Notifications
Clear all

Forget Gordon Cole, Get the New Car

33 Posts
13 Users
41 Likes
12 K Views
(@tero)
Eminent Member
 

Some thoughts...

As Cooper's return was a big "payoff" scene, the meeting with Cole or other familiar faces will be saved for another. It felt right that Cooper should awake among the people he was with these recent times. But it might have ruined the moment to have some random FBI people asking questions.

Another possibility: Cooper will not meet any of the characters from the old series in person. People in Twin Peaks will never know Cooper came back. Albert and Gordon will be left wondering what has really happened.

I also like the idea that there is still something more to this.  It is indeed a bit strange that the mention of "Gordon Cole" on TV is what led to Cooper's awakening, but Cole would not be witnessing it in person, or have Gordon as one of the first people to contact. Perhaps the situation of Cooper as Dougie-Coop served a purpose beyond just recruiting help. It was some kind of spiritual ordeal that was needed. Gordon Cole and the people at Twin Peaks, they don't have anything to do with it really.

 
Posted : 30/08/2017 5:45 am
(@jocelyn)
Reputable Member
 

 Um, Murat,  I don't think The Return is a morality play. I can't  read all your posts because many of them are simply too long. But  those I do read, often sound moralistic and judgmental to me. Must we expect justice to win out in this series?

 
Posted : 30/08/2017 8:49 am
(@fumiko)
Reputable Member
 

If you think about it, Cole isn't a young dude.  If you just got home from a 25--year lodge visit coupled with a week or so trapped in someone else's existence in a vegetative state, and then also suffered an electrocution induced coma; you may be forgiven for assuming your old boss from 1989 was still there at his desk waiting for you. 

And this Cooper would've seen and probably been aware of (since he seems to be aware of his interactions with people while he was "Dougie") the incompetence of the local constabulary, so why waste time dealing with them and their sure-to-follow, never-ending questions when he knows what he has to do and has no time to spare in doing so? 

The Mitchum brothers friendship angle may be suggestive of simply redemption (i.e., you are good people, even if you don't fully realize it yet, as you are capable of good, as reinforced by Candie), or Coop simply realizing he can use that friendship to help save the world from evil.  If you want to get hyper-technical, didn't we, the mighty U.S., "use" known mobsters in various ways during the World Wars?  So there may be a bit of an 'ends justify the means' motif here, but I don't think it's any more troubling at the moment than simply "dude needs to get his ass to Twin Peaks".  

And if I think, as I do, that one of the subconscious under-currents of this entire series is some sort of commentary about the treatment of Native Americans in the early years of Americana, then there might be something to say for having strange bedfellows while advancing one's goals, or perhaps one's (manifest) destiny. 

 
Posted : 30/08/2017 11:36 am
(@seattle-swede)
Estimable Member
 
Posted by: Jocelyn Rowe

 Um, Murat,  I don't think The Return is a morality play. I can't  read all your posts because many of them are simply too long. But  those I do read, often sound moralistic and judgmental to me. Must we expect justice to win out in this series?

Yeah, I've had the same reaction at times with Murat's diatribes (Murat, I apologize for the third person reference, I am not being diminutive), but in contrast to the sometimes back and forth of purely bandwidth sucking fun chatter which goes nowhere (good stuff, too, no question!), I've also appreciated the deep thought which goes into his posts, and the challenges to my own perceptions about the narrative, not to mention the possibility that he has the perspective Lynch and Frost are always championing, that Twin Peaks lives outside the town limits and in the viewer's interpretations.

As to the morality tale, as you put it, yes, I don't think that's Lynch's priority in storytelling.  I think it's Frost's.  You call it justice.  He might call it karma.  Mean, selfish Steven--well, we assume.  Sadistic Richard--fried.  Hutch & Chantal--ventilated.  Overreacting jealous Roadhouse husband--crushed sinus cavity.  Bad tulpas--plug pulled.  You see the point.

Now Good Coop is coming for Bad Coop.  Part of the tale.

 

 
Posted : 30/08/2017 2:38 pm
(@murat_erol_ozkan)
Reputable Member
Topic starter
 
Posted by: Jocelyn Rowe

 Um, Murat,  I don't think The Return is a morality play. I can't  read all your posts because many of them are simply too long. But  those I do read, often sound moralistic and judgmental to me. Must we expect justice to win out in this series?

