FWWM The Missing Pieces

Yeah, many of our interpretations of Peaks were altered by The Return, which is what led to some of the initial criticism back on dugpa. I think it's interesting to consider the extent to which Lynch's concept of the film changed *after* the scripting process, and how that might affect his direction of things he'd written. Iirc it's been talked about how the process of collaborating with Sheryl Lee and others had a direct effect on the course the film took during production.
The angels were added at Sheryl Lee’s request. That’s the main thing I’ve heard. That’s always felt off to me in terms of the Lodge mythology, but I don’t even care. Sheryl was right; Laura needed something good at the end. And as Cappy says, the Red Room is a subjective space.

The weird thing about Mike/the ring is that the script doesn’t mention him giving the ring to Laura in the train car. He just listens in on the murder, helps Ronnette, and runs away laughing. I believe I’ve read that the appearance of the ring in that scene was part of a reshoot due to Lynch toning down the violence in that sequence. I’m not certain that I’m correct on that, but if you look at the film, there’s no shot of Mike ever actually throwing or even holding the ring. Just the one insert shot of it landing on the floor. So it seems to me the ring was a very late addition to that scene.

Oddly enough, the ring appears in the script everywhere else it appears in the film, so what exactly was it supposed to be setting up? The nurse stealing it from Annie? That seems pretty anticlimactic.
 
Last edited:
But the script gives him a pretty horrible reason to laugh. (Not that things can't be changed after the script is written.)

In the script:

Gerard leans in to take a look and steps back laughing. he yells out
for Bob to hear.

GERARD (continued)
THAT'S HIS OWN DAUGHTER YOU'RE
KILLING.

He continues to laugh and runs away from the train car.
To me that says: 'You're finished! They're going to catch you now!'

Intriguing thought: what if Mike hadn't got the ring to Laura? Would BOB still have killed her or would he have succeeded in possessing her? Can BOB possess more than one person at a time or can he hop from body to body? If BOB had succeeded in possessing Laura, would Laura have killed Leland or would they have both been vessels for BOB? When Laura put on the ring, evidently this meant BOB couldn't possess her anymore, so he killed her, as she knew his earthly identity.

Every answer leads to a dozen more questions! The other thing is: was BOB destroyed in The Return or simply badly beaten up and sent packing? Could he reform in the Black Lodge? If BOB has been destroyed, the man known as 'Dale Cooper' or 'Richard' would presumably be moving on to fight a Bigger Bad in the form of Judy.

Sorry,I know that slightly drifts from TMP, but the discussion springs from it.

I also wonder when the LMFAP starts to evolve and why. He speaks the spiel about whether it's the future or the past in TMP, which directly ties into The Return.
 
Oddly enough, the ring appears in the script everywhere else it appears in the film, so what exactly was it supposed to be setting up? The nurse stealing it from Annie? That seems pretty anticlimactic.
Presumably the fate of the ring was intended for another film. Given the evil reaction of the nurse, did she get possessed by a lodge spirit too? A lot of TMP seem to be setup material for a second movie.
 
The angels were added at Sheryl Lee’s request. That’s the main thing I’ve heard. That’s always felt off to me in terms of the Lodge mythology, but I don’t even care. Sheryl was right; Laura needed something good at the end. And as Cappy says, the Red Room is a subjective space.

The weird thing about Mike/the ring is that the script doesn’t mention him giving the ring to Laura in the train car. He just listens in on the murder, helps Ronnette, and runs away laughing. I believe I’ve read that the appearance of the ring in that scene was part of a reshoot due to Lynch toning down the violence in that sequence. I’m not certain that I’m correct on that, but if you look at the film, there’s no shot of Mike ever actually throwing or even holding the ring. Just the one insert shot of it landing on the floor. So it seems to me the ring was a very late addition to that scene.

Oddly enough, the ring appears in the script everywhere else it appears in the film, so what exactly was it supposed to be setting up? The nurse stealing it from Annie? That seems pretty anticlimactic.
Might be Joel Bocko who commented on the overall heavier tone of the finished film than the screenplay as well, with the "gobble gobble" scene perhaps one of the last holdovers from that more tongue in cheek vision of the film.
 
