Author Topic: Twin Peaks season 3?  (Read 51371 times)

Shameless Custard

  • PAUSE FOR THE JET
    • My RUBBISH
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1080 on: May 17, 2017, 11:12:14 pm »
Was Heather Graham too busy on that fucking Foxy Bingo advert?

I still think there'll be some surprise appearances. I just can't believe they wouldn't invite Piper Laurie back, for one. Lynch loves her

up_the_hampipe

  • Crowd appeaser
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1081 on: May 17, 2017, 11:16:06 pm »
Would be good if Lara Flynn Boyle turns up in the red room. Just to give everyone a fright.

a peepee tipi

  • All facts start as dreams dreamt by a wizard
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1082 on: May 18, 2017, 12:29:46 am »
Was Heather Graham too busy on that fucking Foxy Bingo advert?

I still think there'll be some surprise appearances. I just can't believe they wouldn't invite Piper Laurie back, for one. Lynch loves her
Perhaps the casting report of Eddie Vedder was just a mistake stemming from Catherine's newest disguise

Ja'moke

  • based on the novel Push by Sapphire
    • Inside Survivor
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1083 on: May 18, 2017, 12:51:58 am »
Not to take the pictures above too literally, but I'm wondering if Naomi Watts will play Annie? Heather Graham isn't coming back after all.

Heather Graham was very coy when asked about it in an interview last year. It wouldn't surprise me if she popped up.

Shaky

  • I drink your thread
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1084 on: May 18, 2017, 01:00:54 am »
I was thinking that Dern might be playing Annie as she said she shares several scenes with Cooper. Watts is fantastic (and apparently has a major role) but doesn't really fit that part, to my mind.

Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1085 on: May 18, 2017, 12:15:58 pm »
Fucking hell, Jim Belushi! Looking at the wikipedia page for the new series there is a massive cast of new actors. Some big names in there as well

Ja'moke

  • based on the novel Push by Sapphire
    • Inside Survivor
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1086 on: May 18, 2017, 05:58:03 pm »
Fucking hell, Jim Belushi! Looking at the wikipedia page for the new series there is a massive cast of new actors. Some big names in there as well

Yup! Showtime revealed a 217 person strong cast list last year (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/twin-peaks-revival-official-cast-887317) including everyone from Monica Belluci to Michael Cera to Eddie Vedder to UFC fighter Michael Bisping.

But given that there's people in the teasers not listed on that cast sheet, I'm expecting surprises along the way.

Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1087 on: May 19, 2017, 08:30:10 pm »

Rev

  • I know, I know, but we're alright for soap now
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1088 on: May 20, 2017, 01:29:03 am »
That article hits some good points, but it's always Lynch, Lynch, Lynch with this, and the assumption that he's deliberately obscure.  Frost is equally important because he knows how to tell and structure a story for TV.  It's not going to be the same as the old series, but it's not going to be freeform madness either.  What I'm expecting is an even more lugubrious version of FWWM with a very thin mystery running through it.

We'll all know in...   fuck, 48 hours!


Ja'moke

  • based on the novel Push by Sapphire
    • Inside Survivor
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1089 on: May 20, 2017, 02:58:29 am »
I do agree that Frost plays an important part, but even he has said this new season is Lynch's baby.

Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1090 on: May 20, 2017, 09:39:02 am »
This is my situation. Had the DVDs for years and years and have watched season 1 multiple times (loving basically every second of it) but as soon as I get to season 2 I just cannot be fucking arsed. It's not helped that I've read spoilers so know the big ones and cannot forget them now matter how hard I try.

Similar story with me although I did manage to avoid spoilers and have just finished watching through season 2 for the first time. I think the problem was that I got season 1 on dvd in the early 2000s when it first came out on dvd and I watched that loads of times. Season 2 didn't come out on dvd for years afterwards and it got to the point where I was just content that the first series was all that Twin Peaks was, especially having heard people say that the second series isn't worth watching, Lynch was barely involved and it was drawn out way too long due to contractual obligation. I attempted to watch the second season a few years ago when the gold box thing came out on dvd but I didn't really give it much of a chance having had my expectations dampened by popular opinion. I got to just beyond the reveal of Laura Palmer's killer and then gave up, I think at precisely the point where Nadine goes back to school.
I bought the blu ray box set recently as it was ridiculously cheap (around £17) and thought I would gradually watch it through to the end to set myself up nicely for the new series coming out and so that I can read all the hype without 'spoilers' for the rest of season 2. I have to say i'm glad I did although I made slow progress during the run of episodes where everyone says it loses its way. That's no exaggeration either, it's really tedious - 3 characters temporarily lose their minds (Ben, Nadine and Leo)   with everyone around them patiently putting up with them wondering when they were going to get back to normal - felt like what I was doing with watching the series. The last few episodes were okay although I was never really convinced by the introduction of the Windom Earle character. The last episode was fantastic although almost annoyingly so - if it could still be this good why were they wasting my time for the 8 hours or so prior? It must've completely alienated any late followers of Twin Peaks when if first came out (if there were indeed such people) who got into it for the slow, soapy storylines.
Anyway it's good to be up to speed and I think I'll watch Fire Walk With Me and some of the dvd special features over the weekend to get me fully prepped for the new series. The little teaser trailers that i've just watched look very promising indeed.

