I also know the season is 18 episodes, so it's more than 1/3 of the way in...

I think Kyles acting is off the chains.

I respect your opinion, and am so happy about the utter absence of trolling on this site, but I am thrilled and enthralled by this season. Any attempt to replicate seasons 1-2 would, to my mind, have been disasterous. 

What is the case, to me, is that this is as startlingly different from anything I have seen beforee on television as was the original series in 1990.

I am, admittedly, a fangirl.

Me screaming at the TV set, "WAKE UP, DALE, WAKE UP!!!" Is EXACTLY what I want from my viewing.

(-;

"1. This show so far hasn't come close to how good season 1-2 are."

You REALLY need to rewatch season 2.

I also keep hearing complaints that the "quirkiness" is gone.  

What made this show popular was the murder of Laura Palmer by her possessed father who had been raping her since she was barely a teenager.

What got the show cancelled was an over abundance of "quirky" side characters ranging from Dick Tremayne to Tojamura to high school Nadine.

The quirky aspect of TP, for the most part, ended with FWWM 26 years ago.

Posted by: Zack Sisson

"1. This show so far hasn't come close to how good season 1-2 are."

You REALLY need to rewatch season 2.

I vividly remember the complaints in 1990, amongst the fans I was talking to during S2, that the show had hit the skids-there was frustration when the quality level dropped.

I also keep hearing complaints that the "quirkiness" is gone.  

What made this show popular was the murder of Laura Palmer by her possessed father who had been raping her since she was barely a teenager.

What got the show cancelled was an over abundance of "quirky" side characters ranging from Dick Tremayne to Tojamura to high school Nadine.

The quirky aspect of TP, for the most part, ended with FWWM 26 years ago.

The "water cooler" and viewing party discussions I remember from 90' were heavily centered on the lodges/briggs/giant/supernatural aspects...Tojomura never came up-Tremayne was seen as an annoying waste of time-at least here in the bay area (northern california) the "mystery" elements were the draw.

I find it funny how people compare The Return to the seasons 1 and 2, as if those first two seasons were somehow perfect without any flaws.

But I also don't quite share many people's view that season 2 was worse than season 1. This may be because of the point at which I first started watching Twin Peaks. I came in part way through season 2, just around the time the killer was being revealed, and then watched it until the end. So I got into TP while it was falling apart and making no sense. Then years later I got some video tapes of season 1 and watched season 1 for the first time, and found it to be a bit of a disappointment compared to season 2, apart from Cooper's dream scene. I was craving all this crazy nonsense but was watching an FBI murder mystery. 

But in recent years I've re-watched season 2 and that's not quite as good as I remembered it either. 

It's like when people who grew up in the 70s say that it was the best decade. But I can tell you that the 80s were better because that's when I grew up. But people who grew up in the 90s will say that was better. 

Things were better when we were younger because we were younger. Now we're older, things don't seem so good. 

If season 1 had been exactly like The Return is now, but The Return now was like season 1 was back then, people would still be complaining. They would probably say the scenes are too short or something.

Posted by: laughingatsky

I find it funny how people compare The Return to the seasons 1 and 2, as if those first two seasons were somehow perfect without any flaws.

But I also don't quite share many people's view that season 2 was worse than season 1. This may be because of the point at which I first started watching Twin Peaks. I came in part way through season 2, just around the time the killer was being revealed, and then watched it until the end. So I got into TP while it was falling apart and making no sense. Then years later I got some video tapes of season 1 and watched season 1 for the first time, and found it to be a bit of a disappointment compared to season 2, apart from Cooper's dream scene. I was craving all this crazy nonsense but was watching an FBI murder mystery. 

But in recent years I've re-watched season 2 and that's not quite as good as I remembered it either. 

It's like when people who grew up in the 70s say that it was the best decade. But I can tell you that the 80s were better because that's when I grew up. But people who grew up in the 90s will say that was better. 

Things were better when we were younger because we were younger. Now we're older, things don't seem so good. 

If season 1 had been exactly like The Return is now, but The Return now was like season 1 was back then, people would still be complaining. They would probably say the scenes are too short or something.

I disagree.  Sometimes there are things that hit a timeless quality (I think it means being really good without using flashy tricks or riding on trends) and they remain good however many decades later.

I think there's a reason why certain works become classics, while others, no matter how wildly successful at the time they come out, will be gone in no time and won't be rediscovered by later generations.

Posted by: Zack Sisson

"1. This show so far hasn't come close to how good season 1-2 are."

You REALLY need to rewatch season 2.

I also keep hearing complaints that the "quirkiness" is gone.  

What made this show popular was the murder of Laura Palmer by her possessed father who had been raping her since she was barely a teenager.

What got the show cancelled was an over abundance of "quirky" side characters ranging from Dick Tremayne to Tojamura to high school Nadine.

The quirky aspect of TP, for the most part, ended with FWWM 26 years ago.

 

 

Mmm, I liked highschool Nadine.  ?  Not Tojamura, but Tremayne I thought was okay.