I thought this was common knowledge, but in talking to LateReg, perhaps it isn’t? Laura’s hand from the ring shot in FWWM appears to have been reused (in distorted fashion) in Part 14 when Sarah removes her face. If not the exact same shot, it’s certainly meant to evoke it:
7289EFC5-F65C-45E2-BF75-9759C96C3529.jpeg8B3AE4CE-B35E-4CEF-8EE1-891ADCE4F297.jpeg
Any thoughts on what THAT adds to the discussion on the ring’s purpose?
 
I thought this was common knowledge, but in talking to LateReg, perhaps it isn’t? Laura’s hand from the ring shot in FWWM appears to have been reused (in distorted fashion) in Part 14 when Sarah removes her face. If not the exact same shot, it’s certainly meant to evoke it:
View attachment 896View attachment 897
Any thoughts on what THAT adds to the discussion on the ring’s purpose?
I think the spiritual finger/mound, and that image, always carried the implication of THE ring. That it appears to be Laura's hand, or at least strongly evokes it (I think it's most definitely her hand, the pose is identical), further emphasizes the connection to the ring.

That said, what I was immediately more fascinated by was how this adds to the discussion of Sarah. Also, as some have pondered before, is it Laura's smile--possibly THE smile discussed so much in this thread--that is also inside Sarah? Whether just Laura's hand or her smile as well, what deeper implications does this carry that a spooky negative of Laura seems to be residing within Sarah? Maybe it doesn't change anything related to the guilt and rage and trauma Sarah is carrying around within her that has always been connected to Laura, but it does somehow make it even more specific, mysterious and haunting.

Plotwise, I think it's obvious that Sarah clearly ate Laura. At some point. Clearly.

(J/K, but you know it is indeed fun to be plot-literalists sometimes.)
 
It looks like a reflection of the hand got burned into her face... as if Laura putting on the ring inflicted scarring.
 
Might be Joel Bocko who commented on the overall heavier tone of the finished film than the screenplay as well, with the "gobble gobble" scene perhaps one of the last holdovers from that more tongue in cheek vision of the film.
I disagree, I think the original vision was to established a gilded idealism of Twin Peaks. The film was always going to be dark, but more like the bugs in the grass of Blue Velvet, except the final film is just the underbelly. I do think an extended version of the film works that way but it does take away from the visceral experience of being trapped in Laura’s mind (just like Laura is trapped as well). Two experiences of the same story.

Also, I’ll go to my grave defending the sincerity of the “gobble gobble” scene and not just write it of as a tongue in cheek moment. We’ll add double the pages the smile did if I get going on that one! 😂
 
I disagree, I think the original vision was to established a gilded idealism of Twin Peaks. The film was always going to be dark, but more like the bugs in the grass of Blue Velvet, except the final film is just the underbelly. I do think an extended version of the film works that way but it does take away from the visceral experience of being trapped in Laura’s mind (just like Laura is trapped as well). Two experiences of the same story.

Also, I’ll go to my grave defending the sincerity of the “gobble gobble” scene and not just write it of as a tongue in cheek moment. We’ll add double the pages the smile did if I get going on that one! 😂
I love the “gobble gobble” moment. But it should be noted that “gone like a turkey in the corn” is a reference to the great blues singer Lightnin’ Hopkins. Another instance of the Peaks writers having a teenage character in 1989 reference some pop culture thing she’d have no business knowing! But it’s a brilliant line, and Sheryl sells the hell out of it. Breaks my heart just thinking about it.
 
I love the “gobble gobble” moment. But it should be noted that “gone like a turkey in the corn” is a reference to the great blues singer Lightnin’ Hopkins. Another instance of the Peaks writers having a teenage character in 1989 reference some pop culture thing she’d have no business knowing! But it’s a brilliant line, and Sheryl sells the hell out of it. Breaks my heart just thinking about it.
It's part of that riff on the 1950s that Twin Peaks had. There's a sense in the TV show that Twin Peaks is set in a 1980s where the 1950s never ended.
 
I think the spiritual finger/mound, and that image, always carried the implication of THE ring. That it appears to be Laura's hand, or at least strongly evokes it (I think it's most definitely her hand, the pose is identical), further emphasizes the connection to the ring.

That said, what I was immediately more fascinated by was how this adds to the discussion of Sarah. Also, as some have pondered before, is it Laura's smile--possibly THE smile discussed so much in this thread--that is also inside Sarah? Whether just Laura's hand or her smile as well, what deeper implications does this carry that a spooky negative of Laura seems to be residing within Sarah? Maybe it doesn't change anything related to the guilt and rage and trauma Sarah is carrying around within her that has always been connected to Laura, but it does somehow make it even more specific, mysterious and haunting.

