Twin Peaks

A Lynch devotee could simply not have asked for anything more for Twin Peaks of 2017. This is what Lynch has been working towards his entire career. What he has given is NOT a retread of the Twin Peaks we know circa 1990, this is a new beast entirely. It's dark, it's beautiful, it's everything that makes Lynch one of the finest artist working today.

If the first few episodes start to make you long for the whimsy and hokiness of the original series, keep going through to Ep4. Lynch is giving this world time to breathe this time around. By the time Ep. 4 arrives we being to see where things are heading and watch this new world start to join with the old Twin Peaks we have all been missing for 25 years.

This is Lynch' OPUS.

A quarter of a century after it ended, Twin Peaks gets a season 3. That in itself is part of the weirdness of Twin Peaks; it's not a reboot, or a remake, it's just ... season 3, picking up just where season 2 left off.

No one but David Lynch would do that.

I suspect whether you will love or hate this series return (and people seem to do one or the other) will depend on what you liked about the original Twin Peaks. If you liked the quirky soap opera aspect of things in plot threads like the lumber mill, well, this might not be for you. If, like me, your favorite scenes were the really weird ones like the hotel scene that began episode 2 and the amazing scene of the kid and the creamed corn, and if you didn't understand while people didn't appreciate the utter brilliance of Fire Walk With Me, then you'll probably like this.

The series begins with the weirdness turned up to ten and the eventfulness turned down to zero, as though Lynch is saying, yes, I made Twin Peaks, but don't forget I'm also the guy who did Inland Empire.

After a while the Inland Empire aspects thankfully become fewer and there is more of the quirky humor of the original series (as in a scene with cops try to track down a key to an apartment), actual story and character, and Lynch's typical approach of painting a placid surface and then showing the rot underneath. And some of the old elements of the series, like a weirdly ageless Kimmy Robertson as Lucy and Lynch as Gordon Cole, are every bit as fun and funny as they were in the original.

At times full Lynchian madness flares up, like the a-bomb test episode that thrilled some people and that annoyed others, like me. Other times, Lynch shocks everyone by actually offering detailed explanaions of some of the mysteries he has raised in the original series and Fire Walk with Me. At times Lynch seems to be saying, "here's a sensible answer to that thing you've been wondering about for years, but before you get too happy here's another unexplained weird thing to replace that."

I wasn't as fanatic about Twin Peaks as some people. I didn't find the pilot especially interesting until funny, eccentric Dale Cooper appeared, and without Kyle MacClachlan I probably never would have watched the second episode. I didn't fully love the series until the incredible weirdness of the second season, and that love didn't last long since the show quickly spiraled into a disastrous mess.

That may be why I enjoy this third season and Fire Walk With Me; they represent David Lynch giving me the aspects of the series I love without all the boring soap stuff.

Some of Twin Peaks is hugely annoying, other parts are utterly fascinating. Overall, I found it very entertaining, and if it's not everything I want (after 4 episodes I rated this 9 stars, but at season's end dropped it to 8), well, that's David Lynch.

One final note. I've seen several reviews saying that the only people who like this series are "hipsters." This is the silliest critique I've ever seen. I'll admit I don't know much about hipsters except they wear funny mustaches and churn their own butter, but my guess is hipsters are not all people who like to watch a revival of a series they don't remember starring a bunch of people old enough to be their parents. Just a guess.

No, you silly 1-star reviewers, I'm not a hipster, and I'm not, as some have suggested, a "paid reviewer" (although if someone can tell me how to make money by writing IMDb reviews please do so). I'm just someone who likes David Lynch when he's very weird but not tediously, incomprehensibly so. And that's what, for the most part, Twin Peaks the Return gives its audience.

When someone works hard at something or does something for a long time you can surmise that they well eventually get good at that thing, even masterful. Generally, this is the case for all great directors and David Lynch is no exception. With the newest Lynch-piece we are given something that is an amalgamation of all his previous work without sacrificing his style or creativity. We see the dark-industrial vibe of "Eraserhead", the American suburbia and the dark underbelly late-night bars/clubs/people from "Blue Velvet", "Wild At Heart", and "Twin Peaks", the winding roads and nightmarish features from nearly all his projects specifically "Lost Highway" and "Mulholland Drive", and then last but not least, we see the venture into the digital age with non-linear story and the craziest sound design you may possibly experience in any piece of media that we get from "Inland Empire". There are even remnants of design that hearken back to his old shorts.

This folks, is Lynch's swan song. The Return is already like nothing else ever before on TV and this includes the original two seasons of Twin Peaks.

Lynch allows the material to breathe, and gives the viewer plenty of time to absorb what's on screen. The filming is patient, and every shot is most definitely taken with care. The slow yearning shots is what Lynch uses to draw you in. The unfamiliarity of new faces leaves you with more questions than before. Also, as most already knew going in, The Return is set in many different locations--not just that charming, wholesome town of Twin Peaks. Even knowing Lynch's filmography there are moments that still have me unprepared for the amount of visuals and sounds that evoke nightmares. More terrifying than 90% of what I've seen as a film-goer.

