Seriously though, what’s the difference? If the end result is identical does it really matter what we label it? Whether he can’t or won’t conclude anything doesn’t really matter. Either way, he doesn’t.
And I’m glad you can appreciate those things. To me, it’s still a load of cleft asshole claptrap parading in a human skin suit of, “you just don’t get it, and I’m not going to explain it (without a heavy application of ‘magic’).” Movies like 2001 get a pass because they are almost indiscernibly linear and would be making a neck breaking heal-turn were they to end linearly any other way than the way they did.
But season one of twin peaks has not much more than a passing glance from complete focus on linearity. Even the parts that abstract from reality conform to the convention of a linear narrative. So, fine, season one is telling a story that is at least a narrative miniseries and at best a cynical critique of rural life in the northwest. Even though they show little intention of revealing major questions introduced of the plot by the end, they still demonstrate unwavering dedication to a linear style.
And I get that season two and the myriad network blunders combine to describe a project that is nothing if not needlessly nuanced (I don’t think any two words have ever more accurately described how I feel about David fucking Lynch 😆), but the fact remains and evidenced by lynch himself that he had a greater creative influence in the direction of the plot in season two than he did in season one. Even considering the episodes he had no credit in, at the very least he has claimed that he had more influence.
He shows absolutely no sign of deviation from this narrative method in his further works, so I have a hard time believing that poor little davey was merely a victim of Mr Frost’s incomprehensibly abstract direction. I would argue he leans in a bit more without frost at all.
And, finales are usually the highest rated episodes in a season, so in a two season release with two season finales, one of those finales being outside the top two is telling more of the story than lynch ever did. 🤭
Otherwise, everything else you’ve said is something I either agree with, am wrong about, or won’t dignify. But I really enjoyed reading it nevertheless. You’re obviously far more familiar with him and his works than I am and my frivolous accusations carry little water. But I tried my best! Thanks
Lol,
direct choice? 🤷
inability? 💁
Seriously though, what’s the difference? If the end result is identical does it really matter what we label it? Whether he can’t or won’t conclude anything doesn’t really matter. Either way, he doesn’t.
And I’m glad you can appreciate those things. To me, it’s still a load of cleft asshole claptrap parading in a human skin suit of, “you just don’t get it, and I’m not going to explain it (without a heavy application of ‘magic’).” Movies like 2001 get a pass because they are almost indiscernibly linear and would be making a neck breaking heal-turn were they to end linearly any other way than the way they did.
But season one of twin peaks has not much more than a passing glance from complete focus on linearity. Even the parts that abstract from reality conform to the convention of a linear narrative. So, fine, season one is telling a story that is at least a narrative miniseries and at best a cynical critique of rural life in the northwest. Even though they show little intention of revealing major questions introduced of the plot by the end, they still demonstrate unwavering dedication to a linear style.
And I get that season two and the myriad network blunders combine to describe a project that is nothing if not needlessly nuanced (I don’t think any two words have ever more accurately described how I feel about David fucking Lynch 😆), but the fact remains and evidenced by lynch himself that he had a greater creative influence in the direction of the plot in season two than he did in season one. Even considering the episodes he had no credit in, at the very least he has claimed that he had more influence.
He shows absolutely no sign of deviation from this narrative method in his further works, so I have a hard time believing that poor little davey was merely a victim of Mr Frost’s incomprehensibly abstract direction. I would argue he leans in a bit more without frost at all.
And, finales are usually the highest rated episodes in a season, so in a two season release with two season finales, one of those finales being outside the top two is telling more of the story than lynch ever did. 🤭
Otherwise, everything else you’ve said is something I either agree with, am wrong about, or won’t dignify. But I really enjoyed reading it nevertheless. You’re obviously far more familiar with him and his works than I am and my frivolous accusations carry little water. But I tried my best! Thanks