I guess that what I was trying to say was that I felt like somebody just stole all my candy after watching this episode.
I guess episode 8 was just too abstract for me.
What makes me wanna rewatch something, is good acting, great dialogue, good interaction between the actors, etc. Not just visuals/visual effects open for interpretation. I want something more.
I'm hoping for more traditional storytelling in the episodes to come.
I don't think the visuals are open to interpretation; I'm convinced there is a definite narrative behind all of it, but like everything in Twin Peaks, we have to work to get it. I just bet a lot of it will become clear(er) as the story progresses.
My wish - in general - is that people would be more patient. Wait and see. If we still have no answers at the end, then you can gripe.
...but not 80 percent of an entire episode.
However these are parts not episodes, this part of the story was 4.4% of the whole.
While I thought some of Part 8 was utterly beautiful, I really did find a lot of it a challenge to sit through. I felt like that to some degree with Part 3, but Part 8 went so far beyond anything I was expecting.
If the whole series was like Part 8, I would stop watching.
That being said, from a purely artistic perspective, Lynch has achieved a new peak, and this is going to go down in history as a moment that totally blew the world of TV to pieces...
I watched it again today and I thought of synaesthesia. The nuclear explosion section is a perfect match between sound and visuals. The sound looks like the explosion and the explosion sounds like the music.
Sorry if it was over your head.
While it's a David Lynch fans dream episode. Frost and his story lines and input are all over it, so maybe you should look deeper.
The more of these the better. So, you just keep watching and raising the ratings so the rest of us can hopefully get another season
I'd like to try and offer @Eric from Sweden a different perspective.
Eric, your opening post seems to work on the assumption that all the "weird stuff" in ep.8 was just an end to itself, that it wasn't meant for you (or for the audience in general) to understand and that "Only Lynch gets it".
I don't believe this to be the case at all.
See, Lynch is 'artsy' -- no doubt -- and he's cryptic and surrealist and abstract, yes, but one thing he generally isn't - especially about what he means to say - is "subtle".
I mean, this is a guy that, in the opening of Blue Velvet, shows a bunch of idyllic shot of The Small American Town only to pan down and zoom on the insects crawling under the lawn.
When he wants to talk about identity, in Lost Highway, he goes for an almost literal "split identity". And you can get to the deepest and 'truest' meaning of Mulholland Drive just going by what that movie shows you.
It's not some cryptic stuff nobody can understand: it's actually there, spelled right out. What's on screen is "what he's talking about".
All that other stuff people -- including me -- blabbers about (reading the story emotionally instead of logically, surrendering to the visuals, bringing your own meaning and so on and so forth) comes from this very easy piece of fact: what you are watching is what you are supposed to see.
In this context, episode 8 reads something like this: some stuff happens with Mr. C. and Ray. Ray shots C. Mystical lumberjack hobos dance around Mr. C. and extract something with BOB's face on it from him. Meanwhile, the NIN are playing at the Roadhouse, singing a song that has ominous connections with the overall story (as is often the case, in real life, when you hear a song and it sounds like it is connected with what you are going through).
Oh, and whatever was the dancing Woodsmen did, it saved Mr. C.'s life. By the way, this very important thing happened in 1945: a bomb went off and something happened inside that explosion. A cosmical being vomited the thing with BOB's face on it along with other things that looked like eggs of some sort. This event allerted ?????? and Señorita Dido, who then proceed to...
and so on. The narrative is there.
The fact that inside, and around, that narrative -- keeping it togheter and filling it with meanings -- there are layers and layers of possible interpretations, hidden truths, subconscious allusions and mysteries inside other mysteries... it's not even that important, not at first, really.
Sort of what I was getting at when I posted - in this or another thread, I forget which - there's a straightforward linear narrative at work.
@Sam: yup, and what you wrote was one inspiration for that post : -)
The old Twin Peaks was very mainstream, made to fit "the general public", I would say. This new series is not. And as much as I like Twin Peaks, this episode made it even less mainstream. I do consider myself an artistic soul, an "esthete" as we say in Sweden, but I also think I have a fairly good idea of what works and what does not work for people in general. I would really want a 4th season, but from what I've seen so far, and the ratings included, I doubt it will ever happen, due to the fact that this season is not as mainstream as it could have been. I think, this new season is mostly made for the fans. Like Kyle MacLachlan said in an interview, it was probably thanks to the fans that this reboot was ever made.
The old Twin Peaks was very mainstream, made to fit "the general public", I would say. This new series is not. And as much as I like Twin Peaks, this episode made it even less mainstream. I do consider myself an artistic soul, an "esthete" as we say in Sweden, but I also think I have a fairly good idea of what works and what does not work for people in general. I would really want a 4th season, but from what I've seen so far, and the ratings included, I doubt it will ever happen, due to the fact that this season is not as mainstream as it could have been. I think, this new season is mostly made for the fans. Like Kyle MacLachlan said in an interview, it was probably thanks to the fans that this reboot was ever made.
So let me get this straight. . . Your crying that the new series isn't "mainstream", yet you think the original, that got way more negative feedback for being unlike anything ever done if you remember, was mainstream?
. . .? Twin Peaks is clearly out of your league kid
I guess that what I was trying to say was that I felt like somebody just stole all my candy after watching this episode.
I guess episode 8 was just too abstract for me.
