Skip to main content

Heaven is a large and interesting place, sir.

Twin Peaks
2.4: Laura’s Secret Diary

Todd Holland, who would mostly go on to comedy work (including The Larry Sanders Show and short-lived Wonderfalls), starts this episode in a highly Lynchian manner, with a macro-shot pulling out of a ceiling tile. It’s a move that promises the unattainable, as rather too much in the way of humdrum plot mechanics will follow.


Four writers are credited on 2.4, suggesting some fairly extensive surgery and overhauling were required to get it in workable shape. As with the previous episode, overly soapy elements arise without a sufficient spin to allow them to operate successfully inPeaks land.


There’s the mistaken identity with Hank and Norma and the travel writer/restaurant critic (he’s actually the D.A.) There’s the return of Josie, whom Harry desperately wants to believe is innocent, the big lug (he also gets down to some hot and steamy dress-tearing rump with her).


There’s also the return of Catherine, buried in a ‘90s equivalent of yellow face make-up as Mr Tojamura. A character coming back in disguise is as potty as a dead character coming back as a twin sibling. If there was any fun to be had with this plotline it might get a vague pass, but its not only dubious in conception, the idea that no one would see through it in about five seconds flat is absurd. Josie’s associate Jonathan (Mak Takano), who has been staring at Coop over a newspaper for several weeks, finally gets to speak and have a fight with Hank, but it wasn’t worth the wait.


Harold Smith is as highly strung as previously, and there’s nothing in his scenes to make them sufferable. Not his desire to create “a sort of living novel” from those he knows, or Donna’s quest to get hold of Laura’s diary.


Lucy: He never exercises, he never washes his car, and he doesn’t even own a sports coat.

Andy and Lucy are provided a series of wank gags, as he is caught with a copy of Flesh World en route to muster up a sperm sample. Later Andy loses the bottle behind a chair in the waiting room. This material is well played, but in the service of a filler subplot.


Richard/Dick features too, of course, offering to pay for Lucy’s abortion. Lucy’s airhead comparison of the qualities of Andy versus Dick is mildly amusing (“He had lot of coats and keeps himself and his car in great shape. Most of his behaviour was asinine but at least he was different”), and Harry commiserates with Coop over failing to help Lucy out (“Well it was a good thought, but its like trying to fix those potholes on Highway Nine. First heavy rain and Thwweeettt”).


Jean Renault: I want this man to bring me the ransom.

The introduction of Jean Renault continues to pay dividends, however. He delivers a business proposition to Ben, in which the latter is put on the back foot and has little choice but to agree. This involves Coop delivering Audrey’s ransom. She’s still riding the tiger, and Holland shoots a rather good scene where she witnesses the demise of Emory Battis, on the end of one of Jacques’ bullets. Audrey is high, and Holland makes effective use of point of view. The scene also suggests that, as much Jacques is a ruthless rotter (he’s going to have Audrey killed, after all) he at least posses a certain villain’s code Emory, who has hit Audrey, lacks.


Codes of honour play a significant role throughout. Coop asks Harry for the services of a Bookhouse Boy for a dangerous mission; of course, as if anyone but Coop couldn’t guess, it’s Harry who shows up.


Leland Palmer: He killed my Laura. Have you ever experienced absolute loss?

In the aftermath of Leland’s arrest, much is concerned with reactions to the murder charge. There are some nice touches, most notably Dr Hayward expressing sympathy for his old friend. He comments sadly that parents should not have to bury their children. Coop rounds on him harshly, having none of it; “Do you approve of murder, Dr Hayward?


Clinton Sternwood: Just let me just say that when these frail shadows we inhabit now have quit the stage, we’ll meet and raise a glass again together, in Valhalla.
Leland Palmer: Would that it were so.

Ray Wise makes the most of his time in the spotlight, with Leland admitting to murder outright, but explaining how he was compelled to act, because, “deep down, every cell screams”. Judge Clinton Sternwood (Royal Dano) also comes out testifying  for Leland, saying he knows him to be a fine, decent man and a capable attorney.


Western legend Dano is a quirky presence, and the judge is treated as a plum guest star part, given interactions with all the main regulars. He doesn’t really blend in as a Peakscharacter, though, more the type you’d find in a straight soap or drama. He does have a suitably irreverent tone, however (“Who do you have to grease to get some coffee round here?”)


Agent Cooper: Heaven is a large and interesting place, sir.

Coop repeats his affection for the town to the judge, comparing Twin Peaks to heaven, despite the “arson, multiple homicides and the attempt on the life of a federal agent”. Harry’s promise “You two should have a lot in common” isn’t really lived up to, however (although there is a line or two in the next episode explaining this).


