Skip to main content

I fear I’ve snapped his Gregory.

Twin Peaks
3.14: We are like the Dreamer.

(SPOILERS) In an episode as consistently dazzling as this, piling incident upon incident and joining the dots to the extent it does, you almost begin to wonder if Lynch is making too much sense. There’s a notable upping of the pace in We are like the Dreamer, such that Chad’s apprehension is almost incidental, and if the convergence at Jack Rabbit’s Tower didn’t bring the FBI in with it, their alignment with Dougie Coop can be only just around the corner.


Gordon Cole: You’ve been there all through the years, Lucy?
Lucy: Well, actually, I have gone home. And Andy and I have taken some vacations.

So much going on here, though. There’s Albert recounting the first Blue Rose case, involving fledgling FBI agents Gordon Cole and Phillip Jeffries and an arrest suspect – two arrest suspects – called Lois Duffy. The last words of one of the Lois Duffys – “I’m like the Blue Rose” – are, construes Tammy, a signifier that the dying woman, who vanished from the scene after being shot by her identical counterpart – who later hanged herself in her cell –  was unnatural, since a blue rose does not occur in nature, and was, in fact, a tulpa, or thought form.


So, long, long before Bob doubled-up on Coop, we have an earlier example of a similar entity encroaching on an unwilling human. Only here, it ends up back in the Black Lodge when its machinations are cut short. One casually wonders what Lynch’s experience with tulpas may be. After all, as a TM-practitioner, he’s repeating a daily mantra invoking a Hindu deity. Sure to have some effect eventually, if anything will.


In The X-Files, that tale would have likely have occupied an entire, largely superfluous flashback episode. Here, it takes about five minutes, and is all the better for it. And then, an unexpected synchronicity, as Diane reveals Janey-E is her estranged half-sister (“I hate her”), making Dougie Coop her half-brother-in-law (I’m guessing they’re so estranged she never even saw sis’s wedding photos; the theory that Janey-E is Diane’s tulpa is a bit of a stretch, I think).


Agent Wilson: How are we going to find the right one?
Special Agent Randall Headley: Wilson, how many times have I told you? This is what we do in the FBI!

Gordon rather leaps to conclusions that the couple may be armed and dangerous, but it’s refreshing to see that not all FBI staff are super-efficient, lateral-thinking credits to the Bureau. I definitely want to see more of the fist-pounding, hyperbolically reprimanding Special Agent Randall Headley (who I knew I recognised; Jay R Ferguson was Stan Rizzo in Mad Men), his incensed response brought on by the confusion of Agent Wilson (Owain Rhys Davies) over how they will locate the correct Douglas Jones out of the 23 in the area.


Albert: Yes, I’m beginning to remember that too.

There are no apparently ambivalent, diversionary interludes in this one, although I absolutely loved Gordon freaking out at the painfully noisy, silhouetted window cleaner. Everything is on point, even the shaggy dog stories, of which there are several, if you include dreams. 


Of course Gordon dreams of Monica Bellucci (again) and of course they had coffee. Perhaps surprisingly, there’s no great Gordon passionate affair (maybe he censored that part), although she was very pleasant, but his fractured narrative is both classical in dream construct (“Cooper was there, but I couldn’t see his face”) and full of Phillip K Dickian reality-bending (“We are like the Dreamer. Who dreams and then lives inside the dream… But who is the dreamer?”), before seguing into our first encounter with compos mentis Cooper in any substantial way this season, even if it comes from 25 years ago, and of dear departed Bowie as Phillip Jeffries (“Who do you think that is there?”). 


There’s also the marvellously curious fact that both Gordon and Albert had forgotten the incident in the Philadelphia office from Fire Walk With Me (both terribly convenient to the plot and highly credible).


Andy: We need to get her down the mountain. She’s very important, and there are people who want her dead. She’s fine physically. We have to put her in a cell where she’s safe.
Sheriff Truman: Okay.
Andy: Don’t tell anybody about this.

I’m not sure what I expected of Jack Rabbit’s Tower, but it certainly wasn’t Andy being at the centre of proceedings. And he does so well, as if, once transported via a now familiar vortex – the one Gordon saw, and the one Freddie Sykes (Jake Wardle) will describe to James – he enters a state of receptive stillness channelling information via the origami puff machine without disturbance – except, for some reason upon seeing the telegraph/ electricity pole – no matter how sinister – and it runs the gamut of scary gas station tramps, including Mr Gotta Light, the penthouse shredder, eyeless Naido from the third episode, who we have earlier seen lying naked in the woods, good and evil Coops, the schoolgirl screaming from the pilot, the pole with the number six on it – before returning him to the woods.


