I'm of the opinion that Twin Peaks the Return was pretty bad and hard to watch.
Yet criticism of David Lynch seems to have this critic proof defense, that everything he does is intentional and "you just didn't get it"
I don't understand why he gets this privilege of being above criticism for making a bad show or movie. Just because it's a guy sweeping the floor 5 minutes doesnt mean its worth watching or good...
why create something you'r not supposed to enjoy?
Other urls found in this thread:
what did you think was wrong with it
television has also become so fucking boring that a guy sweeping the floor was entertaining
Just because you didn't enjoy it doesn't mean you're not supposed to enjoy it. I fully and unironically enjoy every second of The Return.
>what did you think was wrong with it
>lynch self insert character is doing things cooper should be doing.
>5 minutes of watching lynch stare at a hooker as she gets dressed
>laura dern in all scenes
>side plots never went anywhere
>time travel bullshit
>british kid saves the day with powerfist plot device out of nowhere
>bob is just a floating orb that cant do anything
>mr c anticlimatic
>indy bands
>doesnt actually take place in twin peaks
>cooper we know isnt in the show except 1 episode out of 18
>audrey side story meant nothing
>Richard side story went nowhere
>bobby and shelly divorced and daughter story meant nothing
>the main plot was incoherent
>entire show retroactively rendered pointless because ime travel bullshit
>loong drawn out scenes, and characters that had no effect on the main story
>the show was in no way connected or resolves the original twin peaks plots
>norma and ed werent together ???
I can go on. But in a nutshell, theres no real story being told or themes being explored. Just things happening on a tv very slowly...
I totally get why someone wouldn't like season 3 but I personally loved every moment. Having something to tune into every week for 18 weeks was fucking amazing and I'll never forget how special that was.
>I fully and unironically enjoy every second of The Return
for what reason?
a common defense of the return is "you're not supposed to like it"
>why create something you'r not supposed to enjoy?
In general, because the purpose of art is not strictly entertainment. In reference to Twin Peaks, who says you aren't meant to enjoy it? It sounds like you didn't, sure. That's not the same thing.
no one cares what your opinion is, brainlet
To say that I'm a big lynch fan would be a ginormous understatement. You see, I'm a ginormous lynch fan to the core and I want everyone to know it. His new tv show has had me hypnotized for weeks!
But in all honesty my most favorite movie of all time is hot fuzz. It's fucking hilarious and has in my opinion some of the greatest camera work in the business. I'd put it up their in the top three movies ever made of all time.
Even my priest agrees. New orthodox bro here btw. Currently non practicing but it's so great to get back into the faith after years of being a degenerate agnostoshit. Now if only I could get my cathlocuck parents to stop being pagans!
That reminds me, am I the only one disappointed that stannis Baratheon is actually gone? Oh who am I kidding! Of course not! Sometimes I forget I'm so completely surrounded by intellectuals of mine own caliber This isn't Reddit after all!
And um, I'd have to say my least favorite movie is a Clockwork Orange. It's far to edgy for me
can you tell me what you enjoyed about it?
I loved The Return but i just can't get over how bad most of it looks. You can call it intentional all you want but i don't get what the bland cinematography, awkard lighting and Z-grade special effects add to the experience.
Other than that it was great.
Do you even like Lynch in general? It really honestly sounds like it's just not for you, if you're coming in with an expectation of back to back action scenes, traditional narrative continuity and resolution and/or "incoherent" plots. As for complaining about the music - wew lad.
its really a matter of style vs substance
a director on the opposite side of lynch who is just as skilled would martin scorsese where everything has a point or a meaning
some of his stuff is genuinely 11/10 genius iq level shit but i do agree he does play alot of sick pranks on his audiences which is why the LYNCHED meme is so popular and true
this
>it didnt maek sense
is literally retard tier criticism
People like it because it's different, not because it's good, and in that context it makes it kind of good.
jesus christ, get a life
>the purpose of art is not strictly entertainment.
enjoyment=/= entertainment
Theres alot of shit you can enjoy without being entertained. You can even be entertained by garbage, or even enjoy watching garbage. It doesnt make it less garbage.
the philosophical purpose of art doesnt apply because twin peaks 3 had no purpose. Unless that purpose...
If I ask, "what did Lynch set out to do? " , you'll find the answer is never given. As if explaining why you needed 18 hours was never the point.
>style vs substance
This, Lynch is just really interesting stylistically for me. Don't try to (((get))) it and you'll have a lot more fun watching his stuff. You can always try to put the pieces together later, Lynch stuff is always better the second time around anyway.
entertainment
/ɛntəˈteJnm(ə)nt/
noun
the action of providing or being provided with amusement or enjoyment.
honestly the return was just Lynch naming the Jew
do tell bruder
You type like a retard. Some of this is barely decipherable. "Unless that purpose..." what? Did you just trail off in the middle of a written sentence?
>'m of the opinion that Twin Peaks the Return was pretty bad and hard to watch
Subtle Lynch thread? HELL GOD BABY DAMN NO
original twin peaks was good, and blue velvet. So i like some of his stuff but I dont suck his cock. Im impartial.
>it really honestly sounds like it's just not for you
who is it for then? Thats a shit
>you're coming in with an expectation of back to back action scenes, traditional narrative continuity and resolution and/or "incoherent"
That excuse doesnt apply to anyone else but Lynch. Noone has to like Kanye personally to enjoy his music. But it seems you have to like David Lynch to enjoy TP3 which is just sad.