What makes me wanna rewatch something, is good acting, great dialogue, good interaction between the actors, etc. Not just visuals/visual effects open for interpretation. I want something more.
I'm hoping for more traditional storytelling in the episodes to come.
Or you probably want something "less". Nothing against your thoughts but I thought we all were agreeing that TPTR (with ep 3 especially) was leading to something like ep. 8 at some point. Probably it is not just your cup of tea. You still have n ep.7 rewatch and feel comfy again. I am sure with ep.9 you'll find you relief once again.
The old Twin Peaks was very mainstream, made to fit "the general public", I would say. This new series is not. And as much as I like Twin Peaks, this episode made it even less mainstream. I do consider myself an artistic soul, an "esthete" as we say in Sweden, but I also think I have a fairly good idea of what works and what does not work for people in general. I would really want a 4th season, but from what I've seen so far, and the ratings included, I doubt it will ever happen, due to the fact that this season is not as mainstream as it could have been. I think, this new season is mostly made for the fans. Like Kyle MacLachlan said in an interview, it was probably thanks to the fans that this reboot was ever made.
So let me get this straight. . . Your crying that the new series isn't "mainstream", yet you think the original, that got way more negative feedback for being unlike anything ever done if you remember, was mainstream?
. . .? Twin Peaks is clearly out of your league kid
And this. Who cares about the ratings? We got a Twin Peaks 3 after 26/27 years for 2 main reasons:
1. Lynch went on with his own path and esthetics with no concern about what is mainstream and what's not. I am a HUGE Fellini lover, and I miss films like his. What I see nowadays in TV but in movies especially is just random shit to me. Still I NEED to watch them in order to understand the zeitgeist and where we are heading at in terms of the 7th art.
2. Twin Peaks fans
So if you worry about ratings thinking that with "low" ratings we won't be able to have a Twin Peaks 4, then how come we had a third season after a 26 years of nothing Twin Peaks? If you are however concerned with ratings has a demonstration that you are watching the "hip and cool" show, I think we belong to two different worlds completely. people are way too fixated over success. i think Lynch secret for his longevity in the film industry is that he does not do it for the sake of fame, but for the sake of "the doing".
I think there will be a season 4, or at least something new from David Lynch. So the viewing figures were low compared to season 1 and 2, but we're in a completely different TV landscape these days. The fact remains that Showtime got a whole bunch of new signups just for Twin Peaks. A good percentage of those could end up being long-term Showtime customers. To not give those new customers more Twin Peaks in the future (or at least some more David Lynch in some form) would definitely be a bad decision.
I mean, even if the main Twin Peaks stories get resolved by the end of this season, there's still enormous potential either for something new or something related.
The old Twin Peaks was very mainstream, made to fit "the general public", I would say. This new series is not. And as much as I like Twin Peaks, this episode made it even less mainstream. I do consider myself an artistic soul, an "esthete" as we say in Sweden, but I also think I have a fairly good idea of what works and what does not work for people in general. I would really want a 4th season, but from what I've seen so far, and the ratings included, I doubt it will ever happen, due to the fact that this season is not as mainstream as it could have been. I think, this new season is mostly made for the fans. Like Kyle MacLachlan said in an interview, it was probably thanks to the fans that this reboot was ever made.
I really wish people wouldn't misuse "Reboot". A reboot is a fresh start, wiping out any previous continuity. Twin Peaks 3 is most emphatically not a reboot. It's a continuation.
The old Twin Peaks was very mainstream, made to fit "the general public", I would say. This new series is not. And as much as I like Twin Peaks, this episode made it even less mainstream. I do consider myself an artistic soul, an "esthete" as we say in Sweden, but I also think I have a fairly good idea of what works and what does not work for people in general. I would really want a 4th season, but from what I've seen so far, and the ratings included, I doubt it will ever happen, due to the fact that this season is not as mainstream as it could have been. I think, this new season is mostly made for the fans. Like Kyle MacLachlan said in an interview, it was probably thanks to the fans that this reboot was ever made.
So let me get this straight. . . Your crying that the new series isn't "mainstream", yet you think the original, that got way more negative feedback for being unlike anything ever done if you remember, was mainstream?
. . .? Twin Peaks is clearly out of your league kid
And this. Who cares about the ratings? We got a Twin Peaks 3 after 26/27 years for 2 main reasons:
1. Lynch went on with his own path and esthetics with no concern about what is mainstream and what's not. I am a HUGE Fellini lover, and I miss films like his. What I see nowadays in TV but in movies especially is just random shit to me. Still I NEED to watch them in order to understand the zeitgeist and where we are heading at in terms of the 7th art.
2. Twin Peaks fans
So if you worry about ratings thinking that with "low" ratings we won't be able to have a Twin Peaks 4, then how come we had a third season after a 26 years of nothing Twin Peaks? If you are however concerned with ratings has a demonstration that you are watching the "hip and cool" show, I think we belong to two different worlds completely. people are way too fixated over success. i think Lynch secret for his longevity in the film industry is that he does not do it for the sake of fame, but for the sake of "the doing".
Good points. I reckon Lynch has enough "clout" in the industry to do what the hell he likes. If he feels there's more to be said, he'll do it.
As to whether or not there will be a 4th iteration, I have no opinion either way. I mean, I'd like there to be but I couldn't second guess the Twin Peaks team on anything.
Fire walk with