Skip to main content

He is changing the pattern of the game board.

Twin Peaks
2.19: Variations on Relations

As if to underline the approaching end game, Mark Frost has his first writing credit since the demise of Leland Palmer. Jonathan Sanger, a TV journeyman delivering his sole Twin Peaksepisode, aids Frost’s cause, and includes a few attention-grabbing touches (most notably the cowled figure whose robes frame the image, MTV-style).


Heavy Metal Dude: Hey man, your story’s cool but you promised me beer.

This is the one with the human chess piece, memorably portrayed by Ted Raimi (well, he’s entombed in a papier mâchépawn and then shot with an arrow by Windom Earle). It’s interest to see Leo, monosyllabic at best, crumbled to the state of one with moral qualms. He baulks at the intended murder of Ted, resulting in some nasty electro-shocks.


Windom Earle: Once upon a time, there was a place of great goodness called the White Lodge. Gentle fawns gambolled here, amid happy laughing spirits. The sounds of innocence and joy filled the air. And when it rained, it rained sweet nectar that infused one’s heart with a desire to live life in truth and beauty. Generally speaking, a ghastly place, reeking of virtue’s sour smell.

Earle’s description of the White Lodge, complete with undisguised disdain for its saccharine excesses, is memorable and very funny. He’s a moustache-twirling rotter in scenes like these, and really lifts the series. As such, his description of the Black Lodge, an opposite place of almost unimaginable power, isn’t nearly as arresting since he’s in earnest.


Special Agent Cooper: Harry, someone’s been here already.

Coop, back in his suit where he belongs, is showing a bit of deductive acumen in between mooning over Annie (he asks her to accompany him on a nature study, like a proper boy scout, tingles talking to her, and takes her out on a lake accompanied by much quacking). He learns of the Shelly poem from Shelly (one he wrote to Caroline) and notes that Earle takes “a perverse pride insinuating himself into innocent lives”.


Special Agent Cooper: He is changing the pattern of the game board.

He also persuades Major Briggs to give them the lowdown on what he knows of Earle from his Project Bluebook days, which Briggs consents to, having mulled the moral judgements involved. The episode concludes with Earle forsaking the back and forth of the chess game when he delivers the body of Raimi and announces by note “Next time it will be someone you know.” This is good stuff, and keeps the episode ticking along.


Special Agent Cooper: It feels like someone’s taken a crowbar to my heart.

Less engrossing is the love chat between Coop and Billy Zane (he’s a cool dude). Billy Zane announces, “Love is hell” whereas Coop is more optimistic (“The Hindus say love is a ladder to heaven”).


The riveting prospect of a Miss Twin Peaks contest is reving up, of course. Which involves Lana wanting the Mayor to fix it for her and Bobby trying to persuade Shelly to enter (“Beautiful people get everything they want”). Bobby’s using and manipulation comes back to bite him, however, since Gordon Cole is still shouting about the place:


Gordon Cole: This world of Twin Peaks seems to be filled with beautiful women.

No shit, David. I wonder how that came to be?


Gordon Cole: You’re witnessing a front three quarter view of two adults sharing a tender moment… Take another look sonny; it’s going to happen again.

Yes, this is the (much-deserved) snubbing of feckless Bobby when before his eyes Cole kisses Shelly not once but twice ("two adults sharing a tender moment"). Yeah, I know, Lynch is twice her age, but it’s adorable isn’t it? What really makes these scenes is how funny Amick seems to genuinely find the whole deal (or she’s just a really great actress, which I’m not rejecting out of hand).


Andy: There are also white wines and sparkling wines.

Dick Tremayne is also on good form, hosting a wine tasting. These sorts of plots are scraping the barrel really, but when you’ve got someone like Buchanan wringing every ounce of comedic nuance from of them, they tend to work despite themselves. There’s his oozing smarm towards Lana but best of all his indignant  SPIT IT OUT!” to Andy (who drinks his wine, wisely, anyway).


Mike: Do you have any idea what a combination of sexual maturity and superhuman strength can result in?