I dont think its a 'morality play' either, that was the point behind the post which points out that things could go wrong again, just as they did at the end of the original series.  Moralism is something like personalized moral judgements that do not take into account the conditions of the material world where the dreams must live, what instruments, systems of economy, institutions, etc. systematically structure the realization of dreams....thus 'moralism' becomes unfair and oppressive, demanding cruelly an impossible task, irrational, etc, because it fails to take into account the instruments that must be changed to accomplish its demands, the limitations we are at presently.....What seemed unfairly judgemental to me was that many immediately came to the conclusive judgement that all was 'said and done', freedom and justice existing for all eternity, because Agent Cooper had just woken up, the same guy who got caught up in the world's injustice and became a BOB character himself.  What is moralistic here is to deny all standards/law/thinking/dreams as being too oppressive on the situation( since it may hurt those who do not fit them, like say Jean Michel Renault, Chad, etc., be a judgment against something/someone, whether justified or not).   If fictions or dreams such as freedom, justice, etc. are not allowed to exist, then one cannot come to the judgement that Chad should be locked up. no one can say anything about the situation, think about it, etc., the moralism here is now one which prevents any kind of rational articulation or genuine dreams, since it sees everything as a possible threat to its feelings, or whatever....then comes to wild conclusive judgements about the situation that it cannot properly think and dream about....like for instance, that we are all saved forever because Cooper woke up....

The moralism and unfair judgement here is to look at a situation where things can easily go wrong, as they have before, where the 'dynamics' of the situation show no room for things such as justice, freedom, etc. then take an irrational moralistic stance which preaches guaranteed salvation no matter what is going on, in order to avoid confronting the problem. So we are ordered that no matter what the dreams are, no matter who is running the show and how they are running it, etc, just 'feel good' about the situation and should pretend everything is great, even if no one is seriously paying attention to this.... This is the cheap moralism that blocks out any attempt to deal with the situation at the level of rationality, dreams, passion, and defers to some guaranteed judgement that all is great, which as Twin Peaks shows us, is not simply the case, said and done with, because we 'feel good'; what someone is deferring to in this situation is nothing greater than people like Chad, Jean Michel, etc, there is always a nasty underside that grows here, always guaranteed in nature without dreams, and why would we not expect these things, when we have prevented dreaming or thinking about how these things work, justice, etc........Why come to an unfair judgement about the situation, when what is shown could easily produce a completely different outcome, with no freedom, justice, etc.? These sorts of dreams and fictions are a material force in the world only when the insufficiency of the default judgemental assumption that 'nature will take care of us' is gotten rid of? Whether we like it or not, we are disconnected from nature and must dream, if we dream to stop dreams, it still wont work, we will just become more ignorant, violent, and have no idea how to deal with the situation.....

 
Posted : 30/08/2017 6:52 pm
(@murat_erol_ozkan)
Reputable Member
Topic starter
 
Posted by: Murat Erol Özkan
Posted by: Joe Congleton

 

Also,  the FBI was at Lucky 7. They were looking for Dougie and Janey -E... for murder.  Of course they would contact Mullins.  He's Dougie's boss.

Yes, but would Agent Cooper himself know this, was he in the coma when this happened? I cant remember if someone told him that the FBI had been to Lucky 7....Maybe he was dreaming in that coma as Subalpine Fir was saying?

Alright, Ive watched it again....and Bushnell did tell Cooper that the FBI was looking for him after Cooper woke up, but did not say anything that it was for a murder charge, since Phil did not mention this to Bushnell.    Cooper responded by saying 'perfect', 'good', or something to that effect when he heard that the FBI was looking for him......, so that it is to his advantage that they are chasing him.....what Cooper wants the FBI to do, will be revealed by what is on that note, whether it is a taunt, an explanation, or a request to have them meet him in Twin Peaks, for whatever reason.

Cooper never met the Las Vegas FBI, so he probably would not have known about Agent Headly and his 'headstrong' methods, nor would he likely know about the Ruth/Briggs murder or that the FBI is after him for this(since it happened before he took over Dougie).  Cooper did meet the Fuscoes, at which point he seemed inspired, desire reignited, with the same jazz music as at his breakfast, then almost went for the electricity socket right there and then....  We can say that he has some kind of mission from the giant I suppose, but what this has now become as realized in the 'viva las vegas' life of Dougie is another issue, how was his mission altered to accept this life.....is he still out for justice and community here, or does he dream of just killing the other Cooper to be number one guy, etc....

  He is definately on a mission, but what is the mission now, as Hawk said 'It depends upon the intention behind the fire/electricity'.  We know he is in a rush towards some goal, part of which I think it is safe to assume will be dealing with his doppelganger Mr. C, but everything else he has planned can at this point be guessed at from the clues that are there, like his declaration that 'I am the FBI'.....