Blumf

  • Not long now
    • IGNORE ME!!!
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1091 on: May 20, 2017, 11:24:07 am »
For completeness, RLM have reviewed FWWM:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bd1bbjXCfyY

They talk a bit about some of the deleted scenes from both the film and the series.

Ja'moke

  • based on the novel Push by Sapphire
    • Inside Survivor
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1092 on: May 20, 2017, 01:10:30 pm »
Part 3 and 4 are going to be available on Sky On Demand straight after the airing of Part 1 and 2 at 4am (Monday morning).

Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1093 on: May 20, 2017, 02:02:49 pm »
The scheduling does seem kind of confusing, but at least we're keeping up with the US.

Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1094 on: May 20, 2017, 02:14:00 pm »
Similar story with me although I did manage to avoid spoilers and have just finished watching through season 2 for the first time. I think the problem was that I got season 1 on dvd in the early 2000s when it first came out on dvd and I watched that loads of times. Season 2 didn't come out on dvd for years afterwards and it got to the point where I was just content that the first series was all that Twin Peaks was.

Yeah, similar for me as well. Twin Peaks really does benefit from streaming, because VHS/DVD sure did fuck it over for a while. I tried watching it in the late 90s but the pilot was unavailable for a while, so the episodes made no sense. Then I tried watching Fire Walk With Me after only watching season one and that was a mistake.

After making my way through the pertinent episodes of season two I'm going to rewatch Fire Walk With Me for the first time in 12 years and I'm looking forward to it.

Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1095 on: May 20, 2017, 03:39:28 pm »
I know the consensus now is that Fire Walk With Me is amazing and if you don't like it you're a shiter, but as I recall, it has none of the warmth or cosiness of the original series. I found it impenetrable and boring.

Yes, I really do think Twin Peaks was warm and cosy - it's the way that's balanced with surreal horror that makes it work, and make the horror all the more horrible. I need the mix. So if this new series really is going to be "pure Lynch"...

Ja'moke

  • based on the novel Push by Sapphire
    • Inside Survivor
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1096 on: May 20, 2017, 04:02:59 pm »
The scheduling does seem kind of confusing, but at least we're keeping up with the US.

In the US, Parts 3 and 4 are going up on the Showtime App after Parts 1 and 2 have aired on TV, so it's a push to get people to subscribe. They'll still be airing Parts 3 and 4 on TV next Sunday. Then after that it's just one part every Sunday until the two-part season finale in September.

I know the consensus now is that Fire Walk With Me is amazing and if you don't like it you're a shiter, but as I recall, it has none of the warmth or cosiness of the original series. I found it impenetrable and boring.

Yes, I really do think Twin Peaks was warm and cosy - it's the way that's balanced with surreal horror that makes it work, and make the horror all the more horrible. I need the mix. So if this new series really is going to be "pure Lynch"...

I rewatched FWWM last night. I like it more with every rewatch, especially that first half-hour with Chet Desmond and the Bowie cameo. If we get more stuff like that in the new season I'll be very happy.

The warmer, more gently kookier stuff ended up being cut because the film was running at almost 4 hours long. A lot of those deleted scenes ended up in the Missing Pieces feature on the blu-ray set. I believe someone made an edited version of FWWM where they put those scenes back in.

Wet Blanket

  • I am the Colour Blind Dog-Thief
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1097 on: May 20, 2017, 04:06:53 pm »
I wouldn't call Fire Walk With Me boring but it is relentlessly, startlingly horrible. Even the good episodes of the series sometimes test my patience with the quirkier, lighter stuff (Nadine can fuck right off) and I find myself sticking around just for Bob to turn up or a red room scene, but FWWM is just nonstop horror and crying and incest and murder. It's no wonder it didn't do any business commercially.

I'm hoping (and optimistic) that he's got the balance right in the new series.

Thomas

  • you couldn't move down here for cybermen.
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1098 on: May 20, 2017, 04:44:56 pm »
Like the tie-in book, The Secret Diary of Laura Palmer, Fire Walk With Me is an uncompromising exploration of the abuse that occasionally rises to the surface in the series. With its quirky, lovable reputation, it's easy to forget that it's a series where a major character rapes, murders, and disposes of his daughter (now available in bobblehead figure form).

Where Twin Peaks spends most of its time dancing strangely around on top of the mossy rock, FWWM tips the rock over and pushes your face into the mud and worms. I'm glad it did and I hope this new series makes space for both.

Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1099 on: May 20, 2017, 05:26:38 pm »
I know the consensus now is that Fire Walk With Me is amazing and if you don't like it you're a shiter, but as I recall, it has none of the warmth or cosiness of the original series. I found it impenetrable and boring.

Yes, I really do think Twin Peaks was warm and cosy - it's the way that's balanced with surreal horror that makes it work, and make the horror all the more horrible. I need the mix. So if this new series really is going to be "pure Lynch"...