Its weird how Lynch apologists have to refer to his other work to defend the return. Literally every forum is fans making up shit to make sense of the hours they spent watching.
If you are making a season 3 of an established show with a coherent plot and continuity, why abandon it out of nowhere? for what purpose?
It could even be reasoned Kyle Mc is the only reason it could even be called Twin Peaks as it was a totally different show.
Sounds like you don’t understand a lot of things. You need to learn to walk before you can run.
>Some of this is barely decipherable. "Unless that purpose..." what? Did you just trail off in the middle of a written sentence?
now you know how I feel when I watched Twin Peaks the Return faggot.
but you probably just didn't "get it"
this post is art you see?
Is the way you keep forgetting to finish your sentences some weird joke about Lynch's incomplete narrative arcs? How do you just forget to finish a sentence?
The show was just a show. If you don't like it, don't take it as an insult if other do.
Holy shit, you actually went there. Fucking kekaroo. Brainlets out in full force today.
>original twin peaks was good, and blue velvet. So i like some of his stuff but I dont suck his cock. Im impartial.
So you like some of his most grounded work and dislike his most surreal work. That's a completely fine stance. No need to treat anyone that disagrees with you like a retard because shit like this
>who is it for then? Thats a shit
Just makes you look ridiculous.
>That excuse doesnt apply to anyone else but Lynch. Noone has to like Kanye personally to enjoy his music. But it seems you have to like David Lynch to enjoy TP3 which is just sad.
No one has used this argument. I personally don't know how Lynch is outside of his body of work. However, if you go into a Lynch movie or show, especially one like Twin Peaks: The Return where you should've guessed what kind of show it was gonna be from episode 1, and expect anything but to get LYNCHED then that's just your fault, bro.
>If you are making a season 3 of an established show with a coherent plot and continuity, why abandon it out of nowhere? for what purpose?
To make a comment about itself? To satirize the endless reboots and revivals we're getting fed up today, just like the original Twin Peaks was a satire about soap operas? To criticize the audience that wanted more DAMN GOOD COFFEE and CHERRY PIE callbacks?
Who gives a fuck? If you didn't enjoy it or get anything out of it that's fine. But other people did, and you can't change that.
different can still be bad.
the thing is noone criticizes twin peaks vanilla for the reasons they criticize the return.
If I say the season 2.5 episodes were bad, the producers are blamed, but never lynch. Its as if lynch can never make anything bad.
but if lynch makes something bad, its called "intentional" which makes it good. but he still made something bad intentionally.
see how I asked two anons to explain what they enjoyed about tp3, and they have no answer?
it doesnt make sense.
anons like you are why I come here
>If I say the season 2.5 episodes were bad, the producers are blamed, but never lynch. Its as if lynch can never make anything bad.
Most people will agree with you that season 2 goes off the rails in the middle but you can't just ignore the fact that by that point Lynch and Frost were barely involved with the show anymore. Why would we blame Lynch for something he didn't do?
Look up info pertaining to the subtext of the JUDY and other things in the Return and original series.
I personally have hung and talked with Lynch as well. This is the extent of what I will say out of respect for him.
Something can be bad and still be enjoyable. I would say personally, the return was bad in a very entertaining way. I didn't read too much into it, and I never expected it to be Twin Peaks. In the context of Lynch's career what he did was very entertaining, and a kind of inside joke. It was bad, yes, but that doesn't mean it wasn't good.
>the season 2.5 episodes were bad, the producers are blamed, but never lynch
These were clearly a fuck you to the executives at ABC who forced them to end the Laura Palmer mystery prematurely just like much of The Return was a fuck you to Twitter people (including cast members) who wouldn't stop spamming him about TP. Lynch has this goofy, weird-yet-friendly art-uncle image but he's actually a pretty angry guy.
I love all of those things you mentioned.
Sounds like you wanted a more traditional TV show and not something made by David Lynch.
>Why would we blame Lynch for something he didn't do?
because I conceded it wasn't his fault. But he had 18 episodes and creative control of season 3, and the problems with season 2 were just made worse as if he had no show to write after the executive meddling. i'd understand that, but te qestion remains, "what was the point of season 3" if it wasn't gonna follow the coherent structure of the praised earlier story (which was the reason it got a season 3 in the first place.) Why'd they advertise it as such? If youre gonna throw away everything people loved for 25 years and time travel away laura palmers murder what was the point?
tp3 was essentially the last jedi filmed by george lucas...noone in their right minds would say its good or enjoyable because they liked Indiana Jones or American Graffiti.
You sound like you're just not a fan of surreal fiction. Original Twin Peaks and Blue Velvet are mildly surreal, but more so atmospheric than narratively or structurally. So you like straightforward narratives. Thats okay. Most people do. Others enjoy more challenging interesting surreal stories, both for their uniqueness and the feelings they evoke.
I was thoroughly entertained by Dougie the entire time
Tons of people, including me, love season 3 of Twin Peaks. Most critics loved it too. Check rotten tomatoes if you need to. You're in the minority. So instead of trying to figure out whats wrong with everyone else, maybe question your own values and tastes.
My only issue was that it felt less like Twin Peaks and more like a collage of Lynch making up for not doing anything for like 10 years so he threw in nearly every idea he's had since Inland Empire. I enjoyed it overall, though.
>Something can be bad and still be enjoyable. I would say personally, the return was bad in a very entertaining way.
I agree , being "so bad its good" is a thing. but at least fans will admit its bad except when its David Lunch.
>The Return was a fuck you to Twitter people (including cast members) who wouldn't stop spamming him about TP.
So the point was to punish people who liked his work and gave him money and the ability to satiate himself in hot women...So why are anons acting like TP3 was a masterpiece rather than Lynch jerking himself off at their expense.
>not something made by David Lynch.
Twin Peaks season 1&2 were traditional tv shows with Lynch like plot elements expressed in the supernatural and weird. Nothing else Lynch made compares to tp3
>I love all of those things you mentioned.
pick 3 and say why
>I'm of the opinion that Twin Peaks the Return was pretty bad and hard to watch.
>wants an honest discussion about criticism against David Lynch
>starts with this bullshit
I dont see too many people defending Inland Empire or Crazy Clown Time so maybe there really isn't a bias.
>You're in the minority.
argument ad populum.
>implying rotten tomatoes is a reflection of reality
I guess Black Panther was a masterpiece worthy of an oscar eh
>including me, love season 3 of Twin Peaks.
yet none of you can form a sentence and explain WHY, without sucking lynch's cock and acting like hes some sort of wizard
Why not just call The Return the Lynch Show? It didnt even take place in twin peaks and all the original characters were irrelevant
>Nothing else Lynch made compares to tp3
I hope you mean within the Twin Peaks series and not in his whole body of work. Because movies like Eraserhead, Inland Empire, and pretty much all of his short films are a lot more challenging than any of TP3.
OP, i have a question: What did you think of Fire Walk With Me?
>has no rebuttal to the opinion, justcalls itbullshit.
So in your opinion the only valid criticism of david lunch is stating you enjoy everything he touches?
>a lot more challenging
define "challenging". Seems like only lynch gets to use this critic shield. Noone elses garbage gets the title of "challenging"
>I hope you mean within the Twin Peaks series and not in his whole body of work.
no i mean in general. He's never gone back and retroactively changed the story structure of a previously finished work.
what if lynch made blue velvet 2 and kyle is now a tranny who sings at a bar and dry humps his reflection in a mirror. And no explanation is given. Is that Lynch's style?
>Original Twin Peaks and Blue Velvet are mildly surreal,
therefore theres no reason to watch anything bsides wahat you were already expecting. And Lynch knows this, which is why they baited TP3 with the hope that the show people wanted was coming back. If he said it was a different show with none of the original aspects, it wouldnt have gotten greenlit.
Not that user but the thing i'm getting here is that you believe no one has been able to explain why they liked the show, when in reality what's happening is no one has been able to explain why YOU should like the show.
If you don't like the fact that the show is a big middle finger to fans that only wanted coffee and cherry pie throwbacks (excuse the weeb reference, but in the same way End of Eva was a big middle finger to fans that only wanted epic robot fights and none of that existential shit they got in the end), then that's fine. If you think the only way a revival of a show can be valuable if it's a direct carbon copy of its predecessor that's fine. Go watch Fuller House, Arrested Development or The X-Files.
I just loved how Lynch took the idea of a revival show and completely turned it on it's head. How he systematically destroyed every single expectation we had of a third season of Twin Peaks and in the process still managed to make some of the most incredible episodes of television i've seen in a while. Say what you will about Episode 8, but you ain't getting an episode like that from something other than Twin Peaks: The Return.
>What did you think of Fire Walk With Me?
1st half was okay. second half was good but not what was needed. Laura Palmer as a main character luckily turned out as enjoyable to watch because Sheryl Lee was enjoyable. Imagine if Lynch cast a shit actress as dead girl laura palmer in the pilot. Fire Walk with me would have never happened.
>the thing i'm getting here is that you believe no one has been able to explain why they liked the show, when in reality what's happening is no one has been able to explain why YOU should like the show.
Show me a post in this thread where an user explain why they liked tp3
>If you think the only way a revival of a show can be valuable if it's a direct carbon copy of its predecessor that's fine. Go watch Fuller House, Arrested Development or The X-Files.
none of those shows ended on a cliffhanger with open ended elements, and if anything they suffered from just as much incoherence
>define "challenging". Seems like only lynch gets to use this critic shield. Noone elses garbage gets the title of "challenging"
Art doesn't have to appease to anyone's comfort zone. TP3 is challenging because it goes against what one would expect a revival series should do, all with the purpose of making fun of the idea of a revival show in the first place (which most of the time are just nostalgia-fueled cash grabs).
You may not like it but that's what he did and most people fucking loved it. And they don't owe any explanations to you.
>How he systematically destroyed every single expectation we had of a third season of Twin Peaks
wew I guess Rian Johnson was a genius then.
>Art doesn't have to appease to anyone's comfort zone.
deflection
TP3 is challenging because it goes against what one would expect a revival series should do
no such thing as a "revival series". It's still a continuation of the same series except totally dissonant from it. It didn't revive anything in twin peaks, if anything it killed everything that made it twin peaks.
