Where? And when? Did that scene end up on the cutting room floor? Just a brief mentioning of something that important? I feel this new season is weirdly put together from a narrative point of view. I would much rather have seen more of the Hastings plotline in action than just in words. But maybe the Hastings plotline will evolve into an even bigger plotline, and therefor there was no time to show what happened to his secretary. Still, I find it very odd.
Yeah this surprised me, don't remember this being mentioned before.
I don't believe it has been mentioned. This is a new development.
Bill Hastings gave his assistant Betty a ride home on the night of the murder after a curriculum meeting at the high school because there was something wrong with her car. She may have been an alibi to Hastings' whereabouts so Mr. C killed her off.
Well we knew it was planned. Bad coop had Hank wire the secretary's car. Then he killed Hank. What isn't clear is the timing, since badcoop was trying to get coordinates from the secretary thru Ray.
Ray was going to get the coordinates from her. Presumably, he did, and then killed her.
The secretary car scene was in episode 2 at about 25 minutes. Jack, who is an associate of Ray and Darya, has just "taken care of" the secretary's car. Then Mr. C kills him before killing Darya at the motel.
Not a huge fan of the Hastings storyline. Feel like they could've come up with something better.
Totally forgot about all that. So Mr. C/Bad Coop is looking for the coordinates to the place that Major Briggs was trying to get to?
I personally don't really get why we get all these seemingly pointless scenes like Sarah Palmer watching TV, when we could have focused more on the plotline that this season started off with. It's a very unconventional way of telling a story. They focused more on the Dougie story. than the Hasting one, but then cut to different types of "none-important" stuff, it seems, like Dr Jacoby's shovels. Its very fragmented, as we've discussed before, and I'm afraid that's not a doing the series any good. That's why we easily forget small scenes like Mr C at the garage.
But maybe we will get to see more in flashbacks, or something.
Of course it is an unconventional way of telling a story. That's why I love it.
I personally don't really get why we get all these seemingly pointless scenes like Sarah Palmer watching TV, when we could have focused more on the plotline that this season started off with. It's a very unconventional way of telling a story. They focused more on the Dougie story. than the Hasting one, but then cut to different types of "none-important" stuff, it seems, like Dr Jacoby's shovels. Its very fragmented, as we've discussed before, and I'm afraid that's not a doing the series any good. That's why we easily forget small scenes like Mr C at the garage.
But maybe we will get to see more in flashbacks, or something.
The keyword is "seemingly". They all have a point and a purpose, even if it's. it clear yet
The original Twin Peaks was similar where they show the town of Twin Peaks and its inhabitants going about their daily lives whilst the main plot of the series runs through the series and the inhabitants have nothing to do with the overriding plot. This is why Twin Peaks is good and different to other television shows. The majority of television shows focus on the main plot and other people not related to the plot are not shown. In Twin Peaks people unrelated to the main plot are shown to provide a background to the main plot and offer a more broad canvas to the series was that narrowly focusing on the main characters related to the main plot. That maybe the reason that the series was expanded from 9 episodes to 18 to show the surrounding Twin Peaks characters rather than just focusing on the Cooper story.
I personally don't really get why we get all these seemingly pointless scenes like Sarah Palmer watching TV, when we could have focused more on the plotline that this season started off with. It's a very unconventional way of telling a story. They focused more on the Dougie story. than the Hasting one, but then cut to different types of "none-important" stuff, it seems, like Dr Jacoby's shovels. Its very fragmented, as we've discussed before, and I'm afraid that's not a doing the series any good. That's why we easily forget small scenes like Mr C at the garage.
But maybe we will get to see more in flashbacks, or something.
You're taking your personal involvment out of the picture, though. It's like you're 'asking' the series to tell you the story in the easiest, more conventional possible way, so that you don't have to work to get it.
