Talk:Twin Peaks/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cleanup tags

I tagged this article for cleanup. I wish I had time to attend to it myself, but I simply don't. Punctuation is a problem throughout the article (not overwhelmingly so, but sporadically from beginning to end). There also seems to be excessive over-linking, especially in the top of the article. --B.Rossow · talk 14:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

DON'T....EAT....THE....CLUES!!!!

Nothing to add. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.163.99.109 (talk) 00:46, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Plot synopsis

I know it was a long series and too complex for a short synopsis but... Really... Is it that hard to make a shorter one parapgraph-long synopsis on what's it all about? Leave the details for the current synopsis for those wanting to find more about the series, but if anyone has seen it it would be better to give an additional more abridged synopsis...Undead Herle King (talk) 03:20, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

If you have a suggestion, maybe post it here and we can work on it. Dbrodbeck (talk) 13:32, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Headlines

to use with this article--J.D. (talk) 19:08, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Pilot information

I had added this bit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Twin_Peaks&action=historysubmit&diff=354539904&oldid=354539011) which I think is quite informational for people interested in watching Twin Peaks on tv as long as it is running in this format. I came to Wikipedia today to try to figure out the differences between the pilot and ep1 that original aired / which the rest of the episodes are based upon. I don't think that is covered anywhere on Wikipedia. Also afaik this is the only place to see the pilot (read the history page) since it's not on DVD or anything.

The CI network seems to have a formula and I don't know if this is the first time it's been thru such a cycle or not (probably not) ...it seems to show season 1/2 with ep1. Then the next play thru (season 1/2) ep1 is replaced with the pilot episode. Put inside each commercial break is a teaser featuring the interrogation scene of Bobby or James. If the pilot was used James is interrogated, and Bobby for ep1 in other words the opposite (so the teaser is from the pilot if ep1 was used and from ep1 if the pilot was used)

The 2hr pilot clearly doesn't jive with the rest of the episodes so I'm not sure why it was done this way. It's possible my DVR just didn't record Ep1 this time and the teasers were fixed for this round. But anyway I wish someone with chops or knows a good faq source would detail the differences somewhere on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilot_%28Twin_Peaks%29)

The pilot seems to really develop things, Ep1 just throws the viewer into the thick of it. Cooper seems almost mischievous in the pilot in contrast to the straight shooter persona he ended up with etc. Oh well a blank slate on the TP talk page is a little depressing, so there you have it. --12.213.80.54 (talk) 02:21, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

"...campy, melodramatic presentation..."

This is how Twin Peaks is described in the overview and I take issue with it. While it's true that the show, in its best days, presented some things in a knowing fashion, it's also very clear that David Lynch really likes melodrama. The heightened, visceral emotion of many of the melodramas of the 1950s greatly influenced him (certainly, Nicholas Ray's Rebel Without a Cause and Bigger Than Life loom large over Twin Peaks.) Part of the reason why the post-Palmer episodes of the show are such a trainwreck is because the writers didn't understand this. They simply lowered the show to the level of "camp" and utter stupidity. JonasEB (talk) 09:43, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

please check dates....

Hi having watched the pilot film Twin Peaks, Fire Walk With Me I decided to investigate further as my husband, Steve and I were sat wondering how old the series was....

having looked it up, we cannot agree with the 1990-91 dates...

At the time the series was being shown on UK TV, I was living in my house in Chatham that I bought not long before my 21st birthday, working two jobs, one full time in London and one at a pub "over the road" every other night over a two week period, so I kept missing episodes.

Steve is certain he was taking his Certificate of Professional Competence for PSVs at night school.

We didn't meet til 1991 ..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.149.63.22 (talk) 20:50, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

There's not much really else to say beside the fact that the series aired during 1990-91. I can't tell by your comment if you thought that the series aired earlier than that or later. If it's later, then it's possible you saw repeats of the series and not their original airings. Drovethrughosts (talk) 21:21, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Definitive Gold Box edition

The article right now makes a mention of this US box including both versions of the pilot (the 90 min version and the longer European one). I have the German version and it only includes the 90 min version of the pilot. Unless the longer one is hidden). If that is correct, given the wealth of information in the article about the Home Video releases, this should be mentioned. However, the article for the pilot episode says that an alternate pilot was shown in Europe, with the killer being revealed in the last scenes. Would this be a third version of the pilot or is it still the longer EU version? Dollvalley (talk) 15:39, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The one where the killer is revealed is the longer version that aired in Europe, as it aired as TV-movie and needed a conclusion. For the region 1 release, the pilot is located on disc 1, and then you can choose either version once clicking the episode, so it's not hidden. You can go ahead and make note that the German version only includes the one version. Drovethrughosts (talk) 22:15, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Plot Synopsis

It's starting to get painful to read all the minutia added to the plot synopsis here. In the talk archives, it had been suggested that we pare it down to a paragraph or two, giving just the most basic plot summary. I'm game for writing it and posting it here for discussion. I'd rather be bold and just replace it altogether, but I imagine, like me, there are some editors here who are passionate about this series. What do you think of reducing this plot summary down to its bare essentials?AstroCog (talk) 14:36, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