And all youre really saying is Lynch made something else, because he couldn't make his new season good if it followed the established story coherently. which maintains the question "Why did you even make it?" If reviving a dead series with a new season means its gonna be shit, then why revive it at all?
>Watching bad movies.
Why?
Also, The Return has many great scenes in one season. Can you say thar about any other show?
>The Return has many great scenes in one season.
with 18 episodes it better .
>Can you say that about any other show?
yes.
Which one?
Rome
Laura Dern's performance was entertaining. The music was good. The time travel unexpected and honestly cathartic with that music playing. The side plots ranged from hilarious to really dark and disturbing to totally surreal. The Audrey side plot was also probably one of the most unsettling things I've seen on TV just based on how unreal it all seemed and how it almost breaks the 4th wall in a very unnerving way that left me uncomfortable after it was all over. British dude with a green glove saving the day is hilariously anticlimactic, followed by the great "we live in a dream" thing. It's all just so interesting and engaging, following this surreal thread for 18 episodes.
It also expands upon the original show's lore by so much.
You sound like the biggest fucking cry baby in the world, whining on an internet forum a year after the show came out, upset it didnt have "my favorite character cooper solving mysteries and eating pie in comfy town waah wahh my brain hurts its not what us fans want waah" meanwhile critics and fans all praise the third season of the show for its originality and pushing boundaries.
some things are great, some things are stupid, but the last scene and episode 8 put the whole thing in such a high remark that you dont care about all the rest.
it could be shorter, dougie was annoying as fuck, the storylines that go nowhere are very stupid BUT... episode 8 and that ending scene are pure redemption.
>Dougie was annoying
HELLLoooooooOOOOooooOOOOO.
Call for help.
Dougie was the best part of the show imo. Not even joking. His story was so entertaining and silly, Naomi Watts and his boss were such fun side characters, and his whole Mr. Bean like bumble through tons of scenarios and a mistaken identity plot was so well done. The way no one picks up on his behavior too was such great absurdist satire as well.
Not to mention he's literally everything fans supposedly wanted. A good natured Cooper eating pie, drinking coffee, helping people, and solving crimes. Dougie does all of this and doesn't even notice it. Its so genius.
YOU CANNOT RELIVE THE PAST
ATTEMPTS BRING ONLY SUFFERING
I guess people were crybabies for 25 years then , yet they still brought the show back because all “cooper eating pie and solving mysteries” was why they watched twin peaks at all m not to watch lynch stare at a woman get dressed for way too long, a showoff his urban outfitters playlist.
>dougie was annoying as fuck
he's adorable
Doug isn’t even a real character. And it’s funny how the mention of David lunches cameo character was the thing that brought coop back.
What you were enjoying wasn’t fun, but it wasn’t twin peaks.
I’m going to do my best to answer this. I didn’t think it was bad or hard to watch though.
One of the reasons S3 is loved by many is due to its constant rule-breaking of the medium. Television is a very democratic medium, with dozens of writers, show runners, guidelines, etc, which usually prevents personal statements from being made. Television is a slave to narrative and structure, which film has broken free of 70 years ago.
Whether you like it or not, film gives you meditative reflections in Tarkovsky, visual poetry in stuff like “Days of Heaven”, Philosophical ruminations with Lav Diaz and Bela Tarr, Man vs. Nature in Herzog, Brechtian Political Analysis in Godard. This isn’t going to be shit for everyone, as not everything has mass appeal. And criticism of everything in general is a good thing, but it should be more than attacking something for what it’s not.
If you think art peaked with Modernism, you’re going to find everything remotely Post-Modern as worthless.
Anyways, Twin Peaks S3 was an attack on nostalgia and reboots/revivals/sequels etc. It was executing what that member berries episode of South Park was trying to say. It was a surreal Western update on Homer’s Odyssey, with the Wild West replacing Greece. It was about the futility of life, with the Greeks mostly being pawns and puppets of the gods. It was about the struggles of morality, doing the right thing isn’t always best for everyone.
Tv always tried to spoon feed you everything.
The show was genreless shifting from comedy to horror to western to crime to variety show. If tv is going to compete with film in a serious artistic way, it needs to take more chances for better or worse.
It was far from perfect, but the ballsiness of the season was why many of us were willing to overlook its flaws
Also, I find shaggy dog stories hilarious so fuck me
Can anyone watch this once and understand it?
lynch is literally a polish jew
what are you on my man?
His reliance on the thematic use of quantum mechanics and nucleic reactions confuse most viewers especially with the transcendental aspects layered on top of it all and the use of emotion as a driving force within the worlds he creates tricks dullards in to focusing on the drama when it is about the chaotic, dualism laced dichotomy that is the human experience along with the uniquely delicious absurdity of being from the USA holding it all together via the allure of classic Americana.
dream/time travel?
>Twin Peaks S3 was an attack on nostalgia and reboots/revivals/sequels etc.
Then why make one at all if you’re just gonna criticize what you’re being paid to do? Why did the fans have to make that explanation up to justify it?
>someone makes a thread on Yea Forums stating Yea Forums threads are stupid and ruining the internet.
Wow so compelling. You showed me
It was literally Kanye reciting Shakespeare tier. It can be fun to watch. but it isn’t really Shakespeare
I got the jist of it my first watching. Really understood it the second time though.