Sheriff Truman: What happened to us back there?
Hawk: I don’t know. Something, but I don’t remember a thing.
Sheriff Truman: The same with me.

Upon which, he instructs Frank, Hawk and Bobby on what to do, all traces of simpleton having momentarily vanished. Well, I say that. Suggesting someone without any eyes is fine physically isn’t quite the description I’d use, nor would I consider locking someone in a cell with Chad and a bloody – at least, some of what he’s excreting is blood – mimicking psycho for company is perhaps the best method of looking after her. No wonder she starts making strange noises. Presumably the soil in the pockets is to keep a connection to the “real” world, and their out-of-phase presences surely connects to the woodsmen’s extra-dimensional form.


This whole sequence is full of intriguing ideas and images, from the slight slow motion effect as they approach the correct spot, to the pool of garmonbozia when things start to act up. And now the Giant is officially called The Fireman? A Fireman being one who puts out fires, fires caused by mankind say, when they detonate nuclear bombs, such fear-inducing moments inspiring Machiavellian thought forms? So Bob is mankind’s darkness personified. Interesting that Hawk is side-lined, having been the most intuitive to date (less so that Bobby is too). But perhaps it is Andy’s empathy and benign emptiness that make him the ideal vessel?


Freddie: This is a person that delights in acting in an obstructive or an otherwise unhelpful manner. As in “Oh, I can’t do that. It’s more than my job’s worth”.

The scene with James and the impossibly cocker-nee Freddie Sykes finds Lynch imagining people still referring to “London Town, in the East End” like its Mary Poppins meets The Elephant Man. Freddie is only 23 years old (the second occasion of that number in the episode) but has already discovered his destiny, in the form of a green glove that won’t come off his hand, having found it at the behest of the Fireman when he was granted an audience on being sucked into a vortex and deposited in the Red Room. Said glove also provides his hand with the power of an enormous pile driver, and said Fireman instructed him to got to Twin Peaks. So this is Lynch and Frost’s first superhero character? (“I fear I’ve snapped his Gregory”) Complete with magically materialising plane ticket?


If I didn’t know James and Freddie were working at the Great Northern as security guards, I might have assumed the furnace room was in proximity to the hospital basement where Bob and Mike met for the European TV movie ending of the original pilot. Lynch is certainly amping up the unsettling sound effects around James there.


Sarah Palmer: Do you really wanna fuck with us?

But that’s as nothing next to the unnerving events surrounding Sarah Palmer dropping by The Elk’s Point Bar for a Bloody Mary and a gasper, only to be pestered by a most insalubrious specimen of a trucker (John Paulson). Lynch leaves us in no doubt this isn’t the sort of fellow to be mourned very hard, but the reveal of dark, possessed Sarah is a shocker, for all the warnings something was seriously up. And what of her opening up her face like an inverse Laura Palmer in the Red Room? Obviously, White and Black Lodge denizens have identical abilities, only to oppositional ends.


Bartender: We’ll see about this.
Sarah Palmer: Yeah, sure is a mystery, huh?

It’s a stroke of genius using Zabriskie’s intensity and turning it into outright villainy, and then her note-perfect act of being shocked by the swift work she made of the trucker’s jugular leaves you wondering for a moment if she isn’t genuinely horrified, possession coming off and on, until she adopts an offhand response to the bloody mess on the floor.


More bloody messes discussed in The Bang Bang Bar, which given the drug-hazed clientele and discourses on desperate, deranged types, leads to the impression of a Twin Peaks in a resoundingly bad place. One of the drinkers is Tina’s (and Kelly, not David Lynch’s) daughter and the other Lynch’s (David, not Kelly) wife. What actually befell Billy is anyone’s guess – that’s Billy who Audrey won’t quit about – but coming on the heels of an episode replete with Black Lodge incidents and supernatural feats (Billy is said to have jumped over a six-foot fence before leaving Megan’s mom’s kitchen in a terrible state) it undoubtedly isn’t normal. So, no sustained scenes with either Coop this week, but the episode doesn’t go wanting for their absence. Indeed, it’s one of the best yet.










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

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…

Right! Let’s restore some bloody logic!

It Couldn't Happen Here (1987)
(SPOILERS) "I think our film is arguably better than Spiceworld" said Neil Tennant of his and Chris Lowe's much-maligned It Couldn't Happen Here, a quasi-musical, quasi-surrealist journey through the English landscape via the Pet shop Boys' "own" history as envisaged by co-writer-director Jack Bond. Of course, Spiceworld could boast the presence of the illustrious Richard E Grant, while It Couldn't Happen Here had to settle for Gareth Hunt. Is its reputation deserved? It's arguably not very successful at being a coherent film (even thematically), but I have to admit that I rather like it, ramshackle and studiously aloof though it is.

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 …

You kind of look like a slutty Ebola virus.

Crazy Rich Asians (2018)
(SPOILERS) The phenomenal success of Crazy Rich Asians – in the US at any rate, thus far – might lead one to think it's some kind of startling original, but the truth is, whatever its core demographic appeal, this adaptation of Kevin Kwan's novel taps into universally accepted romantic comedy DNA and readily recognisable tropes of family and class, regardless of cultural background. It emerges a smoothly professional product, ticking the expected boxes in those areas – the heroine's highs, lows, rejections, proposals, accompanied by whacky scene-stealing best friend – even if the writing is sometimes a little on the clunky side.

They make themselves now.

Screamers (1995)
(SPOILERS) Adapting Philip K Dick isn’t as easy as it may seem, but that doesn't stop eager screenwriters from attempting to hit that elusive jackpot. The recent Electric Dreams managed to exorcise most of the existential gymnastics and doubts that shine through in the best versions of his work, leaving material that felt sadly facile. Dan O'Bannon had adapted Second Variety more than a decade before it appeared as Screamers, a period during which he and Ronald Shusett also turned We Can Remember It For You Wholesale into Total Recall. So the problem with Screamers isn't really the (rewritten) screenplay, which is more faithful than most to its source material (setting aside). The problem with Screamers is largely that it's cheap as chips.

Well, we took a vote. Predator’s cooler, right?

The Predator (2018)
(SPOILERS) Is The Predator everything you’d want from a Shane Black movie featuring a Predator (or Yautja, or Hish-Qu-Ten, apparently)? Emphatically not. We've already had a Shane Black movie featuring a Predator – or the other way around, at least – and that was on another level. The problem – aside from the enforced reshoots, and the not-altogether-there casting, and the possibility that full-on action extravaganzas, while delivered competently, may not be his best foot forward – is that I don't think Black's really a science-fiction guy, game as he clearly was to take on the permanently beleaguered franchise. He makes The Predator very funny, quite goofy, very gory, often entertaining, but ultimately lacking a coherent sense of what it is, something you couldn't say of his three prior directorial efforts.

My pectorals may leave much to be desired, Mrs Peel, but I’m the most powerful man you’ve ever run into.

The Avengers 2.23: The Positive-Negative Man
If there was a lesson to be learned from Season Five, it was not to include "man" in your title, unless it involves his treasure. The See-Through Man may be the season's stinker, but The Positive-Negative Man isn't far behind, a bog-standard "guy with a magical science device uses it to kill" plot. A bit like The Cybernauts, but with Michael Latimer painted green and a conspicuous absence of a cool hat.

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

The possibilities are gigantic. In a very small way, of course.

The Avengers 5.24: Mission… Highly Improbable
With a title riffing on a then-riding-high US spy show, just as the previous season's The Girl from Auntie riffed on a then-riding-high US spy show, it's to their credit that neither have even the remotest connection to their "inspirations" besides the cheap gags (in this case, the episode was based on a teleplay submitted back in 1964). Mission… Highly Improbable follows in the increasing tradition (certainly with the advent of Season Five and colour) of SF plotlines, but is also, in its particular problem with shrinkage, informed by other recent adventurers into that area.

What a truly revolting sight.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge (aka Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales) (2017)
(SPOILERS) The biggest mistake the Pirates of the Caribbean sequels have made is embracing continuity. It ought to have been just Jack Sparrow with an entirely new cast of characters each time (well, maybe keep Kevin McNally). Even On Stranger Tides had Geoffrey Rush obligatorily returning as Barbossa. Although, that picture’s biggest problem was its director; Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge has a pair of solid helmers in Joachim Rønning and Espen Sandberg, which is a relief at least. But alas, the continuity is back with a vengeance. And then some. Why, there’s even an origin-of-Jack Sparrow vignette, to supply us with prerequisite, unwanted and distracting uncanny valley (or uncanny Johnny) de-aging. The movie as a whole is an agreeable time passer, by no means the dodo its critical keelhauling would suggest, albeit it isn’t even pretending to try hard to come up with …