Yeah I was surprised at seeing people say they hoped that this new series would be more like FWWM. It's always been about the balance of the two. I mean I don't mind them ditching some of the sillier soap opera melodrama and if certain characters are non-existent, that's fine, but I'd hope it still retains a lot of the humour.

NoSleep

  • feat. Keith Jarrett and his singing parrot
    • Space Is The Place
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1100 on: May 20, 2017, 05:46:22 pm »
Some of the humour arose at the most dramatic or tragic moments. e.g. Andy's weeping at murder scenes, Leland leaping on Laura's coffin and the lower mechanism malfunctioning, the old guy bringing a bullet-riddled Coop his warm milk. It was often interspersed to catch you unaware at the most inappropriate of times. More of this, please.

Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1101 on: May 20, 2017, 07:43:18 pm »
I'm open to whatever they want to do, really. It's not just a binary choice between more early 90s TV or more early 90s financed-by-the-French productions. Would rather judge it on it's own terms and hope it expands to encompass all kinds of new STUFF. Because it's not going to be EITHER, and there will be much disappointment if such things are mandatory for a modicum of enjoyment.

For so many years I just wanted to see those deleted scenes. That we can kibbitz about 18 new episodes shot by a perennial all-time art weirdo (and knowing the way tee vee works -- probably another two seasons on top of it) is a really nice turn of events.

Welp, 30-some-odd hours till the expectations get shot in the chest and left on a hotel room floor.

(Ok admittedly I'll probably sporadically suppress internal bitching that it's not shot on 35mm Kodak, but Lynch can wring good value out of digital...)

Rev

  • I know, I know, but we're alright for soap now
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1102 on: May 20, 2017, 08:30:23 pm »
The premiere was last night and everyone's understandably embargoed and tight-lipped, but one of the few comments doing the rounds states that it'll make no sense to 'fairweather' viewers, or anyone who doesn't have the original series fresh in their mind.  Could be bollocks of course, but if true it suggests the thing will be hitting the ground running.

up_the_hampipe

  • Crowd appeaser
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1103 on: May 20, 2017, 08:35:35 pm »
So annoying that there are now a bunch of people out there who have seen it before me.

NoSleep

  • feat. Keith Jarrett and his singing parrot
    • Space Is The Place
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1104 on: May 20, 2017, 08:56:31 pm »
Fair enough that they know who their audience is already (and most of them are probably still alive).

Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1105 on: May 20, 2017, 09:46:07 pm »
Here it comes:

https://www.yahoo.com/tv/twin-peaks-season-3-premiere-preview-200557476.html

most excitingly:

"Though advertised as a “new season” of Twin Peaks, these episodes felt more like a revival of ALL of David Lynch’s work. Parts of it felt very Blue Velvet and Lost Highway, with some imagery from Eraserhead mixed in."

He claims it to be non-spoilery but a few things sure sound like them to me, so avoid if so inclined.

(They ended up editing it and removed a few.)

Quote
but one of the few comments doing the rounds states that it'll make no sense to 'fairweather' viewers, or anyone who doesn't have the original series fresh in their mind.  Could be bollocks of course, but if true it suggests the thing will be hitting the ground running.

That one seemed a bit "my uncle works at Nintendo" bullshit to me.

More gibberish:

http://mashable.com/2017/05/20/twin-peaks-premiere-showtime-david-lynch-kyle-maclaughlan-tv/#hS23guXxHiq3

"But before we dive in, here's what I do feel at liberty to say about those episodes we saw: Lynch has lost nothing. In fact, he's learned some new tricks, refined his old ones, maybe even found the height of his powers. This is no mere revisitation; there is new ground broken. And if you feel goosebumps as you read that, good. That's good.

You're going to need them."
« Last Edit: May 20, 2017, 10:26:12 pm by Skip Bittman »

Rev

  • I know, I know, but we're alright for soap now
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1106 on: May 20, 2017, 10:55:03 pm »
I'm watching FWWM as a bit of a warm-up, but the version I've - ahem - obtained is new to me:  it has subtitles for the pink room and basically everything that's difficult to hear.  Who thought this was a good idea?

Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1107 on: May 20, 2017, 10:58:14 pm »
The director and a lot of the people who watch it. It's fantastic! Captures the vibe of being in a club with the music too loud rather than a movie with actors talking and pretending to dance to music that isn't really there and is added later. Earlier video releases had a much crappier mix that kind of butchered the theatrical version.

Howj Begg

  • Member
  • **
  • There are no children or dogs.
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1108 on: May 20, 2017, 11:06:29 pm »
Quote
Based on the first two hours, it’s safe to say Twin Peaks‘ 18 difficult new episodes will rattle, baffle, and enrage, and that’s exactly what TV needs right now.


oh hell yes. last thing it needed was to be safe.

chocky909

  • Member
  • **
  • you don't know what love is
Re: Twin Peaks season 3?
« Reply #1109 on: May 20, 2017, 11:09:13 pm »
Yeah, t'was the old DVD release's audio that was mixed badly. The BluRay is mixed properly as the cinematic release sounded. The subtitles were always supposed to be there. One of the best depictions of a nightclub sound along with The Social Network.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REJ9bh7vuDE