 Cooper has genuine problems to deal with in the world, that he will bring to his judgment, after the destruction of his dreams, being inhabited by BOB, and being stuck in the red room for 25 years, etc....  But something is still missing with Cooper, and what is it? remember this clue? What is Cooper missing in the world, what are his dreams, what is he after rushing around like that?  Its all up for grabs right now.... And if 'Its all about the bunnies, isnt it, Hawk?', lets hope he did not 'eat the evidence' of the garmanbozia/'gas', the evidence of the same problems that led him to fall prey to BOB before.......

 
Posted : 30/08/2017 7:26 pm
 ella
(@ella)
Estimable Member
 

Wow! Fellas, this is, I think, the most interesting thread in this forum. To the point I almost regret to having it read cause now I look even more inpatiently for the finale, possibly spoiled? Oh dear...

Murat, I really admire your reflexions and your ability to dig deep. Very deep. Isn't it too deep in this case? I don't know but it's possible that you just guessed the final resolution of this story. What if not? What if there's still some twist even deeper? I would wait another few days before making judgements.

But I agree for sure with some points. It surprised me too that awakened Cooper didn't contact Cole in the first place but... Mitchums. Yes, when they love they have hearts of gold but if you trick them, they're not so kind... They are mobsters, not the best company of friends for FBI special agent.

The recurrent leitmotif of Twin Peaks was always the loss of innocence. After 25 years in hell, in non-existen-ce agent Cooper could become somebody else. I am who I am/ Who I was I will never be again.

There's always a possibility that he's aware he will be chased and charged for all Mr C's crimes. The court is probably not ready to believe that all of them were commited by some shadow self from the Black Lodge...

 
Posted : 30/08/2017 8:54 pm
(@arcadesonfire)
Reputable Member
 

Two things:

1. In the Sunset Boulevard scene, Demille says,

"Get Gordon Cole. Tell him to forget about our car. Tell him he can get another old car someplace."

So, I like the connection you originally drew Murat--and it might turn out to truly be foreshadowing--but I doubt that it's the right take on things. If we're free to interpret, the "car" might mean the official FBI. "Forget the FBI Cole. They won't understand this. You can get an FBI anywhere. We're the Blue Rose team and only we can handle this." I don't believe that interpretation; instead, I'm not willing to put much weight on the car. That just happens to be the line in the movie after the very important "get Gordon Cole." I agree with others that Cooper had to move fast, and the note was his way of getting Cole.

2. The Mitchum Brothers: I still think they're "good" guys in the milieu in which they live. Again, I think of Vito Corleone. A big reason why Cooper might admire them and have taken them is that they were orphans. 

We've seen discussions about the importance of fathers, damaged people who grew up without fathers, and three mother-son relationships in this season. The 119 woman whose not taking care of her son; the jackpots woman who cleaned up and reconnected to her son thanks to Cooper's good karma; and Janey-E and Sonny Jim, who will probably have a better relationship with each other and the new tulpa, no longer in danger, no longer with philandering father (hopefully).

So I've taken parenthood to be a big theme of the season, and the Mitchums and "-andie" girls were presumably all orphans and found each other. Cooper might have an affinity for these men who've shown some good hearts especially after learning they grew up in an orphanage. (What reason would they have to pay Dougie respects first thing in a hospital if they were truly heartless?)

So, I take it you're playing a long game and prepping for an ending like the end of Season 2. I'm a little more optimistic at least that Cooper and Cole are still paragons of goodness--not perfect (like Audrey once said), but still top brass. And if the Fireman and lodge forces knew Cooper wasn't all that special or that he posed a threat, I don't think he would have had so much good luck and help along the way. 

Oh, and as for MIKE, he's always making angry, confused faces, seems to me. 

 
Posted : 31/08/2017 2:49 am
(@seattle-swede)
Estimable Member
 
Posted by: Jesse Newkirk

 

2. The Mitchum Brothers: I still think they're "good" guys in the milieu in which they live. Again, I think of Vito Corleone. A big reason why Cooper might admire them and have taken them is that they were orphans. 

I think of standard Shakespearean jokers.  They're in all the romances.  Think of A Midsummer Night's Dream.  Quince, Snug, Snout, and Flute and the rest of those guys are the low-lifes that everyone else considers themselves to be above.  But in the final analysis, their value is recognized, usually by the leading characters (Lysander and Hermia in this case), and they are happily elevated beyond their station. 

The Mitchums are not Rosencranz and Guildenstern.  They have good intent.   They remember their own orphaned youth when, referring to Candie, one says "She would have no place to go."  They're forever boys without a mama, but they have each other.

 
Posted : 31/08/2017 3:07 am
(@esther)
Eminent Member
 

Maybe Cooper sees more, knows about certain things in the future and just knows that the Mitchum brothers will need exactly in the right time and place, no one else.