More like the wishful dream of woman as she dies.
its was cute for a while but them become annoying to me. im glad other people enjoyed - and its not like i hate and fast foward hes scenes.
i was more into the dark side of the show and that was well done until the end.
the thing about twin peaks is how much lynch and frost are into esoteric stuff that pass by most of people - but maybe work still, into a subliminar level.
jay analysis do a great job at that and it helps to understand how rooted in real life some aspects of the show really are.
>Doppelgängers and Interdimensional Demons involved in murder mystery story are based in quantum mechanics and nucleus reactions
If you watch it you understood it via your emotional responses. You need to be in touch with yourself in order to make sense of anything. Assuming all works of art have a singular meaning to interpret is fucking retarded. This is what mass media and marketing has done to people you expect to have a definite answer for something or you fail to accept it due to your own inability for free thought.
waaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
waaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh
me want coopy
me want coopy
me want pie
give me pie
waaaaaaaaaaaaaaahh
me need log lady me need show waaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh
lynch hates his fans and personally attacked me by not giving me more mystery soap opera waaaaahh
>why make art that criticizes art/challenges the genre and medium/makes meta statements and pushes boundaries
hmmm we got a real thinker here.
I find it interesting the show of twin peaks the return can’t at all be explained or answered without guessing or assuming the thought system of lynch and frost , even though they had 18 hours to make their points coherent and sensible,
If I stand on a milk crate , shit on the ground and then hold the turd in my hand while reciting the les Marseilles for 3 hours rather than present the school play people expected to see their kids in. Is it still art? Am I just pushing the boundaries of the genre?
Meta statements are
>lynch hates his fans
Clearly
You're doing neither. You're also shitposting on a tv and film board.
If you're David Lynch, yes.
Your response doesn’t answer the question. And basically a criticism of the human desire to understand.
>lol Free thought is not thinking , get it “thought free”
That’s you
>original twin peaks
>satire of 90s television in which the existential horror comes from how fucking shallow and self serving these soap opera characters really are in the face of tragedy
>new twin peaks
>satire of modern television in which the existential horror comes from the overreliance on deus ex machina, the constant chasing of big scenes and cliffhangers, and the forced revival of the past
WOW HOW DID THAT HAPPEN DAVID LUNCH IS SUCH A HACK
Inland Empire: Twin Peaks Edition
As i suspected. A false standard is applied to Lynch’s shortcomings , which basically suggests he’s retarded. As only retarded children are celebrated for not shitting themselves as they take 2 hours to draw a smiley face.
The only one I'll give you is Laura Dern.
lynch doest explain stuff, never did, since eraserhead.
frost did two books expanding the show universe - the last happens after the end of the show.
its not a linear book, but pieces of informations, like they were real stuff collected from all over the place.
How old are you?
You lack the comprehension of what you don't understand.
>original twin peaks
>a coherent story with a discernible plot and memorable characters wth a comfy setting
>nutwinpeaks
>only exists because people liked original, and sets out to shit on them for it.
the surrealist parts are pure Lynch kino. but judging the show by its own merits and against its contemporaries, the show was an incoherent mess that never went anywhere. not a single thing in its entire 18 hour span had a payoff or real purpose. just go in for the weird bullshit, there's nothing deeper to be had.
Older than 25
Don’t we all?? That statement doesn’t mean anything.
>You lack the ability to smell what you can’t smell
you have to find the deeper meaning yourself, if you want to
Well stated
Yep, not true.
this might be a wild guess, but you might be a lot different in 30 years or so.
why do you think everything is catered to your expectations, and it either panders to you or shits on you?
Most creators don't give a fuck about you at all, movies are not videogames, directors who think about what their audience wants at all are busy making capeshit or star wars, which coincidentally are written exactly like videogames
Twin Peaks season 3 is the way it is because lynch and frost wanted it to br the way it is, obviously you can like it or dislike it but the idea that was made to shit on you is preposterous and only entertained because literal manchildren like rian johnson think that's what narrative is
He's not for you OP. As simply as that. I"ve enjoyed it immensely and I didn't find it hard to watch. For me it's an endearing masterwork. A matter of tastes, I suppose.
A movie can be a visual spectacle with no story because it’s not 18 hours long and self. And Xavier renegade angel and Off The Air do exactly what the YouTuber claims Lynch was trying to do but way better.
If lynch was just trying to make visual spectacle he shouldn’t have advertised twin peaks the return as a continuation of the shown people weren’t lifelong fans of.
An pd it’s funny how all the movies he listed were crap and forgettable.
What if this is all just a dream?
Then why would i promise people what I can’t deliver
Cool, then I can safely say it’s garbage and my opinion is just as valid as the garbage lynch and frost put out as twin peak s season 3
Finally decided to watch Twin Peaks last year.
First season was decent, second was meh, and the third one is garbage.
I like surrealism and absurdism, i wholly support authors that try to do something new and original, but this is just a big dump of CGI mess with shitty camera work and no fresh ideas in sight.
It seems that the originals were successful not because of Lynch, but in spite of him.
>the season was good because it gave me something to do for 18 weeks
Oh wow so deep!
Off The Air is an anthology of shorts, so it’s not fair to compare. The XRA creators are huge Lynch fans.
Bret Easton Ellis has normie taste in contemporary movies, but I think he does an adequate job at explaining the appeal of the show.
Have you never seen movies longer than 3 hours?
