Skip to main content

When two separate events occur simultaneously pertaining to the same object of inquiry we must always pay strict attention.

Twin Peaks
1.5: The One-Armed Man

With the waves left in Albert’s wake subsiding (Gordon Cole, like Albert, is first encountered on the phone, and Coop apologises to Truman over the trouble the insulting forensics expert has caused; ”Harry, the last thing I want you to worry about while I’m here is some city slicker I brought into your town relieving himself upstream”), the series steps down a register for the first time. This is a less essential episode than those previously, concentrating on establishing on-going character and plot interactions at the expense of the strange and unusual. As such, it sets the tone for the rest of this short first season.


The first of 10 episodes penned by Robert Engels (who would co-script Fire Walk with Me with Lynch, and then reunite with him for On the Air), this also sees the first “star” director on the show in the form of Tim Hunter. Hunter is a director (like Michael Lehman) who hit the ground running but whose subsequent career has rather disappointed. River’s Edge, a twisted teenage murder yarn that announced Kean Reeves’ career and contributed, with Blue Velvet, to the second coming of Dennis Hopper, may well have attracted Lynch’s attention due to the latter’s crazed turn with a blow up doll. Or it could just have been recognition of kinship with the atmosphere of queasy unease and decay in a small town setting.


Since then, Hunter has made a go of it as (mostly) a TV gun for hire, marking out territory in projects such as Eerie, Indiana, Carnivale, Mad Men and Hannibal. One might see him as leading the charge (or disenchantment) of directors turning to TV. Even before his Twin Peaks gigs, he was calling the shots on episodes of Falcon Crest and Beverly Hills 90210.  He takes to Twin Peaks like a duck to water.


Mark Frost appears to be keeping his eye mostly on teasing out enough plot ammunition to ensure the series keeps up a head of steam, which is why – encounters with llamas and intuitive discourses aside – this episode goes light on the peculiar. Mostly, we encounter further elaborations on characters’ involvement in no-good activities.


There’s Benjamin Horne, whom we knew was plotting the demise of the mill but didn’t realise he was entangled with Leo Johnson (he shows up while Leo is burying Bernard). He’s clearly capable of – at least – ordering unspeakable acts. This positions him even more as a suspect, since he had the means to procure Laura and Ronette (employing them at his department store perfume counter) and ready access to the drugs smuggled by Leo and Jacques. On the lighter side, he laughs at a joke for which we’ll have to wait another week to hear the punchline (“No, I don’t know what you get when you cross a Norwegian and a Swede”).


More of a surprise is the reveal that pouting princess Josie is also in with the villains. The extent of this will be made clear next episode, but for now it’s enough to find out that newly released Hank is known to her. Hunter goes nuts with this (the final scene in the episode), shooting Josie from alarming Dutch angles as she reads his letter. 


Chris Mulkey has made a career out of a rather untrustworthy face, but Hank, with his attempts to get back into Norma’s good books and role as heavy for hire, isn’t the most interesting of roles.


Agent Cooper: Is it safe to say she came to you because she was having problems of a sexual nature?
Dr Jacoby: Agent Cooper, the problems of our entire society are of a sexual nature.

In contrast, Russ Tamblyn continues to steal scenes as Dr Jacoby. With his two-tone tinted glasses and sleight of hand with golf balls, Tamblyn is constantly interesting to watch. He gets a meaty scene with Cooper, in which the FBI man unsuccessfully fishes for any information he can get while the latter cites doctor-patient confidentiality (“Laura had see-crets”). They also compare notes on Tibet and ancient Hawaiians. It’s unfortunate that during Jacoby’s next couple of episodes an entirely banal subplot is introduced in which he Madeline poses as Laura.


The One-Armed Man: I was on the road from Memphis selling pharmaceuticals to… some place.

The other face in the frame is Al Strobel’s One Armed Man (last name Gerard; a Fugitivereference). If this is much more grounded than Mike’s first appearance (in Coop’s dream), there’s still sufficient peculiarity to go round. Mike (middle name Michael) is staying in the Orwellian Room 101 at the Timber Falls motel. He has no record, no warrants against him, but he obliquely fits the face of the man from Coop’s dream. This is a good scene for undercutting expectations, as Mike has no (apparent) recollection of the person Coop thinks he is, and even leading clues, such as his tattoo, do not pay off as expected (he had his tattoo removed; “It said… mom!” at which Mike starts crying).


Audrey: You ever heard of One Eyed Jacks?
Donna: Isn’t that the western with Marlon Brando?

Audrey continues to be by far the most interesting and watchable of the show’s bright young things. Smoking in the school locker room, dreaming of an FBI agent whisking her away from it all, her investigative skills are exceeded only by Coop’s and even that’s without law enforcement agencies at her beck and call. There’s an overt parallel here, with Donna comparing her to Sherlock Holmes (“What else have you figured out, Sherlock?”) just as Harry did Coop.  She also proves to be an excellent actor, feigning repentance to pater (“Please let me be your daughter again”) in order to go undercover at the department store.


Agent Cooper: In the grand design, women were drawn from a different set of blueprints.
Sheriff Truman: Amen to that.
Hawk: Amen.

While all of this is likeably played, it’s evident that the true Peaksy-ness only kicks in when Coop is involved. In particular, scenes with Bobby and Shelly and Donna and James (“This is about us. We have to do this for us not her”) feel like filler, waiting for something more interesting to happen.