 
Posted : 31/08/2017 8:44 am
ella reacted
(@murat_erol_ozkan)
Reputable Member
Topic starter
 
Posted by: Subalpine Fir
Posted by: Jesse Newkirk

 

2. The Mitchum Brothers: I still think they're "good" guys in the milieu in which they live. Again, I think of Vito Corleone. A big reason why Cooper might admire them and have taken them is that they were orphans. 

I think of standard Shakespearean jokers.  They're in all the romances.  Think of A Midsummer Night's Dream.  Quince, Snug, Snout, and Flute and the rest of those guys are the low-lifes that everyone else considers themselves to be above.  But in the final analysis, their value is recognized, usually by the leading characters (Lysander and Hermia in this case), and they are happily elevated beyond their station. 

The Mitchums are not Rosencranz and Guildenstern.  They have good intent.   They remember their own orphaned youth when, referring to Candie, one says "She would have no place to go."  They're forever boys without a mama, but they have each other.

   I would argue that its quite the opposite here, the Mitchums are highly rewarded in the society and well regarded, as criminals they are well regarded, the law/society itself is criminal, the Mitchums live in the lap of luxury and are recognized by everyone as quirky rich lords, almost like nobility of Las Vegas, after all they are mafia.  The Mitchums are extremely wealthy and accepted as almost something like secret 'town elders' of Las Vegas:  Mullins thinks they are great, the police allow them to function in their criminal enterprises(probably with a wink and not saying it out loud, like the police did with Duncan's group), Janey E/Sonny Jim/Dougie think they are 'gold hearted' rich benefactors(benign 'billionaires', etc.).....everyone loves them and their quirky ways, no matter what they do.  I mean, what sort of work do the Mitchums do that is unrewarded?  They have a casino that tends to drain money from vices, they operation a criminal enterprise including murder, protection racket, etc....and are compensated excessively, they have more shares of 'mother nature' than almost everyone combined, and leave large segments of the society in rancho rosa.  Their charity work, if they do any outside of Dougie/Mullins insurance payouts bonding, is just to soothe their conscience for everything they have been taking and destroying........and people love them for it.....they were poor, so thats how it is and they now make others poor, and they can give charity like was given to them before, its how they see it, and its criminal in more ways than one..........

  What happened with Candie was tragic, she was crying genuinely about doubting that she could ever find true love with the Mitchums and she wanted to, she became hysterical and was on the verge of leaving, she then convinced herself into staying and becoming a robot(all the cars at the traffic jam, etc.), she went with the money and sold her heart. The Mitchums just ignored Candie's love, dreams,  completely and basically 'bought her' and turned her into their personal robot, with the help of Dougie to smooth things over, when she saw that Dougie was their robot buddy to during the 'melancholia restaurant scene'. Thats why Candie now really likes Dougie and is only happy with the Mitchums when Dougie endorses them, look again at how she looks at Agent Cooper in the hospital bed and in the limo.  Dougie was that extra special thing that fixed all of the problems magically, some quick and cheap salvation, a jackpot, a 'damned good cherry pie', etc.  When Dougie/Cooper brought the box in the 'Seven scene' that was expected to be a woman's head(like in the movie Seven), he was actually delivering to the Mitchums Candie's head via 'damned good cherry pie', the death of Candie's dreams and love.

    The ones who have been completely discounted thus far are Richard, Mr. C, and Diane, shunned as easy scapegoats for all the evils in the world, they are the 'children of satan', etc., the source of all evil, highly exaggerated in order to hide from the real problems and pin everything on them.   Mr. C is the one who has been dealing with the consequences of Agent Cooper's(and the world in general's) failures from the original series, unlike Dougie/Agent Cooper who are happy to 'viva las vegas' and forget about garmanbozia, Laura's tragedy, easily......Mr. C knows about 'the place', void(world does not hold itself together, its up to people and their dreams, etc.), maybe trying to show Richard this, who is still too reliant on the world-as-nature(still a young kid) in which he has no place.....the two coordinates that fit, trying to go back into the world as it is(as if you could just 'blend' Mr. C and Agent Cooper/world-as-it-is back together and forget the antagonism), Richard gets shocked and killed there(he cannot be in the world where he has no place, but must know of THE place, void, dreams, etc.), Mr. C can have no son in the world until Laura's tragedy is solved, until the third coordinates that dont fit in the world are solved, changing the world itself and leading to new dreams.....still a lot of work to be done before anyone can start getting happy with 'viva las vegas', and Mr. C is not happy about it....

