A Twin Peaks movie should have been a continuation of the series

[deleted]

I can't imagine resolving the Cooper story in just one movie, it may have been very rushed

While the plans for a trilogy of movies seem to be interesting ("Fire walk with me" introduces some elements that were to picked up in the second and third movie), I have come to appreciate a "25 years later" approach (and am still hoping that something is prepared to be released 2014, although again, one movie would not be enough to finish the story).

I agree that it would have been a wise move to make it a continuation, and maybe explain more of the Laura Palmer story without it being the primary narrative.

On the other hand, this film seems to be made for the purpose of making new connections with the series. Exploring the most compelling parts of the series- everything leading up to the reveal in season 2. And that all revolved around Laura Palmer.


"Sorry detective. There was a fish... IN the percolator."

check the final scene of FWWM. I actually think the film resolved Coop's story in a kind of roundabout way, certainly not in a way *we* want, but in its own way. Unintentional, sure, but it still comes through.

Please nest your IMDB page, and respond to the correct person -

I totally agree with you.

The reason it is a prequel is because David Lynch loved the Laura Palmer character. He decided to go back to it also because he was disappointed with having to end that storyline.

You criticise the film for "crappy acting" yet, the series has mostly crappy acting with the exception of a few. Lara Flynn Boyle & James Marshall are not very good, to put it mildly.

There are key characters missing, but they were cut for a reason. What relevance does Harry Truman & Josie Packard playing guitar have to Laura Palmer's story? Absolutely nothing. A lot of people call the current film a mess, but if all the characters were in the film, that criticism would be a hell of a lot more used. Some actors didn't want to come back anyway.

How are you going to do a sequel about saving Dale Cooper since Kyle MacLachlan refused to come back? I asked Sherilyn Fenn why she didn't do the film, & she told me she was busy with Of Mice & Men. So, how are you going to resolve that bomb explosion without her?

People criticise the film for apparently requiring the TV series to be watched first, but these people who demanded a sequel don't realise that it would definitely need the show first. Especially with multiple plot lines that everyone wanted. Why should people who haven't watched the show, care about some annoying girl blown up in a bank explosion?

The current film is not that difficult. There are more films out there that are harder to comprehend, & anyone with any experience with surrealist cinema wouldn't have much of a problem with FWWM without the show. It is a stand alone story. Its just that without the show, you'd come to a different interpretation of the abstract stuff. The ending does give closure, depending on your view. There is no need for a spoon feeding ending with Dale Cooper & Heather Graham riding off into the sunset.

Well the series will now continue so some plot points might be cleared up.

Its that man again!!

The important thing to realize is that Lynch didn't WANT to make a continuation in '92. His heart wasn't in it - what he cared about was revisiting Laura Palmer because it was her disappearance from the show that had soured him on it in the first place. Lynch is an artist who ONLY makes works he really wants to make. A continuation tying up cliffhangers in 1992 might have pleased fans more but his heart wouldn't have been in it.

I think he was right - without a head-on exploration of Laura's final days something is missing in the Twin Peaks saga. The whole story is about getting closer and closer to her and her secrets; there's hardly a scene in the pilot which doesn't circle around her. Even if she was intended as a MacGuffin, she had become so much more by the time her killer was revealed. The show never was able to escape her shadow though it tried.

One other thing: a continuation in '92 would probably have been a practical impossibility. MacLachlan was barely coaxed into a cameo, let alone a starring role. Numerous other cast members had soured on the show's legacy and were trying to run away from it (some would have been keener on a sequel than prequel, but many would not have been).

Now, 25 years later, we can have our cake and eat it too: a new miniseries dealing with the fate of good/evil Coop, a book which will probably do most of the heavy lifting as far as the town's fate, AND a movie giving us the texture of Laura Palmer's last 7 days, the vortex of the whirlpool which is Twin Peaks' narrative. The first two are possible in 2016, the third would not have been (among other reasons, Sheryl Lee obviously can't play a teenage Laura Palmer now - or even very long after FWWM). More than ever, Lynch's decision to seize the opportunity and finally tell Laura Palmer's story (her actual story, not merely a forensic glance in which she remains the out-of-reach "dead girl") looks like the right one.