Just think about the cigarette scene with Gordon, Diane and Tammy. There's an entire narrative, within that scene, a story being told primarily through looking and emoting. The things all three of them do with they're eyes, and their non-verbal language, actually constitute a dialogue - but you have to work with that scene to 'hear' that dialogue: if you don't pay attention to the details, if you don't draw conclusions based on those details and you don't question those conclusions on the base of new details, all you're watching are three people standing there for the good part of two minutes before one of them take a smoke. Which is exactly what happens but there's also so much more, there: so much more information, so much more characterization.
And I think this applies to the single scenes, to the single shots (to a different degree), to the single episodes and to this season as a whole (the '18 hours movie').
Take the scene with Matthew Lillard (Hastings) as another example: that scene is not so much about the things he says, the story and facts he's telling, as it is about showing the psychological collapse of an individual confronted with something - both outside and inside of him - that he can't handle and, thus -> "Fruitcake, anyone?"
You see, traditional storytelling is highly predictable: it can surprise you with content but you can always anticipate how it's going to tell you the story - you can rely on it and it will guide you through every step of the story.
Here you have to do the 'legwork', you have to investigate, you have to question - and, sometimes, you have to allow yourself to get lost. It's not so bad, being lost. Like someone on this boards perfectly said, "just look at the pretty pictures". Take note of the details and the small things. Listen to the echoes. You'll find yourself a direction, a meaning, rhyme and reason - eventually.
I personally don't really get why we get all these seemingly pointless scenes like Sarah Palmer watching TV, when we could have focused more on the plotline that this season started off with. It's a very unconventional way of telling a story. They focused more on the Dougie story. than the Hasting one, but then cut to different types of "none-important" stuff, it seems, like Dr Jacoby's shovels. Its very fragmented, as we've discussed before, and I'm afraid that's not a doing the series any good. That's why we easily forget small scenes like Mr C at the garage.
But maybe we will get to see more in flashbacks, or something.
You're taking your own subjective experience of the show and applying to others. Stop it. You keep using language like "we". I did not forgot the scene at the garage, because the image of Mr C squeezing the guys face stuck in my mind. I love the scattered story telling, it gives a lot to look forward to, I think that fragmenting the story in such a way builds immense tension, and it is fantastic when you've waited an entire week and an extra bit of the puzzle if revealed, for you to piece back together. I am aware though, that is my own personal impression. I won't just begin to impose this experience on everyone else just because we've seen the same show. Just because you're having trouble following a non-linear narrative with scene-to-scene plot development doesn't mean that you can apply that as a criticism to the show, because its not a show problem, it's subjective.
Moaning about these kind of things on forums hinders discussion and interaction. Half your posts are just complaints about the show. Every episode, another complaint about how you hate the way things are being done. Gets a little bit boring. "That's not doing the series any good"... I think what you meant to say here was "that's not doing me any good". The plot-line the season started off with is arbitrary, Lynch himself said he hadn't decided what order to present events a few months before the show was edited together. What if the season "started" off with a different plot from the show?? Would you love that plot and hate all the others? Is this just the show being a victim of circumstance?
I feel like patience is needed to be able to sit through this 18 hour movie. Binge-watching culture where everything is available to you if you can sit through something quick enough without any breaks seems to have rubbed off on a lot of people, who don't have the patience to wait week by week for the story to unravel, and get angry when their entitled vision doesn't come through. As people say on here a lot, Twin Peaks isn't what you want it to be, it's what Lynch wants it to be.
Would you read a quarter of a novel, put it down, and then criticize it when you pick the book up a week later, only to find that you're at "Part 2" which follows a different character in a different setting? Would you make the same "fragmented" argument? I feel like a lot of your reservations and judgement about the show will be solved and sorted by episode 18 when you have the full picture. Maybe try and focus more on discussing the show in a positive vibe and aiding theory-building rather than complaints about the methods of storytelling? Why not set up your own forum about how terrible the new series thematic styling is?
🙂
Fire walk with