Meanwhile, Pete’s composing poetry to departed Josie, Donna’s threatening to study overseas unless her mother tells the truth about Ben, and Mike is whispering the secret of his tryst with Nadine to Bobby. And Ben has come up with the theme for Miss Twin Peaks (“How to save our forests”, no self interest there) and agreed to pay Dick’s nasal expenses.


The Catherine/Andrew plot involving the puzzle box is actually quite okay as obvious intrigue goes, and about the first time their storyline has become engaging (no fault of the actors). As shown in the US, this was the pre-penultimate episode (the last was shown as a double). I recall finding the Earle plot just as engrossing as the first season on initial viewing. Admittedly, it isn’t. But it’s also the case that the show was far from having run out of juice at this point. It just needed more care and understanding directed its way.





Comments

  1. Since the begin of the mail business, each mailer out there has had one shared objective - to better convey. We've seen a great deal of innovations go back and forth, all helping us achieve this objective. Yet, through all that time, one objective has dependably escaped us: to efficiently print static and variable information, in one go, in fantastic shading. Ending for nectar

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Exit bear, pursued by an actor.

Paddington 2 (2017)
(SPOILERS) Paddington 2 is every bit as upbeat and well-meaning as its predecessor. It also has more money thrown at it, a much better villain (an infinitely better villain) and, in terms of plotting, is more developed, offering greater variety and a more satisfying structure. Additionally, crucially, it succeeds in offering continued emotional heft and heart to the Peruvian bear’s further adventures. It isn’t, however, quite as funny.

Even suggesting such a thing sounds curmudgeonly, given the universal applause greeting the movie, but I say that having revisited the original a couple of days prior and found myself enjoying it even more than on first viewing. Writer-director Paul King and co-writer Simon Farnaby introduce a highly impressive array of set-ups with huge potential to milk their absurdity to comic ends, but don’t so much squander as frequently leave them undertapped.

Paddington’s succession of odd jobs don’t quite escalate as uproariously as they migh…

An initiative test. How simply marvellous!

You Must Be Joking! (1965)
A time before a Michael Winner film was a de facto cinematic blot on the landscape is now scarcely conceivable. His output, post- (or thereabouts) Death Wish (“a pleasant romp”) is so roundly derided that it’s easy to forget that the once-and-only dining columnist and raconteur was once a bright (well…) young thing of the ‘60s, riding the wave of excitement (most likely highly cynically) and innovation in British cinema. His best-known efforts from this period are a series of movies with Oliver Reed – including the one with the elephant – and tend to represent the director in his pleasant romp period, before he attacked genres with all the precision and artistic integrity of a blunt penknife. You Must Be Joking! comes from that era, its director’s ninth feature, straddling the gap between Ealing and the Swinging ‘60s; coarser, cruder comedies would soon become the order of the day, the mild ribaldry of Carry On pitching into bawdy flesh-fests. You Must Be Joki…

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…

I added sixty on, and now you’re a genius.

The Avengers 4.3: The Master Minds
The Master Minds hitches its wagon to the not uncommon Avengers trope of dark deeds done under the veil of night. We previously encountered it in The Town of No Return, but Robert Banks Stewart (best known for Bergerac, but best known genre-wise for his two Tom Baker Doctor Who stories; likewise, he also penned only two teleplays for The Avengers) makes this episode more distinctive, with its mind control and spycraft, while Peter Graham Scott, in his third contribution to the show on the trot, pulls out all the stops, particularly with a highly creative climactic fight sequence that avoids the usual issue of overly-evident stunt doubles.

Kroll couldn’t tell the difference between you and me and half an acre of dandelion and burdock.

