The Red Room in Review.
So I have spent the last week craming (or as close to what I can do to such given my responsibilities) the entire series of Twin Peaks, as well as Fire Walk with Me into my system. This was necessary viewing that had been long overdue. This came after having been leant "The Secret Diary of Laura Palmer" which I flew through rather fast.
I can say a few things, and I'm going to take extra care not to spoil anything for those who may intend on watching it or simply haven't seen all of it (which is, really, a necessity). I realize as I type this that making such a statement might in fact ruin what I intended to say. (ironic, no?)
I will post musings on pacing/feel... (sort of) While the series is excellent for what it is --- a t.v. series --- After having viewed Fire Walk with Me, I found myself wishing that the series had more closely resembeled the "prequel." Of course, this is not very possible, as those of you which have viewed both know (and to those that have seen the film only, I pitty you) Twin Peaks the television series does an excellent job of presenting to us a happy-go-lucky, gentle small town that is the last bastion of goodness in the world, and as the series progresses, tears that down to show the evil underbelly beneath, wherein the greatest horrors you can imagine can and do take place... this, of course, happens slowly, and in my opinion, doesn't happen until they reveal Laura's murderer. The after-effects of which leave the remainding half of the second season effectively as the main characters desperately trying to rebuild the goodness in the town of Twin Peaks...
Anyway, what makes this different than Fire Walk with Me is the fact that we are seeing the events in Twin Peaks through Laura's eyes... and I believe I can say this without ruining anything when I say that Laura Palmer is perhaps the only citizen in Twin Peaks who never has the option of truly living in that shroud of goodness, no matter how hard she so desperately tried, up until her death.
Of course, both the series and the film had flooded pop culture with symbols that stuck in the collective consciousness of the general populace for years, and in some cases, remain there. Obviously, the tag-line of the series "who killed Laura Palmer?" ranks up there with "Who Shot J.R.?" as far as television questions go.... After having skimmed through the working Screenplay for Fire Walk with Me as well, I find myself going over something in my head: Why is it that I find myself not liking all of it as much as I feel I should?
Good question.
And there's no concrete answer to it. Lord knows the second half of the 2nd series sputters downward. It's humourous, and not entirely without merit beyond, that, but the lack of budget and looming cancellation does something to the series... puts a mark on it. A stain. In a way, the series moved from being something truly original into a sick parody of a Soap Opera, that didn't work. To some extent the series always was a parody of such, but they kept it hidden. it was like a thin layer of wax paper beneath all the quality painter's canvas that was the sheer quality of the majority of the series, especially in the first 16 episodes or so.
Now, on the film... Many, many good moments in it, and it does an excellent job of keeping the necessary, grim mood... but, sadly, on some points, Lynch failed with his film, and I see why. It's a great film if you don't look at it within the context of the series, but if you know what's in the series, the inconsistences can easily mar the whole experience.
I feel like I've bashed it undeservedly, which is not what I set out to do. Instead, I set out to weigh both the good and bad.
Here's what I will say: Never have I seen such a glorious puzzle so properly put together. Lynch's other, similar works that I've seen being Lost Highway and Mullholland Dr. --- well, both of those are very abstract, and refuse to say anything straight out, which is fine, and those two films are gorgeous, but I find that it's inherent lack of ease in regards to logic is something of a detriment to it in regards to solidarity of a story..... which is funny, because those two films are inherently not about such a thing... and really, neither, completely, is the tale of Twin Peaks... (I have realized later, that this comes off sounding different than I mean it, so I will make this one attempt at clarifying: Lynch's later works are very much left up to the viewer's interpretation, whereas twin peaks has a more obvious train of logic to it, and perhaps one could say, is more propogandist, in the sense that certain things can not be denied to be truth due to the manner in which it is written, which is such a thing that is not nearly so prevalent in later Lynch films.)
However, in Twin Peaks, we have our bizarre symbolism, and it all fits, if you watch it long enough. There is a pattern, and everything means something, from the colours in the shot to the atmospheric score. They all cycle back towards something that you will learn... and, more importantly, the viewer can, without an exceedingly large amount of effort (though still some, i wouldn't suggest exposing slow people to this series) put all the pieces together. That is what makes it solid.
In the end? I aspire to make something like this.. Something full of the rich bizarre symbolism that really does mean something, if you're only willing to look hard enough, but that can at the same time, pull people by their hearts in a forward direction through the tale.
Of course, there's the part of me that says: How can I do something like that and still have it be original? It's impossible. You'll just end up with everyone saying "man, he ripped off twin peaks."
*sighs*
anyway, I've ranted far too much about this for today. heh, if only I could write actual stories this long all the time.
If only I could understand
The reason for my crying
If only I could stop this fear
Of dreaming that I'm dying.
I can say a few things, and I'm going to take extra care not to spoil anything for those who may intend on watching it or simply haven't seen all of it (which is, really, a necessity). I realize as I type this that making such a statement might in fact ruin what I intended to say. (ironic, no?)
I will post musings on pacing/feel... (sort of) While the series is excellent for what it is --- a t.v. series --- After having viewed Fire Walk with Me, I found myself wishing that the series had more closely resembeled the "prequel." Of course, this is not very possible, as those of you which have viewed both know (and to those that have seen the film only, I pitty you) Twin Peaks the television series does an excellent job of presenting to us a happy-go-lucky, gentle small town that is the last bastion of goodness in the world, and as the series progresses, tears that down to show the evil underbelly beneath, wherein the greatest horrors you can imagine can and do take place... this, of course, happens slowly, and in my opinion, doesn't happen until they reveal Laura's murderer. The after-effects of which leave the remainding half of the second season effectively as the main characters desperately trying to rebuild the goodness in the town of Twin Peaks...
Anyway, what makes this different than Fire Walk with Me is the fact that we are seeing the events in Twin Peaks through Laura's eyes... and I believe I can say this without ruining anything when I say that Laura Palmer is perhaps the only citizen in Twin Peaks who never has the option of truly living in that shroud of goodness, no matter how hard she so desperately tried, up until her death.
Of course, both the series and the film had flooded pop culture with symbols that stuck in the collective consciousness of the general populace for years, and in some cases, remain there. Obviously, the tag-line of the series "who killed Laura Palmer?" ranks up there with "Who Shot J.R.?" as far as television questions go.... After having skimmed through the working Screenplay for Fire Walk with Me as well, I find myself going over something in my head: Why is it that I find myself not liking all of it as much as I feel I should?
Good question.
And there's no concrete answer to it. Lord knows the second half of the 2nd series sputters downward. It's humourous, and not entirely without merit beyond, that, but the lack of budget and looming cancellation does something to the series... puts a mark on it. A stain. In a way, the series moved from being something truly original into a sick parody of a Soap Opera, that didn't work. To some extent the series always was a parody of such, but they kept it hidden. it was like a thin layer of wax paper beneath all the quality painter's canvas that was the sheer quality of the majority of the series, especially in the first 16 episodes or so.
Now, on the film... Many, many good moments in it, and it does an excellent job of keeping the necessary, grim mood... but, sadly, on some points, Lynch failed with his film, and I see why. It's a great film if you don't look at it within the context of the series, but if you know what's in the series, the inconsistences can easily mar the whole experience.
I feel like I've bashed it undeservedly, which is not what I set out to do. Instead, I set out to weigh both the good and bad.
Here's what I will say: Never have I seen such a glorious puzzle so properly put together. Lynch's other, similar works that I've seen being Lost Highway and Mullholland Dr. --- well, both of those are very abstract, and refuse to say anything straight out, which is fine, and those two films are gorgeous, but I find that it's inherent lack of ease in regards to logic is something of a detriment to it in regards to solidarity of a story..... which is funny, because those two films are inherently not about such a thing... and really, neither, completely, is the tale of Twin Peaks... (I have realized later, that this comes off sounding different than I mean it, so I will make this one attempt at clarifying: Lynch's later works are very much left up to the viewer's interpretation, whereas twin peaks has a more obvious train of logic to it, and perhaps one could say, is more propogandist, in the sense that certain things can not be denied to be truth due to the manner in which it is written, which is such a thing that is not nearly so prevalent in later Lynch films.)
However, in Twin Peaks, we have our bizarre symbolism, and it all fits, if you watch it long enough. There is a pattern, and everything means something, from the colours in the shot to the atmospheric score. They all cycle back towards something that you will learn... and, more importantly, the viewer can, without an exceedingly large amount of effort (though still some, i wouldn't suggest exposing slow people to this series) put all the pieces together. That is what makes it solid.
In the end? I aspire to make something like this.. Something full of the rich bizarre symbolism that really does mean something, if you're only willing to look hard enough, but that can at the same time, pull people by their hearts in a forward direction through the tale.
Of course, there's the part of me that says: How can I do something like that and still have it be original? It's impossible. You'll just end up with everyone saying "man, he ripped off twin peaks."
*sighs*
anyway, I've ranted far too much about this for today. heh, if only I could write actual stories this long all the time.
If only I could understand
The reason for my crying
If only I could stop this fear
Of dreaming that I'm dying.