine Martell and of season 1-most of season 2 Ben Horne, the one she despised, which is probably a better fit for this story and all in all a smart idea. Honestly I feel like we actually got a lot of interesting things.
It seems to me that behind many people's disappointment there are unreasonable expectations. Expectations of getting immediate and complete answers about Chester Desmond, because the trailer teased them. Expectations of getting back the old Audrey, or at least the one people had imagined/wanted. But in TP and in Lynch's works we never get immediate and complete answers. Sometimes we don't get answers at all. When we do they rarely are straight forward and often come as tiny pieces of a puzzle we have to put together (and sometimes with holes to fill with our imagination). And there's no place for nostalgia in this season. It probably wouldn't make sense (TP has changed, both the show and the town), most of these old characters couldn't fit in this story without some major changes, but even if it did, it's been pretty clear for a while now that nostalgia is banned from Twin Peaks the return. So frankly, I don't wanna sound harsh, but if someone at this point feels like he can reasonably complain about not getting the Audrey they wanted, not getting the whole blue rose-FBI agents disappearing things explained within an episode, or having to elaborate new information that brings new questions instead of giving immediate answers (who are Chuck, Charlie, Billy, Tina, Paul?; what contract and rights is Audrey talking about?), well, honestly I feel that more than blaming Lynch, Frost, the show, Showtime etc you should really blame yourself for not cutting bait like 8 or 9 episodes ago
Hallelujah!
Maybe Richard is Donna's son. Didn't she turn out to be big man Horne's daughter in season 2?
Ben Horne says ''and the boy's parents?'' - I'm guessing he would just say: and Audrey?
When he said "and the boy's parents?" he was referring to the boy who was run over.
I love this forum, I really do. So many ideas to think about, Thank you folks! I totally buy the idea that the whole Audrey scene might not be what it seems. It could be very possible that the dwarf guy is psychiatrist but are doctors allowed to play this kind of game with illusioned patients? I don't know. However what strikes me the most is the fact that Audrey is in Twin Peaks (cause she wants to go to the Roadhouse) so definetely there' s something wrong about her relationship with Richard... I sustain my opinion that he was raised by his granparents, nobody even refer to his mother, the sheriff goes to Ben, Ben complaints about Richard not having a father etc. What about mother?
Audrey's return may seem disapointing but there's more to that. Really looking forward the development.
I'm not even sure the last episode was real. Too many bizzare things going on. And it's never good when a guy named "Trick" enters the picture.
Fire walk with