The Andy-Lucy subplots are in full effect now and they’re filler of a different kind; quirky, but more irritating than charming. I do like Lucy’s response to Harry’s “What’s going on?”, leading to her summarise the latest events in Invitation to Love. Andy is more centre stage than usual, puzzling over why Lucy isn’t talking to him, which leads to a curiously over-masculine appraisal of Men are from Mars, Women are from Venusproportions from Coop (Harry and Hawk’s has the complementary hue of hearty sexism). It seems less nuanced and equivocal to the Coop we expect.


Sheriff Truman: Ever married, Coop?
Agent Cooper: No. I knew someone once who helped me understand commitment, responsibility and the risks. Who taught me the pain of a broken heart.

However, it leads to a marvellously unreserved recollection from Coop on lost love, and, surprisingly, a hilarious undercutting of the Wise Native American trope I’ve complained that Hawk represents.


Hawk: One woman can make you fly like an eagle. Another can give you the strength of a lion. But only one in the cycle of life can fill your heart with wonder and the wisdom that you have known a singular joy. (pause) I wrote that for my girlfriend.

Surprisingly, the thunderously thick Andy is an excellent sketch artist. Unsurprisingly, he’s a fecking eejit when it comes to stealth raids (his gun goes off, leading to a visit to the shooting range). Sarah Palmer’s vision in the living room of her daughter’s bedroom is clarified as not being a bad edit, as that’s exactly where was while she was in the living room (“I saw him, at the foot of Laura’s bed. He looked like an animal”).


It’s also notable here that here lies another stage in Leland’s disintegration. No longer is he breaking down at a moment’s notice. He has turned rather dark; dishevelled, unshaven, dismissive of Sarah. Even if Wise didn’t know it, there are more than enough pointers here to his character’s eventual reveal, the inner burden of terrible deeds breaking the surface


Agent Cooper: This is the man I saw in my dream. I had an intuition that my dream and Sarah Palmer’s vision were connected.

While there are no fractured realities in this episode, there is further embedding of Coop’s assessment of a holistic universe. Bob is established as one and the same person in both his and Sarah’s visions. He didn’t want to be present at the sketching as, “I’m a strong sender” (Andy’s picture isn’t perfect; “The eyes are a bit closer together”). Coop’s also a crack shot. At the target range Hawk is surprised that the FBI guy only had four hits, to which he replies, nonchalantly “Oh, I put four through each eye then one through each nostril”.


Agent Cooper: Harry, in the heat of the investigative pursuit, the shortest distance between two points is not necessarily a straight line.

Harry accepts all this talk of dreams, although he’s back to his uncertain status after last week’s talk of evil in the woods (“Cooper, I’d think you be afraid to go to sleep at night”). In another example of the kind of recycling that would make Douglas Adams proud, the European pilot’s discussion of synchronicity is regurgitated (“When two separate events occur simultaneously pertaining to the same object of inquiry we must always pay strict attention”). Which is good, as it’s a wonderful Cooperism.


Agent Cooper: The bird that attacked Laura Palmer is a client of this office.

The most fun to be had here is with the visit to veterinary clinic (“Aid to the Beast Incarnate”), in pursuit of Coop’s theory (Laura’s body had bird bites on it, while Mike professes to know a vet named Bob Lydecker). The obvious question is why Coop didn’t just take a look at the Bob Lydecker lying in a coma in the hospital, rather than asking the receptionist at the clinic if sketched Bob is her boss.


Nevertheless, there’s some neat stitching together of clues here. And there’s also Coop and Harry’s encounter with a llama (that would be Tibet again, sort of). After much searching of files (they’re organised alphabetically by the name of the pet), it’s discovered that the bird in question is Waldo, a mynah bird owned by one Jacques Renault. Watching this again, one of the most surprising aspects is how cogently and concisely the disparate elements are brought together. The show isn’t guilty of the kind of free-for-all time wasting of Lost, even though that show takes many of its cues from Twin Peaks. On the subject of birds, there’s a nice big close up an owl.


1.5 is more a solid episode than a top-to-bottom class act. It’s very much more the eccentric procedural with mild intrigue than truly offbeat. Still, there are obligatory food references, so all is still right in the world (“We’re going to need some more coffee”). Josie makes Pete a sandwich with mayo, while Dr Hayward cannot contain his disgust at the latest ready meals (“Donna, who the heck ever heard of diet lasagne?”)




They fucking drown them in it in that shit.


Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

Do you know that the leading cause of death for beavers is falling trees?

The Interpreter (2005) Sydney Pollack’s final film returns to the conspiracy genre that served him well in both the 1970s ( Three Days of the Condor ) and the 1990s ( The Firm ). It also marks a return to Africa, but in a decidedly less romantic fashion than his 1985 Oscar winner. Unfortunately the result is a tepid, clichéd affair in which only the technical flourishes of its director have any merit. The film’s main claim to fame is that Universal received permission to film inside the United Nations headquarters. Accordingly, Pollack is predictably unquestioning in its admiration and respect for the organisation. It is no doubt also the reason that liberal crusader Sean Penn attached himself to what is otherwise a highly generic and non-Penn type of role. When it comes down to it, the argument rehearsed here of diplomacy over violent resolution is as banal as they come. That the UN is infallible moral arbiter of this process is never in any doubt. The cynicism