Mr. C has BOB in him because of what Agent Cooper did in the original series, thinking Twin Peaks is great/perfect(not like Philadelphia despite the brutal underside), ignoring teh nasty underside which was ripping Laura and Cooper's dreams apart;  and now Cooper is doing the same now by just endorsing the insurance fraudster Mullins as great and criminal Mitchums as great...everything feels good/great again, no matter dreams, law, justice, etc... Agent Cooper is headed for BOB again; but Mr. C has had BOB for 25 years and after meeting Jeffries he is looking for Judy(Jeffries' Laura tragedy, etc.) again the 'third coordinates' that dont match, so he is the one that may be able to connect back with the Laura tragedy, 'Laura is the one', and bring about the genuinely new Agent Cooper that takes into account Lauras tragedy, Cooper's pain, destroy BOB so monster Agent Cooper zombie clone cannot get his hands on BOB again....Mr. C killing BOB and turning legitimate is what is needed, then putting the mobster Agent Cooper to the law...end 'viva las vegas', show the limitations of it, etc...there is a lot to like about pie, coffee, etc. but all will be ruined if not having that Mr. C aspect of it, will degrade into BOB and rancho rosa itself and without law, justice, dreams, etc, this becomes BOB....in 'viva las vegas' it is always a fortune, but the fortune is both won and lost always....like the mud and the golden shovel....need Mr. C and the ring(Mike trying to stop BOB, the fire-man puts out the fire, and creates new fire, etc.)....

 

 

 
Posted : 31/08/2017 3:57 pm
(@alessandro_mancini)
Active Member
 

Dale Cooper is an FBI agent who knows exactly what the procedures are for a sophomore ... he probably does not know that he is looking for douglas jones, he is almost certain they are looking for him because he was a co-worker, he was a prisoner for 25 Years old and knows that in his place there was the doppleganger in his place with BOB inside him, he realizes what he (badcoop) could have combined in all those years and when the FBI would have arrived, knowing the Procedures would have stopped him at the istates, especially if he had said who he really was, remember that the co-operative agent is wanted for evasion by a prison ... it would have been days before he possibly met him and even who would treat him circumspectly Not knowing who he was and what it was, to get to twin peaks was the only logical option to do since time is tight

 
Posted : 01/09/2017 12:02 am
(@seattle-swede)
Estimable Member
 
Posted by: Murat Erol Özkan
Posted by: Subalpine Fir
Posted by: Jesse Newkirk

2. The Mitchum Brothers: I still think they're "good" guys in the milieu in which they live. Again, I think of Vito Corleone. A big reason why Cooper might admire them and have taken them is that they were orphans. 

I think of standard Shakespearean jokers...

   I would argue that its quite the opposite here...

Once again, I wanted to dismiss your postulate posthaste, but instead I find parts of it boiling in my head all day long while I'm out working in the woods. 

At times, you start up with a really valid, if contrarian point with substance and then you take it out of the realm of conceivability by excessive broadening.  I stated that the Mitchums supply a stock dramatic character profile to the story (devised, I propose, entirely by Frost) and drew a parallel to classic dramatic formula modeled in Shakespeare, which is really hard to disagree with. 

I don't think the Mitchums role goes deeper than performing as a cast device, as evidenced that all their behaviors are really stage acting.  That's why I think Mark Frost invented the characters.  They're not Lodge entities.  They're not doppel-anything.  If we see them in the future, dollars to doughnuts, they will be performing yet more Abbot and Costello gangster flick material.  Certainly, they are not "filler" material, before I'm accused of saying that.  I see Mark Frost's hand all over that story, mostly, and Lynch is adjacent to it in terms of characters with whom the brothers interact. 

Yes, society thinks itself above their kind.  Oh, lip service is paid to high-earning profiteers (i.e. Walter White-types) who outwardly show their hard-won honest gains, running reasonable businesses the American way, but without naming details everyone "knows" they didn't become filthy rich with a small string of carwashes.   As long as their attorneys can keep them off of the front page, people are willing to say they approve of such business types, but, do they ever get invited to the Governor's inaugural ball?  Do they ever get invited to certain Congressional cocktail parties?  I know firsthand, they may be in the Congressman's pocket financially, but they don't show up as guests at the bar mitzvah.  Americans lead the world in superficiality--I've lived here my whole life.  We even vote guys into the President's office on a platform that they're going to stick it to the Establishment--to hell with Political Correctness, and all that.  Give 'em hell, Donald.  Right.  Then the guy fumbles his public reactions to neo-Nazi activities at a rally, and all those fine Congressmen are like, Oh heavens, Oh my! I can't support that President, oh, for shame, for shame.  DISCLAIMER: NOT AT ALL attempting to fan any political flames, just giving you a true example how Americans love to look down their noses at shady cats they simultaneously love to worship.  Humans have done it since the beginning, as Shakespeare knew. 