So I think Lynch is just not playing it safe, some elements are so out there that opinions are polarized.

But I feel seas3 is more focused on the plot and unraveling mysteries, that character development and emotional aspects are somewhat neglected (no romance or flirtation except a brief scene with Becky, and the brief appearance of James).  Everything's so fragmented, nobody gets enough screen time except DougieDale and DoppelDale, and so if we're ever gonna love the characters, it might take an entire season.

@Yamabag021: well, that's one...  weird opening post you got there, buddy : -)

It starts with a title that seems to suggest that whoever has a different, more positive or more optimistic, opinion than you, must be a fanboy/fangirl -- thus implying hir/her point of view as biased. 

Then you go on, however, by stating that you are a "peaks fan" as well and that

"This show so far hasn't come close to how good season 1-2 are."  

which, going by the same mentality that appears to be behind the title, leaves you exposed to being considered an "original TP-fanboy/fangirl" yourself; also, part of what you wrote from there on would support the idea that you are wearing 'nostalgia goggles' -- at least to a degree -- and that this is preventing you from enjoying the show.

Anyway, the point is that then you proceed to write a post that reads like a fanboy-rant verging on trolling, where you go in mostly subjectve stuff stating your opinions as facts. Mind it: I'm not saying that that's your intent, just that you're using exactly such kind of 'incendiary' style. 

About your points, now: 1 to 4 are completely subjectives, and your opinions are just stated -- as opposed to well-argued and detailed -- so there really isn't much to discuss, there. 

On to #5, however, I can say this: yes, there are references, call backs, hints and cues that tie in with most of Lynch's previous filmography, but it's nothing that subtracts from the plot or the characters if you can't pick up on them. What those do, however, is to provide a wider context and a more layered texture of meaning, and then it's each viewer's choice: one may acknowledge it (partially or fully), one may choose to ignore it completely, you may not care for any of it or you may just say "you know what, I'm interested, I'll go on and watch those other movies and see what I came up with". 

This is actuallt very respectful and fair to the viewer as it's one of the many regards in which this show treats its audience like intelligent, adult people.

What I found really quirk in your post, however, is that - right then - you have points #6 and #7, where you go on to say

" And even while having no clue wtf is going on, I find myself hanging on every scene trying to figure out what will happen."

which sounds like a good defintion for "endearing, interesting, exciting" (<- aka "definitely not 'boring' or 'too drawn out'"), just before adding:

"Even though Ive given up trying to figure anything out and just watch the episodes, I still come to this Damm site and read up on the theories from everyone."

and that's even more befuddling, because the first sentence is a direct contradiction of the previous one (it seems to me that either you are "hanging on every scene trying to figure out what will happen" or you have "given up trying to figure anything out") while the second once again confirms that you feel intrigued, interested and challenged by the show. 

I guess that what I'm trying to say here is: if "boring and too drawn out" capture your attention and entices you to the point where you are trying to figure things out and lurking on discussion boards to read even the most bonkers theories... then it's not really 'boring' and 'too' drawn out, right? : -)

So, since half of your post contradicts most of the other half, I... really don't know what you're talking about - except for the lynchian tie-ins.

The only other thing I clearly understand from your post is when you say that you " have faith lynch will tie everything together" -- yeah, I wouldn't count too much on that: I may be wrong, but I feel we are going to have a lot of things that will be left open for personal interpretation and a lot of "bring your own meaning to it" (which, when done correctly, is another way to acknowledge the audience's intelligence).

Nice talking to you : -)

Posted by: Häxan L. MorningStar

@Yamabag021: well, that's one...  weird opening post you got there, buddy : -)

 

It starts with a title that seems to suggest that whoever has a different, more positive or more optimistic, opinion than you, must be a fanboy/fangirl -- thus implying hir/her point of view as biased. 

Then you go on, however, by stating that you are a "peaks fan" as well and that

"This show so far hasn't come close to how good season 1-2 are."  

which, going by the same mentality that appears to be behind the title, leaves you exposed to being considered an "original TP-fanboy/fangirl" yourself; also, part of what you wrote from there on would support the idea that you are wearing 'nostalgia goggles' -- at least to a degree -- and that this is preventing you from enjoying the show.

Anyway, the point is that then you proceed to write a post that reads like a fanboy-rant verging on trolling, where you go in mostly subjectve stuff stating your opinions as facts. Mind it: I'm not saying that that's your intent, just that you're using exactly such kind of 'incendiary' style. 

 

About your points, now: 1 to 4 are completely subjectives, and your opinions are just stated -- as opposed to well-argued and detailed -- so there really isn't much to discuss, there. 

 

On to #5, however, I can say this: yes, there are references, call backs, hints and cues that tie in with most of Lynch's previous filmography, but it's nothing that subtracts from the plot or the characters if you can't pick up on them. What those do, however, is to provide a wider context and a more layered texture of meaning, and then it's each viewer's choice: one may acknowledge it (partially or fully), one may choose to ignore it completely, you may not care for any of it or you may just say "you know what, I'm interested, I'll go on and watch those other movies and see what I came up with". 

