Subject: Re: Second Guessing...
From: UnoJ
Date: 1992-09-14, 21:25
Newsgroups: alt.tv.twin-peaks

In article <15441@umd5.umd.edu> jblum@hamlet.umd.edu (Hi ho -- Kermit the Frog
here...) writes:
> >Second, the entire half-hour before Laura appears would be cut TO THE BONE.
> >The number of scenes could be counted on one hand.  The TV smashed -- Teresa
> >floating down the river -- Desmond and Stanley do the autopsy and find the
> >T -- Coop says he feels the killer will strike again -- BANG into the Twin
> >Peaks title sequence.  Keep the movie focused on what it's about: Laura
> >Palmer.  None of this confusion about Cliff Howard.  And no Philip 
> >Jeffries scene.  Maybe splice a couple of shots from the Gathering of Owls
> >in the convenience store into Laura's dream, to explain "garmonbozia", but
> >that's it.  All that stuff involving the FBI investigation really belonged
> >in a completely separate movie.  In fact, I'd love to see it explored to
> >that depth.  Just not here.

Now now.. I heartily disagree here. The first half (? I thought it was
a little longer than that) was brilliant. The Teresa Banks thread may
(put a thick underline on that "may") have shed little light on the
plot as whole, but it had nice little tidbits of humor and great
Lynchian filmmaking. And besides, I think it did advance the plot.
The ring for instance: Teresa had it; it disappears for a while
and then misteriously reappears under the Chalfont's trailer. 
The convenience room scene. Brr.... the whole thing was a cornucopia
of wonders for TP theorists and lovers alike.

> >
> >As for additions, I'd add a Meals On Wheels run, simply to introduce Harold
> >Smith and the Tremonds.  Otherwise they seem to just come out of nowhere.
> >At the end, I'd put in at least one scene to make it clear that Laura knows
> >she is going to die -- maybe she writes that last diary entry and mails it
> >to Harold.  Make the thematic shape of the movie clearer that way.

I disagree again. This is a part of the movie I would have shortened.
Lynch obviously knew that we were out there ready to scream foul
at every mistake he would have made (and who cares it they are little
and inconsequential anyway), therefore there were token inclusions
from Harold Smith to Peggy Lipton's mini appearance. I would have 
shortened some of Laura's scenes too. Especially the one in the
"pink room." Not because I'm a staunch puritan, mind you, but because
I got the point in five seconds. Yet it did last (including the scene
at the Roadhouse) in excess of ten minutes. 

> >
> >The end result -- a slimmer, more focused film that could almost stand on
> >its own.  Anyone else want to come forward with their "improvements" to
> >FWWM?
> >
You seem to have preferred the "let's really tie all those little
threads together" approach. The way it was was just fine for me
thank you. Sure, I would have made minor changes here and there,
but I was satisfied. It opened up another set of totally unexpected
questions and discussion possibilities. Just what the show at
its best was all about.

Concluding remarks: I have noticed that most people who griped
most vociferously about the movie had a whole set of expectations
before they entered the theater. I'm not trying to say that it's
a bad thing, I just trying to say that rarely have I liked a 
movie where I expected it to be exactly the way I envisioned it.
When I walked in I just had this in mind: "Mr. Lynch, wash the
TP world and mystery over me again...make me gasp in disbelief"
And for me, that happened many a time throughout both my viewings.


    UnoJ





</pre>
<hr><a target="right" href="/fwwm/index.txt">Return</a></body></html>