I can't agree with you about Candie.  She's nobody's robot.  I just think she's limited.  Those guys have, for all their complexities (very few, actually) they really have a curious nurturing instinct about them.  Possibly, Frost is saying that due to some bond forged through a fostered childhood, they feel a need fulfilled by caring for the 3 bunnies in a parental way.   I think all those girls are damaged in some way or another--two of them may as well be mute.  Candie seems to have mild learning disabilities, and God only knows, she may have mystical properties.  She didn't sell her soul for anything; can you honestly visualize her in any other occupation?  The Mitchums are her parents.  Again, I contend my point that the Mitchums are only a simple plot device straight out of undergraduate drama analysis. 

As for your last paragraph, that's a whole separate subject.  There are multiple points in it I can't negotiate within the context of the film...ex: Mullins a fraudster?  not following that. Also, Cooper ignores all the glaring faults of said crooks (Mitchums, Mullins, et al) by whitewashing them, evading legal scrutiny and justice...?  Following this it gets quite confusing with which Cooper you're referencing, who should be prosecuted, who should be Bob-exorcized (for lack of the right word).  Feel free to scold me. 

Apologies tendered for spelling and grammatical errors.  I can ramble, but prefer not to.

 

 

 
Posted : 01/09/2017 2:30 am
(@murat_erol_ozkan)
Reputable Member
Topic starter
 
Posted by: Subalpine Fir
Posted by: Murat Erol Özkan
Posted by: Subalpine Fir
Posted by: Jesse Newkirk

2. The Mitchum Brothers: I still think they're "good" guys in the milieu in which they live. Again, I think of Vito Corleone. A big reason why Cooper might admire them and have taken them is that they were orphans. 

I think of standard Shakespearean jokers...

   I would argue that its quite the opposite here...

Once again, I wanted to dismiss your postulate posthaste, but instead I find parts of it boiling in my head all day long while I'm out working in the woods. 

At times, you start up with a really valid, if contrarian point with substance and then you take it out of the realm of conceivability by excessive broadening.  I stated that the Mitchums supply a stock dramatic character profile to the story (devised, I propose, entirely by Frost) and drew a parallel to classic dramatic formula modeled in Shakespeare, which is really hard to disagree with. 

I don't think the Mitchums role goes deeper than performing as a cast device, as evidenced that all their behaviors are really stage acting.  That's why I think Mark Frost invented the characters.  They're not Lodge entities.  They're not doppel-anything.  If we see them in the future, dollars to doughnuts, they will be performing yet more Abbot and Costello gangster flick material.  Certainly, they are not "filler" material, before I'm accused of saying that.  I see Mark Frost's hand all over that story, mostly, and Lynch is adjacent to it in terms of characters with whom the brothers interact. 

I can't agree with you about Candie.  She's nobody's robot.  I just think she's limited.  Those guys have, for all their complexities (very few, actually) they really have a curious nurturing instinct about them.  Possibly, Frost is saying that due to some bond forged through a fostered childhood, they feel a need fulfilled by caring for the 3 bunnies in a parental way.   I think all those girls are damaged in some way or another--two of them may as well be mute.  Candie seems to have mild learning disabilities, and God only knows, she may have mystical properties.  She didn't sell her soul for anything; can you honestly visualize her in any other occupation?  The Mitchums are her parents.  Again, I contend my point that the Mitchums are only a simple plot device straight out of undergraduate drama analysis. 

As for your last paragraph, that's a whole separate subject.  There are multiple points in it I can't negotiate within the context of the film...ex: Mullins a fraudster?  not following that. Also, Cooper ignores all the glaring faults of said crooks (Mitchums, Mullins, et al) by whitewashing them, evading legal scrutiny and justice...?  Following this it gets quite confusing with which Cooper you're referencing, who should be prosecuted, who should be Bob-exorcized (for lack of the right word).  Feel free to scold me. 

Apologies tendered for spelling and grammatical errors.  I can ramble, but prefer not to.

 

 

Maybe your right about the Mitchums being drawn from Shakespeare, and 'Midsummer Night's Dream', I cannot comment on that right now tbh.  I dont think they are 'filler' either, but go a long way in explaining how Agent Cooper is right now, how he has adopted parts of his experience as Dougie wholeheartedly, by calling the Mitchums 'hearts of gold', Mullins as a good man, and claiming to Janey E and Sonny Jim that he loves them and is Sonny Jim's father(quite a bold statement from Agent Cooper, who was just thrown into that life by accident, and is now leaving to join up with a mafia group and claims 'I am the FBI', looks like he is going for it all here, without recognizing any of the serious problems involved).