I have to admit that it is taking me some time to adjust to the new vibe of the series knowing well in advance that Lynch and Frost have stated that The Return will be more like the prequel movie FWWM. I am someone who prefers the film to the series because Lynch had more room to work toward his vision. The result is a surrealist nightmare that The Return will have beat by a landslide. With that said, there will be many of you who will not like this at all (even folks who enjoyed the original series because The Return is THAT different). Lynch is certainly an acquired taste and everything isn't for everybody, but for those of you who are willing to give it a shot and appreciate an artist in his top form then maybe there is still some redeeming qualities in this for you. The Return is no run-of-the-mill action series or soap opera so be ready for one of the craziest rides you may ever be on.

It's condescending to tell people they don't 'get it', and it's narrow-minded to claim anyone who loves it is pretentious. I adored this new Twin Peaks, and I understand why it's divisive.

In his old age, an artist had a chance to throw a kitchen sink's worth of ideas on screen, under the banner of his old show, with complete creative control. Good on him I say! That creative control means many of the aspects which came from others in the original show are missing.

I was compelled from start to finish. I appreciated its slow rhythms, found the pacing hypnotic. I'd understand why many fans would despise its new form. I wouldn't blame them for it.

If you're after a fully-resolved, tightly-plotted, didactic storytelling, you won't get it. You'll be frustrated by scenes which suggest the story is kicking into high gear in traditional Hollywood ways, only to then be presented with a five minute shot of a man cleaning a floor.

This jarring approach... loose ends, unresolved plots, ambiguity and odd pacing are understandably annoying for many. It does lack the melodrama of the earlier series, but there's still a warmth to many of the characters, you are just less guided by music and tight plotting. It's a feat to me that it is somehow utterly absurd yet simultaneously feels more grounded, but this show is not going to tell you a tight story with a guiding hand.

Personally, I haven't received this feeling from any US cinema in the past few decades, and I love it. Twin Peaks The Return gave me space to let my mind wander in the same way an Apichatpong Weeresthekul film might. That's a very personal thing, for me it's not boredom, it's a space to imagine and open my mind.

There's a lot of hyperbole surrounding David Lynch but his works are the summation of his very clear influences, like any other artist. You can see it all very clearly, and I happen to share many of his loves, so it's exciting for me. Here it's the usual Cocteau, Anger visuals, noir and 50s stylings, but there are clear nods to everything under the cinematic sun, from Jacques Tati to Tarantino and early silent cinema. I loved that, it feels like a celebration of cinema!

The tone jumps from humour to horror in a heartbeat, each episode is jarring in barely-cohesive ways but for me, somehow it coalesced. The show feels liberated, free of expectation and cliché. It put me under a spell, certainly not because I was instructed to by critics at large but because together, all these disparate elements felt refreshing.

I don't think it's a puzzle to be solved, I don't think there's a bullet-point explanation to the story sitting in a locked vault. I do believe the broad intention was to make you think, imagine and question what you're used to being fed by TV and films.

Would I watch it if it weren't called Twin Peaks and weren't by David Lynch? Yes. Should it have been called Twin Peaks, and is it kicking fans in the face by doing so? Very likely. I think that's what makes it so anarchic and brilliant. I also fully understand why many wouldn't want that from Twin Peaks.

What a fascinating case of mass self-delusion this has been. It's truly amazing and disgusting how heavily people are stroking themselves over their ability to force themselves to choke down something that is so very poorly executed just so they can reach that oh so "clever" hidden story within.

Look, I know that it must be very comforting to keep talking down to people about how they just don't get the weirdness and complexity of it all (because WOW, use of metaphor and non-linear storytelling in the video medium? UNHEARD OF!), but that's really not the problem here. It's the absolutely abysmal pacing and structure. Yes people, we get it. Lynch likes to pull the same old thing out of his bag of tricks that he always has, where he tries to artificially induce unease by drawing scenes out well past their welcome, except instead of the handful of times spread out across a 2-3 hour movie we are now treated to 45/60 minutes of this filler in each episode of an 18 hour saga, leaving very little room for any actual worthwhile content. You don't need to be a mathematician to see that the ratio between the two is incredibly uneven.

But OK, yippee hooray for ARTISTIC INTEGRITY! He has such complete free rein to spew out completely unfettered streams of consciousness that no one at all will dare to tell him that maybe things like having a confused old woman talking to the police about who has the keys to a door for 10 straight minutes is an absolute waste of film, and none of you will dare admit that this pile of slop is in dire need of editing because you're too busy preening about what an artistic genius Lynch is, and how open-minded and avant-garde you are by extension for being able to wrap your heads around a plot that's literally been done a hundred times before in superhero comic books.

A big slow clap for you all.