Review by dogg724
VIP3Another week, another unnecessary reboot of a fetishized show. A lot of time and effort is put into apologizing for "surrealist" works. When something seems bizarre or off-putting, it's really the symbol of [blank] that has kept the particular reviewer up for many sleepless nights and changes in meaning for them over years. It would be too simple, it is supposed, to only say the plot was weak and dialogue boring. To suggest camp as a lazy crutch to account for bad acting is to just miss the point! It's a flexible genre that not everyone tunes into for its ability to... make sense... or frame its alleged message in a way you particularly care to hear. ::huff:: Fine. There's some truth to the notion that one person's art is another's self-indulgent waste of time and resources. And in terms of "cultural impact," one must concede this is a "great" show that captured the momentum and fervor of its time and has carried such a special place that it's managed to reboot even if the notion of rebooting has smelled sour for longer than anyone cares to admit.
Whatever else I might figure out to say about this show as I carry on, I cannot get over how horrendously bored I am. One dimensional characters bouncing from one boring ass conversation to the next before schizophrenically altering their personality and plot line to be doing something that isn't better or worse than before and probably won't be given a resolution. The main arc and mystery could have ended it all mid-way in season 2, but they keep going...because. The forced introduction of painted-marionette characters to continuously drag the story along must exist in a collective blackout by the show's most ardent fans.
Check out my viewing habits. I watch nearly everything. Across cultures, eras, and languages I peek. I get that some people have very niche voices and that it can be nice just to find that someone does indeed have a voice. I get that some things are complex or difficult. I get that some things are goofy. I just don't get this. It feels bored with itself. Like someone with the resources to make a parody, or pay homage, or experiment in a bend or twist, just threw it all in a blender and poured it out on the table, dryly proclaiming, "eat." I liken it to the kind of "comedy" that comes from Comedy Bang Bang or Tim and Eric. "WE DID SOMETHING! ACCEPT US! NOT ALL COMEDY IS ABOUT LAUGHTER, DUH!" Okay, you complex, tortured souls you. So it goes not all drama has to feel particularly dramatic nor do all mysteries need to make you think, I guess.
It feels like when True Detective got undermined by its own popularity. Forcing more layers and conversations than were ever needed. It feels like if an X-Files subplot got particularly out of hand. It feels like the original college junior script for Fringe before it went through a 95% rewriting process. It feels like Wonderfalls in a universe where the word "charm" never existed. It's Carnivale without the mystery, style, or acting. It's an episode of Bate's Motel where it's 38 minutes of just Norman and Norma folding sheets and sweeping up the hotel before a slightly awkward conversation at dinner andthenohlookabloodstain cut to black. It's so goddamn boring I'm staring at a frozen frame of it because I had to capture the void and every time I look up it makes me feel even emptier. Now, go on, tell me that's Lynch's intent all along and now I'm finally starting to see the inherent brilliance and wisdom of his sad take on life. Or, let the conversation die like the show should have died in 1991, or whenever the middle of the second season aired.
loading replies
@dogg724 You don't get it at all. Not because it has overmuch profundity that you can't handle, but because you simply don't know how to approach surrealism. There is absolutely no point to the show. There's no point to art in general. Art is created through interpretation, it is and means whatever you, the interpreter thinks it does. Surrealism is a perfect microcosm of that concept, a perfect example that art is wholly and fundamentally subjective. All you have to do to enjoy and "understand" Twin Peaks is randomly ascribe any meaning you wish to it.
Review by dogg724
VIP3Another week, another unnecessary reboot of a fetishized show. A lot of time and effort is put into apologizing for "surrealist" works. When something seems bizarre or off-putting, it's really the symbol of [blank] that has kept the particular reviewer up for many sleepless nights and changes in meaning for them over years. It would be too simple, it is supposed, to only say the plot was weak and dialogue boring. To suggest camp as a lazy crutch to account for bad acting is to just miss the point! It's a flexible genre that not everyone tunes into for its ability to... make sense... or frame its alleged message in a way you particularly care to hear. ::huff:: Fine. There's some truth to the notion that one person's art is another's self-indulgent waste of time and resources. And in terms of "cultural impact," one must concede this is a "great" show that captured the momentum and fervor of its time and has carried such a special place that it's managed to reboot even if the notion of rebooting has smelled sour for longer than anyone cares to admit.