This is actuallt very respectful and fair to the viewer as it's one of the many regards in which this show treats its audience like intelligent, adult people.

 

What I found really quirk in your post, however, is that - right then - you have points #6 and #7, where you go on to say

" And even while having no clue wtf is going on, I find myself hanging on every scene trying to figure out what will happen."

which sounds like a good defintion for "endearing, interesting, exciting" (<- aka "definitely not 'boring' or 'too drawn out'"), just before adding:

"Even though Ive given up trying to figure anything out and just watch the episodes, I still come to this Damm site and read up on the theories from everyone."

and that's even more befuddling, because the first sentence is a direct contradiction of the previous one (it seems to me that either you are "hanging on every scene trying to figure out what will happen" or you have "given up trying to figure anything out") while the second once again confirms that you feel intrigued, interested and challenged by the show. 

I guess that what I'm trying to say here is: if "boring and too drawn out" capture your attention and entices you to the point where you are trying to figure things out and lurking on discussion boards to read even the most bonkers theories... then it's not really 'boring' and 'too' drawn out, right? : -)

So, since half of your post contradicts most of the other half, I... really don't know what you're talking about - except for the lynchian tie-ins.

 

The only other thing I clearly understand from your post is when you say that you " have faith lynch will tie everything together" -- yeah, I wouldn't count too much on that: I may be wrong, but I feel we are going to have a lot of things that will be left open for personal interpretation and a lot of "bring your own meaning to it" (which, when done correctly, is another way to acknowledge the audience's intelligence).

 

Nice talking to you : -)

?

Posted by: Oyster Bells

I disagree.  Sometimes there are things that hit a timeless quality (I think it means being really good without using flashy tricks or riding on trends) and they remain good however many decades later.

I think there's a reason why certain works become classics, while others, no matter how wildly successful at the time they come out, will be gone in no time and won't be rediscovered by later generations.

I see your point. Yes, there are some things which still seem just as great when you go back and watch them again. 

But who gets to decide whether something get labelled as a "classic"? Is it if a certain percentage of people still really like it years later? What if something is generally considered a classic by most people, but you happen to not like it yourself? Would you consider it to not be a classic? Or would you consider it a classic that you don't like?

There are some aspects of season 1 and 2 that I really loved. For example, episode 7 of season 2 is one of the best episodes of seasons 1 and 2. In particularly, the roadhouse scenes, and to be even more specific, the bit around 2:35 in this video clip:  https://youtu.be/OLtjcP1IqYM. The look on Agent Cooper's face when the old man says "I'm so sorry". David Lynch and Kyle Maclachlan should be super proud of that scene.

But there were also many things I didn't like about season 1 and 2. There were a lot of things I DID like a lot, but it was flawed in several places. 

Posted by: laughingatsky

Posted by: Oyster Bells

I disagree.  Sometimes there are things that hit a timeless quality (I think it means being really good without using flashy tricks or riding on trends) and they remain good however many decades later.

I think there's a reason why certain works become classics, while others, no matter how wildly successful at the time they come out, will be gone in no time and won't be rediscovered by later generations.

I see your point. Yes, there are some things which still seem just as great when you go back and watch them again. 

But who gets to decide whether something get labelled as a "classic"? Is it if a certain percentage of people still really like it years later? What if something is generally considered a classic by most people, but you happen to not like it yourself? Would you consider it to not be a classic? Or would you consider it a classic that you don't like?

There are some aspects of season 1 and 2 that I really loved. For example, episode 7 of season 2 is one of the best episodes of seasons 1 and 2. In particularly, the roadhouse scenes, and to be even more specific, the bit around 2:35 in this video clip:  https://youtu.be/OLtjcP1IqYM. The look on Agent Cooper's face when the old man says "I'm so sorry". David Lynch and Kyle Maclachlan should be super proud of that scene.

But there were also many things I didn't like about season 1 and 2. There were a lot of things I DID like a lot, but it was flawed in several places. 

I can agree to that, there are elements I dislike all throughout 3 seasons.

And while there are other movies/series/books that I find flawless, from beginning to end never setting an off note, I feel Twin Peaks remains up there with them.  I dunno, maybe the memorable moments far outweigh the few flaws that overall it's still a remarkable work?

Lynch always says he thinks seas2 ratings plummeted because Laura's murderer was revealed.  I disagree, I think the show had generated many other points of interest that even when that one was concluded, others remained to hold the show up.  But probably there were too many off notes.  For me things like Tojamura, Evelyn Marsh, Lana Budding felt like new elements that were just stuffed in as fillers and they brought the good stuff down, maybe.

The major difference is the lack of background music. There was so much background music in the original to set a certain mood. Now there is almost no background music what so ever, and therefor, I fear, that special Twin Peaks mood is gone. But... Much of season 3 isn't set in Twin Peaks, so that could explain a lot. But I really miss the music.