  • Just noted that one of the criticisms from the article's last peer review was that the plot synopsis was overly detailed.AstroCog (talk) 14:44, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
I have no problem with it getting cut down. Although, season two's plot should definitely be longer given it's 22 episodes versus season one's 8 episodes. Three to five paragraphs for each season sounds good to me. If you're game for doing it, then definitely go ahead and do it! :) Drovethrughosts (talk) 15:39, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Plot Synopsis

It's starting to get painful to read all the minutia added to the plot synopsis here. In the talk archives, it had been suggested that we pare it down to a paragraph or two, giving just the most basic plot summary. I'm game for writing it and posting it here for discussion. I'd rather be bold and just replace it altogether, but I imagine, like me, there are some editors here who are passionate about this series. What do you think of reducing this plot summary down to its bare essentials?AstroCog (talk) 14:36, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

  • Just noted that one of the criticisms from the article's last peer review was that the plot synopsis was overly detailed.AstroCog (talk) 14:44, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
I have no problem with it getting cut down. Although, season two's plot should definitely be longer given it's 22 episodes versus season one's 8 episodes. Three to five paragraphs for each season sounds good to me. If you're game for doing it, then definitely go ahead and do it! :) Drovethrughosts (talk) 15:39, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
* Been working on this, but it's slow going. Busy in real-life makes wiki-writing slow.AstroCog (talk) 23:32, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

DVD release ... could someone give a nice, user-friendly summary?

Okay... I've never seen a situation where "WTF?" applies more appropriately. Can someone write a nice intro to the DVD section which describes the state of affairs as it is now and a brief overview of the changes that have gone on, for the average reader? It is a bit "obscene" as it is.....

Peace and Passion ☮  ("I'm listening....") 02:54, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

list of characters/actors

I notice that the main article on this topic nicely lists all the characters, but the actors/characters from the main series are mixed in with Fire walk with me. It would be nice if someone with the info could indicate wich of the series those actors were in, or even better, which episodes. thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.245.231 (talk) 01:04, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Home video

Didn't there used to be some information here about the laserdisc releases of TP in the "home video" section? TP received full laserdisc releases of the entire series in both the US and in Japan, where the sets were very luxed-up. Seems like it deserves a mention.75.64.212.13 (talk) 23:47, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

There is no Section entitled "Home video," so I'm not sure what you're talking about, exactly. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 06:51, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

The person was asking if there USED to be. 124.182.212.65 (talk) 08:15, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Creating two season articles?

We have List of Twin Peaks episodes already. I expressed concerns to TonyTheTiger about, due to amount of episodes (30), creating season pages that may duplicate content from main page and episode list page. Tony believes that even two seasons may benefit needs of separate season page. Because of awards, he makes them high-priority per WP:WikiProject Television/Seasons for creation. Due to recent practices of merging one-season episode lists into main pages, like Firefly, I wonder if we should create a page about the second season of the two-season series or avoid duplication. --George Ho (talk) 04:49, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

With only eight episodes in season one, I don't think it really warrants standing alone. The episode list is already an FL and many episode articles are GA/FA already—there's not really much information, if any, that two season articles will offer than doesn't already exist, and I'd worry about it then cheapening the episode FL. I'd say to leave it as is. GRAPPLE X 04:51, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
My point is that any season that has episodes that contributed to a Golden Globe Award win may have content that makes it worth creating. It is more of a general rule than one specific to this show. I think it may be the case that interested editors may find content that makes the season articles worth creating. I don't understand the harm of leaving this show on the list.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
I agree with Grapple. In the event that prose on the individual seasons exceeds what the individual articles should handle, then that would be an argument for a separate stand-alone page. Season 1 could arguably have enough coverage out there to build such a page, but I'd like to see commitment from editors in the form of content creation on this page FIRST. As of now, I'd say no. Do the work first. Show me the money. Life isn't about creating new pages. AstroCog (talk) 05:53, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Can I get a clarification on the 4:49 topic creation by George Ho and 4:51 comment by Grapple X. Are you guys WP:SOCKs?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:01, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Nope. I actively watch this page on my watchlist, being the site's resident Peaks editor. GRAPPLE X 06:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Tony, I want your apology for your quick assumptions; no more mere "I'm sorry" messages or anything similar. I don't like being accused of sockpuppetry when two others here agreed with my honest thought. --George Ho (talk) 06:29, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Absolutely ridiculous question from Tony. This is what watchlists are all about. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:38, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Back on topic, the current "list of episodes" is fine. As far as I know, we won't be seeing another series of Twin Peaks, so the list is complete, and doesn't need any further splitting. Of course, the list could use updating to meet our current criteria to prevent it being delisted, but otherwise, the status quo should remain. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:38, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, we can always hope for another season. But until that happens, I don't think we need season articles. (I could perhaps be convinced otherwise if someone was to produce a really compelling userspace-draft of what it would look like.) The Editorial Voice (talk) 22:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Twin_Peaks/Archive_2&oldid=543319490"