Whatever else I might figure out to say about this show as I carry on, I cannot get over how horrendously bored I am. One dimensional characters bouncing from one boring ass conversation to the next before schizophrenically altering their personality and plot line to be doing something that isn't better or worse than before and probably won't be given a resolution. The main arc and mystery could have ended it all mid-way in season 2, but they keep going...because. The forced introduction of painted-marionette characters to continuously drag the story along must exist in a collective blackout by the show's most ardent fans.
Check out my viewing habits. I watch nearly everything. Across cultures, eras, and languages I peek. I get that some people have very niche voices and that it can be nice just to find that someone does indeed have a voice. I get that some things are complex or difficult. I get that some things are goofy. I just don't get this. It feels bored with itself. Like someone with the resources to make a parody, or pay homage, or experiment in a bend or twist, just threw it all in a blender and poured it out on the table, dryly proclaiming, "eat." I liken it to the kind of "comedy" that comes from Comedy Bang Bang or Tim and Eric. "WE DID SOMETHING! ACCEPT US! NOT ALL COMEDY IS ABOUT LAUGHTER, DUH!" Okay, you complex, tortured souls you. So it goes not all drama has to feel particularly dramatic nor do all mysteries need to make you think, I guess.
It feels like when True Detective got undermined by its own popularity. Forcing more layers and conversations than were ever needed. It feels like if an X-Files subplot got particularly out of hand. It feels like the original college junior script for Fringe before it went through a 95% rewriting process. It feels like Wonderfalls in a universe where the word "charm" never existed. It's Carnivale without the mystery, style, or acting. It's an episode of Bate's Motel where it's 38 minutes of just Norman and Norma folding sheets and sweeping up the hotel before a slightly awkward conversation at dinner andthenohlookabloodstain cut to black. It's so goddamn boring I'm staring at a frozen frame of it because I had to capture the void and every time I look up it makes me feel even emptier. Now, go on, tell me that's Lynch's intent all along and now I'm finally starting to see the inherent brilliance and wisdom of his sad take on life. Or, let the conversation die like the show should have died in 1991, or whenever the middle of the second season aired.
loading replies
@dogg724 Listen, I'm not trying to get into an essay writing contest with you nor am I insulting you but it is very apparent that you just have a giant misunderstanding of what this show is trying to say and it's due to not being open to how it is saying things. You keep on saying it doesn't have coherent storytelling but I'm not sure what you mean by coherent. In terms of having a point that it is trying to get across it is absolutely coherent, in fact, every single minor detail in the show is working towards the same goal, but if you're just talking plot point to plot point then yes, you'd be correct, not everything is closed up in an envelope at the end, not every scene will be relevant to the main storyline, certain scenes just kind of happen and then fade away. But like I said you misunderstand why Lynch and Frost have decided to include these parts anyway.
"The claim is immediately false given the sheer amount of shows I watch and can see the point of that have all sorts of conflicting narrative structures and styles. I watch 250 shows a year. I can see the point of every single one of them besides Twin Peaks"
First off, no you don't watch 250 shows a year, you don't need to lie here. Secondly, numbers don't mean anything, there are plenty of people who watch dozens of shows and only understand half of them.
"What makes Twin Peaks special? Its sheer lack of coherence or point beyond self-indulgent screed."
It is coherent, it just takes a little bit of deeper thought to understand. This is like saying a surrealist painting has no meaning because it doesn't fit the image in your head of what it should look like.
For the acting bit, yes you did mention the acting was bad in the OP but whatever fine.
"No, I'm not going to imbue my own pick-your-own mystery on top of what doesn't exist there in the first place. I've already spoken to the idea that maybe it's just shitty and lazy writing. Maybe they're just "one-dimensional" because the mind conceiving them was. You're not asking yourself why you're compelled to make excuses."
This is exactly why you aren't enjoying it. You aren't being open to a different form of storytelling than what you're used to. How can you call it lazy and say something doesn't exist when you don't even try to understand the characters in the context of the story being told? Other people are clearly getting gold when they dig, you're just sitting there looking at the ground thinking "There's no gold there anyway so I won't dig."