Doctor Who The Power of Kroll
All baloney? Certainly, The Power of Kroll was and is oft-cited as one of the worst Doctor Who stories evah, which is probably why there’s now a converse apologia that it isn’t that bad at all, actually, to the extent that a cult of Kroll has grown around it, bathing in its badness, Plan 9 from Outer Space-like. Both the 1998 DWM and 2003 Outpost Gallifrey story polls, way back before there was nu-Who to mess with the purity of the process, had it pegged at 145th out of 160-ish (the exact number depending on which other extraneous inclusions were allowed), which isn’t quite the pits but not far off. Far from being an exemplar of all that’s wrong with the much-maligned Graham Williams era, though, the story stands out because it effectively shuns many of its key ingredients. Albeit, the most notable exception to this proved the biggest stick to beat it with: never more variable production values.

So, you want to go overseas. Kill some Nazis.

Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)
(SPOILERS) I suppose you have to give Kevin Feige credit for turning the least-likely-to-succeed-in-view-of-America’s-standing-with-the-rest-of-the-world superhero into one of Marvel’s biggest success stories, but I tend to regard Steve Rogers and his alter ego as something of a damp squib who got lucky. Lucky in that his first sequel threw him into a conspiracy plotline that effectively played off his unwavering and unpalatable nobility and lucky in that his second had him butting heads with Tony Stark and a supporting selection of superheroes. But coming off the starting block, Captain America: The First Avenger is as below par as pre-transformation Steve himself, and I’m always baffled when it turns up in best of Marvel Cinematic Universe lists. The best I can say for it is that Joe Johnston’s movie offers a mildly engaging opening section and the occasional facility for sharp humour. For the most part, though, it’s as bland and impersonal as…

Farewell, dear shithead, farewell.

Highlander II: The Quickening (1991)
(SPOILERS) I saw Highlander II: The Quickening at the cinema. Yes, I actually paid money to see one of the worst mainstream sequels ever on the big screen. I didn’t bother investigating the Director’s Cut until now, since the movie struck me as entirely unsalvageable. I was sufficiently disenchanted with all things Highlander that I skipped the TV series and slipshod sequels, eventually catching Christopher Lambert’s last appearance as Connor MacLeod in Highlander: End Game by accident rather than design. But Highlander II’s on YouTube, and the quality is decent, so maybe the Director’s Cut improve matters and is worth a reappraisal? Not really. It’s still a fundamentally, mystifyingly botched retcon enabling the further adventures of MacLeod, just not quite as transparently shredded in the editing room.

In a way, that’s good, as there can be no real defence that the fault lies elsewhere. What was Russell Mulcahy thinking? What was anyone thinking? Th…

He mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.

Darkest Hour (2017)
(SPOILERS) Watching Joe Wright’s return to the rarefied plane of prestige – and heritage to boot – filmmaking following the execrable folly of the panned Pan, I was struck by the difference an engaged director, one who cares about his characters, makes to material. Only last week, Ridley Scott’s serviceable All the Money in the World made for a pointed illustration of strong material in the hands of someone with no such investment, unless they’re androids. Wright’s dedication to a relatable Winston Churchill ensures that, for the first hour-plus, Darkest Hour is a first-rate affair, a piece of myth-making that barely puts a foot wrong. It has that much in common with Wright’s earlier Word War II tale, Atonement. But then, like Atonement, it comes unstuck.

So the house is falling apart and the vineyard makes undrinkable wine. Excellent.

A Good Year (2006)
(SPOILERS) I oughtn’t really to like A Good Year. And, kind of, I don’t. But I kind of do too. Despite entirely floundering on a number of levels that should entirely incapacitate it on the starting line, it’s probably the most likeable, personable movie Ridley Scott has made in the past two decades. Which doesn’t make it very good, but it’s very evident he actually had something invested in what he was making for a change.

I apologise for Oslo's low murder rate.

The Snowman (2017)
(SPOILERS) Maybe Morton Tyldum made Jo Nesbø adaptations look deceptively easy with Headhunters, although Tyldum hasn’t show such facility with material since, so maybe Nesbø simply suits someone with hackier sensibilities than Tomas Alfredson. It’s a long way down from the classy intrigue of John Le Carré to the serial killer clichés of The Snowman, and I’m inclined to think that, even if Alfredson had managed to film that 15% of the screenplay he says went awry, this wouldn’t have been all that great.