Twin Peaks Usenet Archive

Subject: Re: Guesses and Revelations
From: (Mark Crovella)
Date: 1990-04-27, 11:26

In article (Malachi Orion Kelerison) writes:
> >
> >   I couldn't stand the direction in that last episode, not only isn't it up
> >to Lynch, but it wasn't up to whoever directed Episode 1. 

I agree 100%.  This episode bore very little evidence of
Lynch's hand (the napkin-dispenser-as-coffin excluded.) 
In retrospect, however, this episode moved the plot along,
introducing Madelein, setting the dream out as a code,
introducing the Bookhouse Gang, and setting up a Cooper
permanent residence in TP. ABC is walking a tightrope here,
because, as others have pointed out, the series is slipping
in the ratings.  ABC is trying to keep the viewers who were
just watching "Father Dowling" from losing interest in TP.
So this episode was longer on "substance" for those viewers
who are watching TP primarily as a murder mystery.

I just can't imagine the sustained quirkiness and freshness of
Lynch's vision lasting on network TV.  Too many compromising
factors conspire: the difficulty of the longer term
creativity, week after week;  the conservatism of the
networks;  and the shallow attention span of the majority of
the viewership.  As someone noted here, ABC is afraid the
dream scene went too far ... a disappointing thought.

I hope I'm wrong.  Thursday's Wall St. Journal had an
article about (Mark?) Igor, the new VP at ABC who courted
Lynch.  The encouraging observation was that he has been
able to sign other, non-traditional talents as a result of
the reputation he gained in giving Lynch so much freedom.

Mark Crovella
Dept of Computer Science, University of Rochester, Rochester NY 14627   
UUCP: {decvax,rutgers}!rochester!crovella      ARPA:
-- Mark Crovella, Dept of Computer Science, University of Rochester, Rochester NY 14627 (716) 275-1448 UUCP: {decvax,rutgers}!rochester!crovella ARPA: