Skip to main content

Is that a cherry pie?

Twin Peaks
3.11: There’s fire where you are going.

(SPOILERS) A damn good episode. Perhaps the lesser part of it is the still great FBI plotline, but that’s only because – despite having the most overtly weird elements – it is more linear and less inimitable than the other claims to fame: Bobby and the shooting incident, and Dougie-Dale’s encounter with the Mitchum Brothers. Yes, it’s taken me a while, but I’ve finally come around to silver fox Bobby. Or should that be Becky’s pops.


What impressed me most about this sequence was the way it develops – escalated would be the wrong word. You think the scene is about one thing but then it becomes about something else, and then it becomes about something else entirely. During the build-up to this we’ve had the ominous, Blue Velvet-esque scene in which a boy playing ball sights Miriam crawling bloodied from the woods. Followed by Shelly riding the bonnet of her car until Becky throws her off. 


There’s something very matter-of-fact procedural about the lengths Lynch goes to show Maggie at the switchboard being called (courtesy of dear old Carl Rodd) and Bobby getting back to his ex – it’s Lynch most noticeable aesthetic in this third season, slowing everything right down, but here lending an air of the ‘50s cop show to the proceedings, such that it could almost be a public information film. Most shocking is that weasely Steve is having an affair with none other than Alicia Witt (Gersten Hayward). Not that can you can blame him, but her appalling lapse of taste is frankly deplorable (I was just waiting to hear a Steve-sized body hit the floor when Becky fired those shots through the door).


Shelly: Becky, we know you’re a grown, married woman, but we’re your parents, and we love you.

Once we’re in the diner, the shifts in emphasis become downright riveting. For some reason, it simply didn’t occur to me that Bobby might be Becky’s dad, and I was completely on the side of sad-faced Briggs when Shelly skips out with her latest bad choice, Red (Norma can well look on disapprovingly, as Shelly’s surrogate ma, since he’s definitely a Hank Jennings type, just with more tricks up his sleeve, and with Becky that makes three generations of poor decisions in men).


And then we shift again, as shots are fired through the diner window, but rather than an enraged Steve, or an enraged anyone, it’s just a kid who found his dad’s gun. A disturbing kid, whose posture is exactly that of his unconcerned dad, hands in pockets while mom does the remonstrating.


And after a while of this, all to the background blare of a car horn, Bobby finally goes to ask the vehicle’s occupant to hush. He gets a hysterical meltdown in response, and you can only feel for his stunned response, as the woman announces “We have to get home! She’s sick!” while her daughter rises from the floor, spewing something bilious and looking for all the world like Linda Blair’s little sister. It’s a bizarre, brilliant series of encounters, and I’d have been just as aghast as Bobby at the final one.


Hawk: You don’t ever want to know about that.
Sheriff Truman: Really?
Hawk: Really.

Also up: the wisdom of Hawk, with his living map, and its black fire and strange bug head – which we’ve seen before on Evil Coop’s playing card – as he instructs Sheriff Truman he really doesn’t want to know about the latter, before Margaret calls and underlines matters nicely (“There’s fire where you are going. My log is afraid of fire”). The Twin Peaks-focused plotlines have gathered pace enough that they’re as intriguing as those elsewhere now, and there’s even some light relief from oblivious Deputy Holcomb (“Sheriff Truman, are you interested in seeing my new car?”)


Bushnell Mullins: Dougie, now that I’ve had time to think about this, it’s clear that your investigative work has exposed a ring of organised crime and possible police corruption flowing through this office.

There was more than enough there to be getting on with, but we’re also treated to Dougie-Coop vs the Mitchum brothers. That Dougie-Coop pulls through with absolute lack of effort on his part comes as no surprise, but the manner in which this unfolds is a delight, from the brothers’ “I can’t wait to kill this guy” to the gradual revealing of Bradley’s premonitory dream, complete with Rodney’s healed Candie-cut and Dougie-Coop carrying a box, which, rather than Gwyneth Paltrow’s head, conceals a cherry pie (it’s safe to say the cheque for $30m wasn’t part of his twinkle time). Mike was obviously aware of the magical properties of cherry pie, but how far his influence spans (Bradley’s dream is a safe bet, but Candie’s cuckoo state?) is open to debate.


Rodney Mitchum: This pie is damn good.
Dougie-Coop: Damn good.

How much longer can all the things Coop loves fail to entirely reintegrate his mental state? Coffee, now cherry pie. It’s a marvellous twist to have Dougie-Coop the new best pal of the Mitchums, and one can only wonder how long it will last, and where it will lead. Candie, in her distracted state, seems like the ideal foil for Dougie-Coop, but they’re both too distracted – by eating pie or serving it –  to pay much attention to each other. And Lady-Slot-Addict’s arrival (“I hope you realise what a special person you have dining with you”) is the perfect send-off to Coop blithely trailing light wherever he goes, like an idiot messiah.


Gordon Cole: He’s dead.

FBI-wise, we see William Hastings lose his head, or half of it, at the hands of the devil tramps who were evidently in the room (“Dirty, bearded men, in a room”) we heard about last week (rather than it being the room in Fire Walk with Me); their modus operandi being the same as the thing in the penthouse.


Gordon is further into his vision quest (again, this would have been earmarked as Coop material if he’d been compos mentis), Diane (“There’s no back up for this”) is digging herself a deeper hole as she memorises coordinates very obviously – coordinates that more than likely will lead to that intersection of FBI and local law enforcement I mooted a few weeks back – and Albert gets a pithy line (“I don’t suppose you found Major Briggs’ head anywhere?”) Curiously, no one seems willing to observe that the dirty bearded men were phasing in and out of corporeal form, but I guess that comes with the territory, or it could just lead to further suspicions.