I dont think Candie has learning disabilities, but was the genuine charachter in that whole things, until she gave up her dreams in that melancholia restaurant scene, where she also became attached to Dougie(the Seven scene is key here, Candie's 'head' and the Cherry pie are interchangeable, that where her dreams/thinking went, etc.).  I dont think that these girls are physically/damaged, but just thinking they are getting a 'good deal' by being chosen by the wealthy Mitchums....pretty common stuff..., but curious what 'damage'/pathologies this does psychically...as I think is shown by the Candie character as the switch from love/passion to 'enjoying all the nice cars at the traffic jam/problem' instead of fixing the problem, laughing at all the nice gifts instead...and why not Candie in another occupation if she did not give up on the problem/garmanbozia and dreams?

Mullins decided to turn on Anthony and dump all the blame on him for how his insurance company is basically used by the various mafia and money factions to get favorable claims, falsify forms, commit fraud, etc.  Anthony wanted out of the entire thing, to make things right, he wanted to 'clean the slate' and make things right at any cost, after all he got caught up, just like Dougie and Mullins, in the 'jackpots', money and gifts, and it all got out of hand. In this situation, Mullins seemed content to dump all of the blame on Anthony and shield Dougie's participation in fraud, since he is getting favorable connections and money from Dougie and his connections to the Mitchus, Dougie becomes his new 'money man' and 'number one sales agent'. Thus Mullins is participating in fraud, shielding Dougie and not dealing with the consequences of how the world uses his company, what his company is doing; and instead Mullins is not 'cleaning the slate' but going to the same kind of behavior that Anthony and Dougie started out on which got out of hand, of dealing favorably with criminal group, social exchange with them, favors to be reciprocated, etc., the same behavior that led to the situation with Anthony almost killing Dougie.  Notice how Mullins was basically acting as a judge, an authority of the law here, deciding who is punished(Anthony and Duncan's group, not his group the Mitchums), when he is running a business and even saying openly how he only cares about how much money he makes, who is 'costing him a lot', etc.;  and then how Dougie learned from this and began to look proud, now is saying ' I am the FBI'....

I agree with you that things are getting very confusing here as to who should be 'bob exorcised', making it interesting, both Coopers are looking quite inadequate to live up to seeing that Agent Cooper's original dreams of justice, duty, and community exist in anyway.....There were big problems with the original Agent Cooper(remember 'Where's Annie?', etc.), with Twin Peaks, and Laura Palmer that remain untouched here by Dougie/Cooper zombie clone, so that its not appropriate or rational to welcome him showing up 'without doorbell or knocking'(especially after what happened with Diane) as if nothing had happened in the first series, which I think is still key to what is going on here.  I think that whatever is the final outcome of the 'return' is not said and done yet, but will only be so after Agent Cooper confronts Mr. C, who is not a clone of Cooper from 1989, but has been living viciously and wrongly in the wake of original Agent Coopers failure....his search for coordinates is now leading him somewhere unheard of,  not the original series Cooper, but the 'third coordinate' that does not match, maybe the message is being shown to him that 'the place'(the void in 'mother nature'/experiment of human intervention of dreams) is something he will never be able to possess in his wild search, destroy, or control once and for all.....that no one will ever be able to find a way to 'come to rest' in the digital iphone paradise or 'viva las vegas'...

 
Posted : 01/09/2017 3:23 am
(@seattle-swede)
Estimable Member
 
Posted by: Murat Erol Özkan
Posted by: Subalpine Fir
Posted by: Murat Erol Özkan
Posted by: Subalpine Fir
Posted by: Jesse Newkirk

2. The Mitchum Brothers: I still think they're "good" guys in the milieu in which they live. Again, I think of Vito Corleone. A big reason why Cooper might admire them and have taken them is that they were orphans. 

I think of standard Shakespearean jokers...

   I would argue that its quite the opposite here...

Once again, I wanted to dismiss your postulate posthaste, but instead I find parts of it boiling in my head...

Mullins decided to turn on Anthony and dump all the blame on him for how his insurance company is basically used by the various mafia and money factions to get favorable claims, falsify forms, commit fraud, etc.  Anthony wanted out of the entire thing, to make things right, he wanted to 'clean the slate' and make things right at any cost, after all he got caught up, just like Dougie and Mullins, in the 'jackpots', money and gifts, and it all got out of hand. In this situation, Mullins seemed content to dump all of the blame on Anthony and shield Dougie's participation in fraud, since he is getting favorable connections and money from Dougie and his connections to the Mitchus, Dougie becomes his new 'money man' and 'number one sales agent'. Thus Mullins is participating in fraud, shielding Dougie and not dealing with the consequences of how the world uses his company, what his company is doing; and instead Mullins is not 'cleaning the slate' but going to the same kind of behavior that Anthony and Dougie started out on which got out of hand, of dealing favorably with criminal group, social exchange with them, favors to be reciprocated, etc., the same behavior that led to the situation with Anthony almost killing Dougie.  Notice how Mullins was basically acting as a judge, an authority of the law here, deciding who is punished(Anthony and Duncan's group, not his group the Mitchums), when he is running a business and even saying openly how he only cares about how much money he makes, who is 'costing him a lot', etc.;  and then how Dougie learned from this and began to look proud, now is saying ' I am the FBI'....