The show illustrated what time did to these people. You can’t wait 25 years and continue exactly where you left off. They aren’t frozen in time.
Idk what promise you’re talking about
Lynch litterally cannot lose, he wins no matter what. How much does that make you seethe you filtered pleb faggot
Who let the comfytards out of the Alita general?
The only way there is no loss is if there is no victory.
The only thing that is left when there is no loss or victory is 0
This is who Lynch is, a meaningless 0
2 deep 4 you i know, you can spend next 18 hours staring at the wall to grasp the idea.
yeah of course you can say it's garbage and your opinion is valid, it's your stance
what I was debating was the idea that it was made specifically with your expectations in mind which is something only Yea Forumsedditors seem to think, because videogames are built from the ground up with pandering in mind
any type of well written story is never about pandering, even the original twin peaks which is beloved now was shat on hard by certain audiences back in the 90s before finding its niche, which is what led to the killer being revealed early by the way
only crazy people like johnson think 'audience expectations' are something to be considered when writing, because when you're normal, as in not a post modern neo liberal, you don't pretend to know everything a specific demographic is thinking all the time
The plot of The Return is really simple outside of its themes. Essentially the forces of good from the White Lodge (first seen in S3) have put into place a plan to destroy evil, which gradually is revealed over the course of the series. Good Cooper is half trapped as a doppelgänger, while the other evil Copper that Bob created as a powerful vessel for himself is looking to ruin the plan. Twin Peaks itself is shown going into meltdown, with most relationships breaking down and later a zombie like infestation. This is clearly due to the battle being waged here and is due to the influence of evil, who are much stronger before the end.
Nearly everything shown reveals more about this plot and the players involved. The rest fleshes out the lodges and JUDY. The ending continues the plot of FWWM, and the well established melding of time and space that occurs with the lodges. Mr Jeffries went back in time so why can’t Cooper? By stopping the historical act of evil, things are brought back into equilibrium. The White Lodge has its champions in Laura Palmer and Cooper and JUDY’s place in time and space is destroyed. Bob is also destroyed in the physical world.
Maybe this could have been more obvious for you if they’d went back in time and destroyed the nuke that birthed Bob but that would be ridiculous and far too obvious. It’s a simple plot for Christ sakes
It did not. It did not once spend enough time with any character to actually show how 25 years after Laura Palmers murder changed them.
Case and point being the trolling of David Lynch to tug in hart strings by teasing the Angelo music with Bobby only for him to not serve a purpose again on screen.
And Lucy can’t use a cell phone after 25 years for some reason..
The promotional material was entirely built around aspects of the original, such ad posters with dale cooper using a voice recorder
>disappears from public eye for 10 years because your twin peaks movie was critically btfo
FWWM was top kino
Literally nothing you said after the first two sentences were ever confirmed in the show , and are just explanations you came up with to make sense of the incoherent and zero explained plot of season 3.
And your next point will be that coherence was never the point because lynch is beyond coherence which makes it good , even after suggesting it’s all so simple to understand as a coherent narrative.
>box office says otherwise
>had to be fit in retroactively
>box office
kek
congratulation for taking a lynch production 100% literally
I bet you also piss in your sink
Yes , the box office, in a time when critics and commercial success reflected quality. Unlike today.
This was a time when a movie with a 10k budget could make millions if it was good.
Not that user, but I do. There a problem?
I’m explaining it for the retard who thought there wasn’t a coherent plot. There was. But that plot wasn’t the interesting part about S3
sink pissing is better than normal pissing
Everything I just said is shown very obviously to you. Name any part individually that you felt wasn’t shown and I’ll put some examples down for you. I’m not doing it for the entire plot but I’ll definitely give you time stamps if you are specific
lol I like how you're unable to accept something just can't be for you so it must be the worst thing ever
off yourself, cretin
what a bizarre and cringe post
That's the point. It wasn't supposed to feel like Twin Peaks, at least not completely. It was a commentary on reboots and how so many of them today are just lazy retreads.
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE WHY DID THEY DO SOMETHING NEW
it sounds like you were, quite literally, too stupid for the show
obviously a low iq faggot like yourself that just wants to eat up lazy rehashes like force awakens all day wouldn't understand
Scene goes too long
So are we doing this or have you conceded?
>accept something just can't be for you
It was for me seeing as i was excited to watch it and the advertising was designed to get me to watch it as it promised me a return of twin peaks, not the Dave Lynch show where everything is whatever you want it to be.
When something is disappointing , it doesnt stop being for you.
If it wasn't for fans like me who wanted more of the show we actually loved. The return never would have been made. If anything It wasn't meant for people like you who David Lynch clearly hates.
GOT A LIGHT
>it sounds like you were, quite literally, too stupid for the show
you're too dumb to understand garbage. I guess understanding JK rowling means harry potter is a goo series rather than The dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises. Each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.
Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.
>a-at least the books were good though r-right
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."
I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.
>>It was for me seeing as i was excited to watch it and the advertising was designed to get me to watch it as it promised me a return of twin peaks
That.
Was.
The.
Point.
>That.
>Was.
>The.
>Point.
according to whom? you?
>That's the point.
unless you're david lynch you dont know what the point is. you just make one up for yourself.