So yeah, go Bobby Briggs. I’m rooting for ya.











Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

You guys sure like watermelon.

The Irishman aka I Heard You Paint Houses (2019)
(SPOILERS) Perhaps, if Martin Scorsese hadn’t been so opposed to the idea of Marvel movies constituting cinema, The Irishman would have been a better film. It’s a decent film, assuredly. A respectable film, definitely. But it’s very far from being classic. And a significant part of that is down to the usually assured director fumbling the execution. Or rather, the realisation. I don’t know what kind of crazy pills the ranks of revered critics have been taking so as to recite as one the mantra that you quickly get used to the de-aging effects so intrinsic to its telling – as Empire magazine put it, “you soon… fuggadaboutit” – but you don’t. There was no point during The Irishman that I was other than entirely, regrettably conscious that a 75-year-old man was playing the title character. Except when he was playing a 75-year-old man.

So you want me to be half-monk, half-hitman.

Casino Royale (2006)
(SPOILERS) Despite the doubts and trepidation from devotees (too blonde, uncouth etc.) that greeted Daniel Craig’s casting as Bond, and the highly cynical and low-inspiration route taken by Eon in looking to Jason Bourne's example to reboot a series that had reached a nadir with Die Another Day, Casino Royale ends up getting an enormous amount right. If anything, its failure is that it doesn’t push far enough, so successful is it in disarming itself of the overblown set pieces and perfunctory plotting that characterise the series (even at its best), elements that would resurge with unabated gusto in subsequent Craig excursions.

For the majority of its first two hours, Casino Royale is top-flight entertainment, with returning director Martin Campbell managing to exceed his excellent work reformatting Bond for the ‘90s. That the weakest sequence (still good, mind) prior to the finale is a traditional “big” (but not too big) action set piece involving an attempt to…

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

You're skipping Christmas! Isn't that against the law?

Christmas with the Kranks (2004)
Ex-coke dealer Tim Allen’s underwhelming box office career is, like Vince Vaughn’s, regularly in need of a boost from an indiscriminate public willing to see any old turkey posing as a prize Christmas comedy.  He made three Santa Clauses, and here is joined by Jamie Lee Curtis as a couple planning to forgo the usual neighbourhood festivities for a cruise.

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019)
(SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

We’ll bring it out on March 25 and we’ll call it… Christmas II!

Santa Claus: The Movie (1985)
(SPOILERS) Alexander Salkind (alongside son Ilya) inhabited not dissimilar territory to the more prolific Dino De Laurentis, in that his idea of manufacturing a huge blockbuster appeared to be throwing money at it while being stingy with, or failing to appreciate, talent where it counted. Failing to understand the essential ingredients for a quality movie, basically, something various Hollywood moguls of the ‘80s would inherit. Santa Claus: The Movie arrived in the wake of his previously colon-ed big hit, Superman: The Movie, the producer apparently operating under the delusion that flying effects and :The Movie in the title would induce audiences to part with their cash, as if they awarded Saint Nick a must-see superhero mantle. The only surprise was that his final cinematic effort, Christopher Columbus: The Discovery, wasn’t similarly sold, but maybe he’d learned his lesson by then. Or maybe not, given the behind-camera talent he failed to secure.

When primal forces of nature tell you to do something, the prudent thing is not to quibble over details.

Field of Dreams (1989)
(SPOILERS) There’s a near-Frank Darabont quality to Phil Alden Robinson producing such a beloved feature and then subsequently offering not all that much of note. But Darabont, at least, was in the same ballpark as The Shawshank Redemption with The Green MileSneakers is good fun, The Sum of All Our Fears was a decent-sized success, but nothing since has come close to his sophomore directorial effort in terms of quality. You might put that down to the source material, WP Kinsella’s 1982 novel Shoeless Joe, but the captivating magical-realist balance hit by Field of Dreams is a deceptively difficult one to strike, and the biggest compliment you can play Robinson is that he makes it look easy.

On a long enough timeline, the survival of everyone drops to zero.

Fight Club (1999)
(SPOILERS) Still David Fincher’s peak picture, mostly by dint of Fight Club being the only one you can point to and convincingly argue that that the source material is up there with his visual and technical versatility. If Seven is a satisfying little serial-killer-with-a-twist story vastly improved by his involvement (just imagine it directed by Joel Schumacher… or watch 8mm), Fight Club invites him to utilise every trick in the book to tell the story of not-Tyler Durden, whom we encounter at a very peculiar time in his life.

You’re never the same man twice.

The Man Who Haunted Himself (1970)
(SPOILERS) Roger Moore playing dual roles? It sounds like an unintentionally amusing prospect for audiences accustomed to the actor’s “Raise an eyebrow” method of acting. Consequently, this post-Saint pre-Bond role (in which he does offer some notable eyebrow acting) is more of a curiosity for the quality of Sir Rog’s performance than the out-there premise that can’t quite sustain the picture’s running time. It is telling that the same story was adapted for an episode of Alfred Hitchcock Presents 15 years earlier, since the uncanny idea at its core feels like a much better fit for a trim 50 minute anthology series.

Basil Dearden directs, and co-adapted the screenplay from Anthony Armstrong’s novel The Strange Case of Mr Pelham. Dearden started out with Ealing, helming several Will Hay pictures and a segment of Dead of Night (one might imagine a shortened version of this tale ending up there, or in any of the portmanteau horrors that arrived in the year…