Plotwise, I think it's obvious that Sarah clearly ate Laura. At some point. Clearly.

(J/K, but you know it is indeed fun to be plot-literalists sometimes.)
Remember in the “Between Two Worlds” featurette that Sarah mentions putting on her “happy face” and that often she is utilized in FWWM and especially TMP as being a major influence on Laura’s ability to forget/deny. The scene with the smile comes just before the “have you seen my sweater” moment. Which I always regret not being in the film because it shows Laura’s talent for gaslighting. Which would set up something I often find people getting confused about later when a coked out and drunk Laura is telling an equally inebriated Bobby that he “killed Mike” knowing full well it wasn’t Mike and Bobby might think he misremembered when the real Mike would be at school the next day.

Point being, this all ties in with all its complexity about Sarah’s part in Laura’s trauma and how it spirals out into the rest of the world.
 
I love the “gobble gobble” moment. But it should be noted that “gone like a turkey in the corn” is a reference to the great blues singer Lightnin’ Hopkins. Another instance of the Peaks writers having a teenage character in 1989 reference some pop culture thing she’d have no business knowing! But it’s a brilliant line, and Sheryl sells the hell out of it. Breaks my heart just thinking about it.

Two points:

1) The intention in that line may not be that Laura is literally quoting Hopkins. It could just be using his quote as dialogue. Many films, tv shows, comic books, etc, use lines from favorite songs or other works of art in the natural flow of dialogue. It's just a reference, but isn't always "character is quoting." Another way of putting it is that Lynch is quoting Hopkins, but Laura is not.

2) If you look at what typical teenagers dressed and talked like in 1989, it's pretty clear that Twin Peaks does not take place in anything close to resembling our real world 1989.
 
The scene with the smile comes just before the “have you seen my sweater” moment. Which I always regret not being in the film because it shows Laura’s talent for gaslighting. Which would set up something I often find people getting confused about later when a coked out and drunk Laura is telling an equally inebriated Bobby that he “killed Mike” knowing full well it wasn’t Mike and Bobby might think he misremembered when the real Mike would be at school the next day.

I 100% do not see that scene at all as Laura gaslighting anybody.
 
I 100% do not see that scene at all as Laura gaslighting anybody.
I didn’t mean to imply she was gaslighting in that scene. But it shows where she would have sympathy for someone who would “benefit” from being gaslit if it meant they could avoid confronting trauma.

Edit: To further clarify, the sweater scene is also setting up Donna in the pink room wearing Laura’s sweater and the next morning Laura definitely gaslights Donna into not remembering anything from the night before beyond blacking out.
 
Last edited:
Two points:

1) The intention in that line may not be that Laura is literally quoting Hopkins. It could just be using his quote as dialogue. Many films, tv shows, comic books, etc, use lines from favorite songs or other works of art in the natural flow of dialogue. It's just a reference, but isn't always "character is quoting." Another way of putting it is that Lynch is quoting Hopkins, but Laura is not.

2) If you look at what typical teenagers dressed and talked like in 1989, it's pretty clear that Twin Peaks does not take place in anything close to resembling our real world 1989.
I mean, this is a show where teenagers reference the 1961 Western One-Eyed Jacks casually in the high school restroom. So, I absolutely agree, this is a surreal world where 1989 teenagers have the cultural sensibility of the much older writers. And it’s trippy and bizarre and kinda cool. But that was exactly my initial point.
 
Hey how awesome is the fight scene with Sheriff Cable? I think it's one of the best scenes in Lynch's entire filmography. It's so woozy and weird and dreamy and funny. The camerawork is just insane. Easy to see why it was cut but it would have been a real showstopper.

I wonder if any deeper meaning or parallel to Twin Peaks can be taken from it or if Lynch just thought it would be a fun idea or what.
 
I love the fight scene with Desmond and Sheriff Cable. I suppose it could be further evidence of Deer Meadows inversions of characters and situations from TP — Desmond, the noble FBI man, putting Cable, the embodiment of local law obstruction and incompetence, in his place effectively flips the dynamics of Truman and Albert’s dust up from S1 on its head.

Even without that, it’s still just a fun and kind of goofy scene. It almost feels like it could be in an Indiana Jones film (or other action-adventure franchise). Definitely a unique scene in Lynch’s oeuvre.
 
Back
Top