> It was a commentary on reboots and how so many of them today are just lazy retreads.
so why make something worse, rather than do a revival in a way thats not utter nonsense and open ended bullshit to leave people grasping at straws to make sense if it?
why use twin peaks for this? If you wanna jerk yourself off intellectually thats fine, but dont drag others into it by promising them one thing, and giving them something they never asked for.
the reason it was canceled was the less coherent plotlines of season 2, so make more incoherent plot lines with no answers or resolution?
Again if he straight up said it is what yo say it was, noone would have given him creative control.
Is he called Dale Cooper because he cooperates with a dale?
Twin Peaks attempts to be the tip of an iceberg, a small viaible part of a larger spritual miracle that's not physically capable of being shown on a television screen. It succeeds, but in doing that, the show itself is truly just the facade of the tip of an iceberg. The rest of the iceberg is in your head. Yes, its also in David Lynch's head too, the "whole iceberg" is real, but the show Twin Peaks is a limited pointer reference to other ideas. More than most any other show, its a fake tip of an iceberg made to make you think about icebergs.
I think critics and twitter people like it because its literally a response to them and what they have said on Twitter, and people who arent part of that are missing a core point of the season
Imagine watching the return without having ever been on the internet
I understand why Lynch doesnt explain his plots so literally and overtly, but forbidding the fans from doing it? Ridiculous
all these poor TP fans attempting to provide an explanation to someone too stupid to understand them.
Might as well try to get a second grader to appreciate Proust, or a parakeet to appreciate Dora the Explorer.
Cut the elitist bullshit. You can be spiritually aware and sensitive to the metaphysical, without loving this 18 hours of television. Just because a show won't openly play its cards doesn't mean mean anybody who didnt like the presentation and content didnt get it
you can also just be stupid, and that's all you are.
>sensitive to the metaphysical,
Seems to me you don't even know what that word means.
There's also a portion of Lynch's fanbase that gets off on feeling they're in on the mystery, and claims others can't understand it, for a dose of satisfaction that most shows can give you without cynicism and blame for other people
You wish. Twin Peaks absolutely throws one in for the existence of the intangible and the human ability to cooperate and ally with it, I struggle to imagine a Lynch fan who says otherwise
you already know what your opinion is, you're just trying to force other people to agree with you
don't get upset that they don't, just be your own stupid fucking faggot self instead of expecting everyone else to follow you like anything you say matters to them
And same to you. I like David Lynch and Twin Peaks a lot but I think avoidance of criticism doesnt suit his themes, and there is a dark and cynical edge to Lynch that some fans enjoy that basically amounts to distrusting and belittling people who would criticize
On a rewatch a bunch of the surreal scenes feel like something only an art student who's full of himself would come up with, but honestly the whole Dougie/Cooper storyline is so heartwarming the show in its entirety is not something any old hackish amateur would be able to create.
it's actually called you being insecure
you already know what you think, don't fucking worry about people you already think are beneath you
you're being pathetic
None of this is actual criticism, just stuff you didn't like.
reminder that electricity is a supernatural force with its own agenda
These accusations dont suit the charm and optimism of Dale Cooper which allow him to interface with the divine as a main theme of the show
and be manipulated by it to his own doom
So the superfans take it to heart and approach any generic criticism as a path to hell. I get it.
you keep saying you get things that you don't
>Twin Peaks attempts to be the tip of an iceberg, a small viaible part of a larger spritual miracle that's not physically capable of being shown on a television screen. It succeeds, but in doing that, the show itself is truly just the facade of the tip of an iceberg. The rest of the iceberg is in your head. Yes, its also in David Lynch's head too, the "whole iceberg" is real, but the show Twin Peaks is a limited pointer reference to other ideas. More than most any other show, its a fake tip of an iceberg made to make you think about icebergs.
This is an incredibly astute, accurate way of describing the show.
Reddit: The Director
And you keep saying that while contributing nothing. Im not moved by your generic non-opinion.
muffin
so what?
it's a show for people who like to think for themselves, and that's clearly not something you're capable of.
there isn't a hard message of any kind that you're supposed to walk away with.
you walk away with the images and the sounds, and what you do with them is up to you.
If you can't do ANYTHING with them, I guess you won't find the show very engaging.
Anybody else here got filtered by inland empire?
I quite enjoyed it, but it really felt like a random series of stuff even more than the rest of Lynch to me.
>the charm and optimism of Dale Cooper which allow him to interface with the divine as a main theme of the show
What show are you watching? cooper's "charm and optimism" is a thin veneer coating a deeply fucked up dude who is constantly shown screwing up everything.
Lynch hates twin peaks fans, its different
I literally said I like the show, but with some Lynch fans you have to walk on eggshells or else they get all militant like they're fighting dark spirits trying to kill their mood. Its a great show but youre all so eager to dismiss and banish people.
>its a show for people who think for themselves
And yet apparerently tasting the Lynch fan's disdain for the casual audience is forbidden
Lynch:
>here you go you fucking retards
Haha, I am retarded! How clever.
You're not supposed to get it, you get whatever you do out of it. When you're so obtuse it's possible, you can cry foul on any criticism. It's a garbage defense.
Lynch is for brainlets who think they are geniuses.
How do I know Lynch fans aren't all aligned with the Black Lodge, and their fear of skepticism doesn't stem from a deaire for egotistical self-satisfaction?