I agree with you that things are getting very confusing here as to who should be 'bob exorcised', making it interesting, both Coopers are looking quite inadequate to live up to seeing that Agent Cooper's original dreams of justice, duty, and community exist in anyway.....There were big problems with the original Agent Cooper(remember 'Where's Annie?', etc.), with Twin Peaks, and Laura Palmer that remain untouched here by Dougie/Cooper zombie clone, so that its not appropriate or rational to welcome him showing up 'without doorbell or knocking'(especially after what happened with Diane) as if nothing had happened in the first series, which I think is still key to what is going on here.  I think that whatever is the final outcome of the 'return' is not said and done yet, but will only be so after Agent Cooper confronts Mr. C, who is not a clone of Cooper from 1989, but has been living viciously and wrongly in the wake of original Agent Coopers failure....his search for coordinates is now leading him somewhere unheard of,  not the original series Cooper, but the 'third coordinate' that does not match, maybe the message is being shown to him that 'the place'(the void in 'mother nature'/experiment of human intervention of dreams) is something he will never be able to possess in his wild search, destroy, or control once and for all.....that no one will ever be able to find a way to 'come to rest' in the digital iphone paradise or 'viva las vegas'...

@ Mullins, specifically.

This part I want to address only because it irks me professionally speaking (until age 40 I worked as a registered rep for a major broker dealer with several years experience as options principal on the CBOE in Chicago).  I know what happens when an internal agent defrauds his company, and although I am more than willing to suspend disbelief especially in the case of Lynch film works, seeing this play out was really akin to watching a cartoon rendering of a financial embezzlement.  Nothing that was shown in the Mullens/Anthony/Dougie play could ever happen in any real context.

$30M checks are not printed.  Not in the US; never.  Funds are electronically transferred via the Federal Reserve System and tracked through the SEC. The largest printed check that is hand delivered to a claimant is never above $10,000 (this is a federal mandate), and it is delivered by the claims department, NOT by an agent, and not alone in the desert--please.  Mullins himself, would never send an agent to meet with a claimant to discuss any claim (it's the claims department's affair--no, not even if big shots like the Mitchums demanded to see "their guy"), and in fact, Mullins himself would have nothing whatsoever to do with a claim.  He would be recalcitrant for doing anything beyond redirecting phone calls anywhere beyond the claims department.  Everything about that process was so far out of protocol.

Anthony was the fraudulent one.  I can't identify the exact nature of his crime, partly due to the obscure Lynchian "evidence" provided by Dougie (scribblings) which we didn't get enough of to examine, and partly because the too short conversation between Anthony and the crooked cops (one played by John Savage and the other by ??) was too vague and left incomplete.  Details were left out.  There's only enough to conjecture that there was a scandal involving some cops, Anthony and persons unknown whose target was (possibly) the Mitchums.  Funds were being extorted which were to be paid/invested via Lucky 7 which constituted insurance fraud which in turn (if it were real) would have resulted in an investigation by the Nevada State Insurance Commissioner (not Dougie), and the NASD, (my old job) which is the regulatory arm of the SEC.  This happens anytime a broker-dealer requests an investigation of an amount of this size.  

As far as Battlin' Bud always punching above his class (or whatever the slogan was), there again, cartoon time.  All highly-capitalized insurance corporations, whether stock or mutual (seems like Lucky 7 was a mutual company--I can't envision they had any stockholders), have reinsurers.  Reinsurers are, over-simplistically, insurance companies for the insurance company.  One $30M claim never wipes a company out; Battlin' Bud is not the Floyd Mayweather of insurance bosses.

That's my peace about Mullins.  Being in the finance industry for a long time just made that too hard to ignore.  It probably ruined it for me.  But I do know what would happen to Anthony.  He would absolutely be fired, lose his licenses and face probable prosecution by the employer.  As far as his crooked cop colleagues...who knows what they have in mind for him?  Mullins himself would likely be removed from office by a board of directors for oversight failure, but he would not be found criminal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Posted : 03/09/2017 2:07 pm
Page 2 / 3
Share: