I stumbled upon your channel (and subscribed went on to binge your videos:)) through your superb analysis of "Twin Peaks: The Return". Just wanted to commend the masterstroke of using the TP FWWM theme in this video/story, kudos:)
May I hear your thoughts on Charlotte please? You did great analysis on Bob but what about her. What does she represent. Where was she walking to? And where was she going? Still searching for her meaning? Tbh I may be off the boil bit I thought she was going to do something as she lost him and him coming back gave her that recharged as in the film we never see her be that emotional till he hugged and kissed her j7st like to hear your thoughts on her please
I enjoyed the movie but it was too convoluted for me to keep up. Mamiya was hypnotized by the video? Thats why he Killed people? In the end Takabe became the new Mamiya because he watched the video just like him? Very confusing, maybe I'm just dumb
I rate Episide 18 as the best in The Return behind Episode 8. It exists in a detached state to the previous 17 episodes and raises more questions than answers. I like its road movie aspect, and the hybrid characteristics of Cooper - he's a mix of what we've seen before. Can't wait to go through the whole journey again, I'm usually very cynical of TV shows but the Return is the greatest I've seen - the anticipation of it, the experience of watching it every week and the onging review of it. Undoubteldy his Magnum Opus.
Great work man. The song in this movie is Perfidia a Mexican bolero from 1939 written by Alberto Domínguez, this version is by Cuban band leader Xavier Cugat made in 1940. Who would have thought that combining Asian mystique and Latin music would create this beautiful film…I like the analysis of the main themes in this video.
I can't relate to this movie more in my own country I'm constantly surrounded by friends and family but no one really... gets it i wish i had my own Charlotte not for any romantic feelings but just for someone who.. gets it. Its a perfect movie
You've summed that up so well, it's about watching the film not having sign posts to look here, where a character explains the exposition we see it in those scenes you showed us by watching the images and the way it was framed and filmed. Even their age difference is not icky but sweet. The opening frame of Scarlet's bottom is a nice scene without being exploitive, how can it be if it was directed by a woman? Sophia knocked this one out of the park despite the criticism of some, it can be as a bad as some say Sophia won an Oscar. Well, okay, but it was still a worthy win. Topped off at the end with a whisper and a cracking song from the Jesus and Mary Chain which makes me cry like a little kid with scuffed knee, it's worth coming back too again & again. Thank you for this Video essay UK, Male, 53 years old.
Man, I wouldn’t even recommend twin peaks for cinephiles, cause as soon as you watch twin peaks, it’s done. Whatever the fucking series you’re watching afterwards, it’s always ten steps below twin peaks. So you lose interest and lose your taste in series anymore. Damn you david lynch, you destroyed the pleasure I had for a short while with series.
Love Aphex twin, this movie was hard to get through though lol. I watched a little over two hours, and had to call it quits last night. The shot of them driving was the standout coolest thing for me. Once they made it onto the space station it got way too slow and drawn out
It's really not clear that she was. It's almost implied that she was trafficked, more than murdered - the clues suggest Ben's a sex trafficker. But the mystery was the point.
I love the observation about the shot from the sub being another move screen, another audience, watching a show. But I think the two separate layers of show matter. It's important at the end of the film that Steve doesn't watch his movie. He lived it. To me, the core of the film was about Steve trying to get his character back to that beloved, successful film hero of his early documentaries, having on some level forgotten he's not a character. Though I think what you're getting at is that he is a character, trying to capture himself on the film within the film, when what he needs to do is let the film do its thing, and stop forcing it. Which could be a filmmaker's philosophy of living life. In the end, I feel like the jaguar shark is The Art, the great, wild beast you encounter when you go deep into the depths. It's not yours. You don't control it, and you can't kill it, because you're out of dynamite. The best thing to do is just accept its grandeur, and hope it remembers you. That's the real show.
I think the movie was far more simple. Its about a girl who doesnt know what she is doing mainly because she never wanted to know herself. Prefering to dramatize in some stories of people somewhere else. That explains all the acting she does. Focused on the external and never trully being aware/awake. Thats for most people of course. The main character is basically the same but he also tries to do "the right thing". Ben is another creature, he is calm and collected only because he is "rich".
Tried to watch a Rohmer film once, kinda like watching paint dry. -Gene Hackman (Night Moves) P.S. Love Rohmer, his films always leave me in a weird relaxed trance. They also are like chips, once you try one you want to go for them all.
"Not giving your fans what they want" is also called "making a self-indulgent mess to obfuscate the fact you don't have a story and painted yourself into corners". The Return was a monument all right. A monument in wasted opportunities.
exactly... it had SO MUCH scattered potential, that I found myself screaming at the TV at times... it could have been really amazing, and honestly the story as it is currently is pretty amazing too, but sooo bloated with unnecessary moments, bad writing, and scattered plot lines that could have been presented in a much more effective even in a more Lynch-ian way. I'm so pissed off at how they wasted an amazing opportunity with S3.
Even though I can't know for a technical absolute fact, I am overwhelmingly convinced that he did it, for some good reasons and a seriously condemning one. The most overwhelming is that Ben himself said on multiple occasions that he did burn a green house down, and made multiple implications of the murder. He says "maybe you were too close to see it" if my memory is correct, and that he did it close to the house and two days after he visited the protagonists house. We know that there was no greenhouse that burnt down, and considering the watch, the stash of items he almost certainly takes away from every girl, the fact that he admitted to doing things like this habitually, the fact that the make up is next to the stash of stolen girls items and that makeup and cremation are so similar in Korean, the likelihood that he has self admitted characteristics of a psychopath, ( doesn't cry, doesn't appear to show empathy in any way), and his belief that he will never get caught, ( classic serial killer narcissism) all relative to his heavy implications around the burning of the "greenhouse", I would feel one hundred percent certain of killing him as well. That being said, I think the video misses the mark on the uncertainty around ben being the killer and the audience making a conclusion about it, though I do think it has a lot to do with uncertainty in general. The character is uncertain in general, he doesn't know what to say most of the time, he doesn't know how to comfort her, even though he clearly cares and has sympathy. There is a strong disconnect between the protagonist and the woman, a type of suffering born from his social confusion, I'm not sure what to make of the themes yet myself, but I thought this movie was incredible
I'd say it's more implied that he's a sex trafficker, than a murderer - the collection of jewellery, putting the makeup on another woman, the group of friends that take her out and groom her, almost like a clockwork routine. It's all classic trafficker behaviour. When he says he enjoys "burning greenhouses", I've interpreted it more that he enjoys destroying women so that they are a husk of themselves, and stripping them down to nothing - not killing them. But that's the genius - it's a mystery, and it's up for interpretation.
The film still packs quite a punch, visual and subtextual. And yet upon watching it again very recently for the first time in many years, I wondered if some of its' impact has been lost in all we've been privy to since '86. We can so easily forget chronology and proper placement of precedent and influence.
I finally now understand my fascination with the modern "Backrooms" videos. It's a similar environment. Brightly lit, but comfortably forbidding. Much like the Overlook Hotel.