... You babble for a bit trying to sound like you know more than you do and still misunderstanding the point about the characters in Twin Peaks being there not to be appealing characters but to serve the purpose of the story. I guess if you don't try to find the purpose you won't see what their place in it means though...
"You reference a handful of shows I rate the highest and think this accounts for all I've watched? What's the "argument" of Game of Thrones? What is Rick and Morty "preaching?" What are you even talking about?"
I mentioned these shows because your top rated shows generally give a good idea of what you want to see in a show. These shows are obviously very different types of shows as I explain.
"Twin Peaks isn't concerned with a lot of things well before you might bother searching for a "solution" or "argument." It isn't concerned with anything. That doesn't make it brilliant or special or worth watching. It's fucking around with a big budget."
Budget has little to do with anything. The point of what I was saying is that certain shows like the Wire or whatever are arguing about a proper solution to a perceived problem or flaw in the world. Twin Peaks and other shows like Lost or Boardwalk Empire are making statements about how the world works. Specifically Twin Peaks is talking about how the randomness of our world gives rise to both the best and the worst things in our lives.
"A proper actually intriguing mystery does this without pretending it can happen without a coherent narrative. Again, you think I'm not asking myself the right questions. I'm not inventing a story to supplement the lack of one. It gets you into a bored and dismissive state."
A proper mystery can't happen with a non-traditional narrative? seriously? I mean that's an opinion but it's clearly wrong. Even people who don't like Twin Peaks would disagree with that one. You don't need to supplement the story but you can take the cues given by the show to actually think about what the show is trying to say.
Basically all you have actually said here is "I don't get it. I shouldn't have to ask any questions. I shouldn't have to understand the plot of the show to judge the scenes and characters because their role in delivering a message is not the most important thing. I don't want to even try to understand this. I just want to be spoonfed everything and be lazy while rapid fire watching 200+ shows every year." I'm sorry if that sounds harsh but that's really all your argument boils down to.
Review by dogg724
VIP3Another week, another unnecessary reboot of a fetishized show. A lot of time and effort is put into apologizing for "surrealist" works. When something seems bizarre or off-putting, it's really the symbol of [blank] that has kept the particular reviewer up for many sleepless nights and changes in meaning for them over years. It would be too simple, it is supposed, to only say the plot was weak and dialogue boring. To suggest camp as a lazy crutch to account for bad acting is to just miss the point! It's a flexible genre that not everyone tunes into for its ability to... make sense... or frame its alleged message in a way you particularly care to hear. ::huff:: Fine. There's some truth to the notion that one person's art is another's self-indulgent waste of time and resources. And in terms of "cultural impact," one must concede this is a "great" show that captured the momentum and fervor of its time and has carried such a special place that it's managed to reboot even if the notion of rebooting has smelled sour for longer than anyone cares to admit.
Whatever else I might figure out to say about this show as I carry on, I cannot get over how horrendously bored I am. One dimensional characters bouncing from one boring ass conversation to the next before schizophrenically altering their personality and plot line to be doing something that isn't better or worse than before and probably won't be given a resolution. The main arc and mystery could have ended it all mid-way in season 2, but they keep going...because. The forced introduction of painted-marionette characters to continuously drag the story along must exist in a collective blackout by the show's most ardent fans.
Check out my viewing habits. I watch nearly everything. Across cultures, eras, and languages I peek. I get that some people have very niche voices and that it can be nice just to find that someone does indeed have a voice. I get that some things are complex or difficult. I get that some things are goofy. I just don't get this. It feels bored with itself. Like someone with the resources to make a parody, or pay homage, or experiment in a bend or twist, just threw it all in a blender and poured it out on the table, dryly proclaiming, "eat." I liken it to the kind of "comedy" that comes from Comedy Bang Bang or Tim and Eric. "WE DID SOMETHING! ACCEPT US! NOT ALL COMEDY IS ABOUT LAUGHTER, DUH!" Okay, you complex, tortured souls you. So it goes not all drama has to feel particularly dramatic nor do all mysteries need to make you think, I guess.
It feels like when True Detective got undermined by its own popularity. Forcing more layers and conversations than were ever needed. It feels like if an X-Files subplot got particularly out of hand. It feels like the original college junior script for Fringe before it went through a 95% rewriting process. It feels like Wonderfalls in a universe where the word "charm" never existed. It's Carnivale without the mystery, style, or acting. It's an episode of Bate's Motel where it's 38 minutes of just Norman and Norma folding sheets and sweeping up the hotel before a slightly awkward conversation at dinner andthenohlookabloodstain cut to black. It's so goddamn boring I'm staring at a frozen frame of it because I had to capture the void and every time I look up it makes me feel even emptier. Now, go on, tell me that's Lynch's intent all along and now I'm finally starting to see the inherent brilliance and wisdom of his sad take on life. Or, let the conversation die like the show should have died in 1991, or whenever the middle of the second season aired.
loading replies
@dogg724 I'm sorry but you are missing the point and attempting to judge all shows by the same metrics is what is probably holding you back from understanding why people love this show. Yes, for a lot of the characters there is poor acting but there's also really good acting, that's something you could really say about any show. You judge the characters as one dimensional but aren't asking yourself why certain characters are one dimensional. Cooper is the near-perfect good guy because he is supposed to within the context of the story. You are supposed to look at him and he is the best possible person to judge what should be done in various situations. Other characters are meant to show the opposite, others are meant to make the world more vivid and emphasize the unpredictability of it. There's this common misconception nowadays that characters have to be morally gray or have internal conflict in order to serve the purpose of the show and Twin Peaks doesn't buy into that.
I've checked your viewing habits and I honestly just don't think it's your show, not because it's bad or because you aren't able to comprehend it but just because it is not something you personally enjoy. Firefly, Game of Thrones, The Wire, Rick and Morty, etc. are shows that rely entirely on presenting the writing and characters to you in ultra-explained detail because they are concerned with directly preaching to the audience and making an argument. Twin Peaks and other shows are more concerned with presenting a truth about the world and aren't concerned about solutions or making arguments.
In terms of style and plot you're not asking yourself why they have seemingly unresolved or overly casual/calm bits that pepper a large portion of the show. It gets you into a state of not knowing what to expect and potentially expecting the exact opposite of what happens. The show has many ideas that it presents but the biggest is that there are random events that happen throughout all of our lives for no intended reason and these events bring both good moments and bad. How do you show the impact of unpredictable coincidences? You have a lot of them happen and make big and small impacts on various characters. How do you make horrible moments seem even more horrible? Have them come immediately after events that seem non-consequential. This difference from conventional storytelling and how strong the tone bleeds through are why people love the show.
You could call this a real cyberpunk anime.
A pretty abstract and philosophical story about identity and who we really are. It leaves the viewer questioning about more than just the series itself.Juicy detail: It is rumoured to be one of the series that had an influence on The Wachowski brothers for The Matrix story. However I don't know if this is ever confirmed or true, and it probably was a minor one compared to Ghost In The Shell. After all it was aired only 1 year before the release of The first Matrix movie.
It is not for everyone, but if you have an open mind and like more gloomy and philosophical stories, it is definitaly worth it.
loading replies
@lainfan Matrix was heavily influenced by ghost in shell. Wachowski even asked permission of creators of the anime to use/remake fragments.
The first half is fairly slow and makes it kinda hard to get into. The last two episodes are also optional because you can just watch kino EoE instead.
Edit: I'm not saying the last two eps are BAD but they are skippable imho and should be watched after EoE if you want to better understand why Anno actually received death threats over the original ending (EoE also helps you better understand the last two eps).
loading replies
@everythingsfine It doesn't replace them, it adds to them
The first half is fairly slow and makes it kinda hard to get into. The last two episodes are also optional because you can just watch kino EoE instead.
Edit: I'm not saying the last two eps are BAD but they are skippable imho and should be watched after EoE if you want to better understand why Anno actually received death threats over the original ending (EoE also helps you better understand the last two eps).
loading replies
@everythingsfine You should be beheaded for suggesting they shouldn't watch both the ending episodes and EoE. The last two episodes are the best of the whole show.