2.4 also appears to be a bit of a dead end for investigations; Hawk reports that no one called Robertson ever lived next door to the Palmers, and there’s still no sign of Gerrard (although Andy bought a pair of his boots from him). This is a middling episode of Twin Peaks, its sobriety indicative of the direction the show shouldn’t be headed. Perhaps the best that can be said of Laura's Secret Diary is the latter part is set on an atmospherically stormy night.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

Something something trident.

Aquaman (2018)
(SPOILERS) If Aquaman has a problem – although it actually has two – it’s the problem of the bloated blockbuster. There's just too much of it. And the more-more-more element eventual becomes wearing, even when most of that more-more-more is, on a scene-by-scene basis, terrifically executed. If there's one thing this movie proves above all else, it's that you can let director James Wan loose in any given sandpit and he’ll make an above-and-beyond castle out of it. Aquaman isn't a classic, but it isn’t for want of his trying.

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

You look like an angry lizard!

Bohemian Rhapsody (2018)
(SPOILERS) I can quite see a Queen fan begrudging this latest musical biopic for failing to adhere to the facts of their illustrious career – but then, what biopic does steer a straight and true course? – making it ironic that they're the main fuel for Bohemian Rhapsody's box office success. Most other criticisms – and they're legitimate, on the whole – fall away in the face of a hugely charismatic star turn from Rami Malek as the band's frontman. He's the difference between a standard-issue, episodic, join-the-dots narrative and one that occasionally touches greatness, and most importantly, carries emotional heft.

The wolves are running. Perhaps you would do something to stop their bite?

The Box of Delights (1984)
If you were at a formative age when it was first broadcast, a festive viewing of The Box of Delights may well have become an annual ritual. The BBC adaptation of John Masefield’s 1935 novel is perhaps the ultimate cosy yuletide treat. On a TV screen, at any rate. To an extent, this is exactly the kind of unashamedly middle class-orientated bread-and-butter period production the corporation now thinks twice about; ever so posh kids having jolly adventures in a nostalgic netherworld of Interwar Britannia. Fortunately, there’s more to it than that. There is something genuinely evocative about Box’s mythic landscape, a place where dream and reality and time and place are unfixed and where Christmas is guaranteed a blanket of thick snow. Key to this is the atmosphere instilled by director Renny Rye. Most BBC fantasy fare doe not age well but The Box of Delights is blessed with a sinister-yet-familiar charm, such that even the creakier production decisions may be vi…

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …

I take Quaaludes 10-15 times a day for my "back pain", Adderall to stay focused, Xanax to take the edge off, part to mellow me out, cocaine to wake me back up again, and morphine... Well, because it's awesome.

The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)
Along with Pain & Gain and The Great Gatsby, The Wolf of Wall Street might be viewed as the completion of a loose 2013 trilogy on the subject of success and excess; the American Dream gone awry. It’s the superior picture to its fellows, by turns enthralling, absurd, outrageous and hilarious. This is the fieriest, most deliriously vibrant picture from the director since the millennium turned. Nevertheless, stood in the company of Goodfellas, the Martin Scorsese film from which The Wolf of Wall Street consciously takes many of its cues, it is found wanting.

I was vaguely familiar with the title, not because I knew much about Jordan Belfort but because the script had been in development for such a long time (Ridley Scott was attached at one time). So part of the pleasure of the film is discovering how widely the story diverges from the Wall Street template. “The Wolf of Wall Street” suggests one who towers over the city like a behemoth, rather than a guy …

I am so sick of Scotland!

Outlaw/King (2018)
(SPOILERS) Proof that it isn't enough just to want to make a historical epic, you have to have some level of vision for it as well. Say what you like about Mel's Braveheart – and it isn't a very good film – it's got sensibility in spades. He knew what he was setting out to achieve, and the audience duly responded. What does David Mackenzie want from Outlaw/King (it's shown with a forward slash on the titles, so I'm going with it)? Ostensibly, and unsurprisingly, to restore the stature of Robert the Bruce after it was rather tarnished by Braveheart, but he has singularly failed to do so. More than that, it isn’t an "idea", something you can recognise or get behind even if you don’t care about the guy. You’ll never forget Mel's Wallace, for better or worse, but the most singular aspect of Chris Pine's Bruce hasn’t been his rousing speeches or heroic valour. No, it's been his kingly winky.

Mountains are old, but they're still green.

Roma (2018)
(SPOILERS) Roma is a critics' darling and a shoe-in for Best Foreign Film Oscar, with the potential to take the big prize to boot, but it left me profoundly indifferent, its elusive majesty remaining determinedly out of reach. Perhaps that's down to generally spurning autobiographical nostalgia fests – complete with 65mm widescreen black and white, so it's quite clear to viewers that the director’s childhood reverie equates to the classics of old – or maybe the elliptical characterisation just didn't grab me, but Alfonso Cuarón's latest amounts to little more than a sliver of substance beneath all that style.