HEE HEE
This was the most heinous cop-out. I was a fan of season 3, but this was some serious bullshit.
Its a show where you're meant to get whateber you eant out of it, but if you got anything that feels negative to anyone else out of it then you're an evil-aligned vengeful spirit made of nuclear fallout and you must be banished with hardline defense using intangible arguments
Do you think she is just old and ugly or her right eyebrow is supposed to be fucked up from the explosion?
Oh yeah, no I see a lot of that. I have friends who'll talk around any garbage that comes up. I like it, but it's clearly flawed.
I just enjoy poking fun at the airheads who clam up and say 'you dont get it' as if blind love for a show and fear of criticism equals spiritual alignment with native american heaven
One of the best TV SHOW ever made, period. I didnt have such a good time watching it when aired with people in any other show. Magical, unique piece of filmmaking.
Ooh look at me I'm a big brain Lynch fan and only I have the wisdom to see that emotions and attitudes have an effect on reality and can be characterized in myth
>enjoyment=/= entertainment
this is proof that the english language is a virus that spawns idiocy (Judy)
Not every sequel/continuation has to be a retread of the past, especially when so much time has passed between the new seasons.
If you expected the exact same goofy FBI shenanigans, i don't have anything for you because it's not there. Given the ending, maybe that's part of the point, but who's to say?
But if you take the return as-is there was a lot of entertaining stuff; even if you don't like the more abstract and strange aspects of the show, there was some stuff that wasn't that confusing or obtuse that was great.
Take a bunch of the stuff with Dougie Jones - while the framing for why he exists is somewhat confusing, and his sections always have the looming question of when (of even *if*) the real Coop will return, the story of this wholesome spirited, child-like man somehow making his way through life very positively is pure kino.
I get the feeling that that entire post is counter to the point he was trying to make
>unless you're david lynch you dont know what the point is. you just make one up for yourself.
i'd take it further and say that lynch himself doesn't believe there is a definitive point
on top of that, an artist should not have the final say on how his work is interpreted anyway. an artist can suggest a possible interpretation just as anyone else can, but art is meant to be interpreted by the viewer. the point of art is not to be shown something and told what it means
Ooh look at me I'm a big brain David Lynch fan, and you're a small brain idiot who probably interfaces with words and actions and finds some value in clarity and the verbal
If wanting a third season is a half-witted idea that offends David Lynch, isnt ignoring the Return before it was even announced the most proper relationship with it?
>t. wants everything simplistic and black & white
>thinks an artist can't have a complicated relationship with their own work
>and is still insistent that art have a clear meaning that's decided on conclusively by it's creator, which no one else gets to interpret
I didnt say that
>arguing with people who will defend even Dune just because Lynch made it
We must keep the threads balanced
absolutely based stealth potterposter
ITT:
david munch haha
>I don't understand why he gets this privilege of being above criticism for making a bad show or movie.
Postmodernism.
>I'd have to say my least favorite movie is a Clockwork Orange. It's far to edgy for me
The film doesn't work for me because torturing a psychopath into being helpless seems like a good idea to me.
>Yet criticism of David Lynch seems to have this critic proof defense, that everything he does is intentional and "you just didn't get it"
it's not this so much as his stuff is impervious to criticism from people who measure art on some sort of objective scale of good and bad. i would say the number of people who love david lynch is about equal to the amount of people who despise him.
>Just because it's a guy sweeping the floor 5 minutes doesnt mean its worth watching or good...
That is actually interesting to me though. It certainly isnt something you see every day, so why does it exist here? Fascinating for me to ponder. To each his own I guess.
You could go into a fucking McDonald's and watch that.
Yeah The Return generally did suck. I don't know how anyone can unironically claim that fantastic first season can be matched
i think you mean the post was based and is open to interpretation on its meaning
personally i don't think it's so bad because green onions is a good song and i enjoyed listening to it, and i enjoy wondering what the significance of it is that meant that we were shown those five minutes of a guy sweeping, but if you don't enjoy those things i can see why someone would hate it, as well as some other aspects of The Return too
>if anything it killed everything that made it twin peaks
user you can still go back and watch the original twin peaks seasons safe in the knowledge that they were made without The Return in mind. The only thing The Return could ruin was itself (which I personally don't believe it did)
>stops mid-episode for a Nine Inch Nails music video
>David's teeth have a starring role
>killer dwarf character because Lynch is butthurt that Michael J. Anderson called him a rapist/murderer
>nine one one
>symbolically kills the audience moment with the teens in front of the demonic box
yea, so good. right
You're on Yea Forums you faggot. Eat my ass.
thanks for listing a bunch of things that i forgot i loved about the show user
Its actually extremely common to find someone sweeping
Do you unironically enjoy David Lynch as an actor?
I do.
OP I'll tell it straight. There are three kinds of reactions to Lynch
1. The fans who like lunch unconditionally and don't even bother to explain to you why they like it. They probably tried that in the past but they came to realize that if you're asking why lynch is good then you'll never enjoy him anyway
2. You. People who don't like lynch and annoy everyone else
3. Me. People who maybe enjoyed one or two lynch kinos but overall, despite enjoying the approach, still feel his gimmick is never truly realized, like all his movies are always missing something
Lynch - BASED
This thread - CRINGE
Based rational poster
gordon cole is a fucking based character nigger