Typically when something lays eggs, they grow up to be the same species as the parent. Maybe the bug frog is a larval version of a new "Mother" ?Yea there was enough distinction to lead to believe 2 separate entities. Can't wait to find out more or continue the speculation madness.
Am I the only one thinking that the girl who eats the bug looks a lot like Nadine?
Am I the only one thinking that the girl who eats the bug looks a lot like Nadine?
The most boring thing this season could've been was just a nostalgia trip like any of the Netflix show revivals have been. After the end of season 2, the idea of Coop just immediately coming back and talking about pie and coffee and all the quirky stuff from seasons 1+2 would've been a bit phony.
I like that this is wild, unpredictable, and not a safe bet.
She mentioned she was 35 in the last episode of the original run. Too young.
EDIT: Actually, the bug eating scene takes place in 1957 right?
I guess it's plausible. But probably not.
I like this theory better than Bob being the bug. The "Mother" incarnate who gives birth to ___ entities w/out the need of an atom bomb.Typically when something lays eggs, they grow up to be the same species as the parent. Maybe the bug frog is a larval version of a new "Mother" ?
35 in 1989 = 2 years old in 1956 (the year of the bug frog)
If the girl whom the creature inhabits is a character we know, I'd say it's the Log Lady (16 in 1956).
There's a limitless amount of possibilities that could have stayed far more true to the original atmosphere and remained very interesting and compelling. In fact, I'd argue that we've seen at least 30-45 minutes of that so far.
"If it wasn't exactly this, it would suck!" is being ridiculously dismissive of the original fabric.
There's a limitless amount of possibilities that could have stayed far more true to the original atmosphere and remained very interesting and compelling. In fact, I'd argue that we've seen at least 30-45 minutes of that so far.
"If it wasn't exactly this, it would suck!" is being ridiculously dismissive of the original fabric.
There's a limitless amount of possibilities that could have stayed far more true to the original atmosphere and remained very interesting and compelling. In fact, I'd argue that we've seen at least 30-45 minutes of that so far.
"If it wasn't exactly this, it would suck!" is being ridiculously dismissive of the original fabric.
So yeah I do find it fairly ironic that some fans wanted this revival to be x/y/z when the whole reason the show was nearly ruined was cause CBS caved to fans. Fans don't always know what they want.
What the hell did I watch?
I would have to check the dates, but I believe she was born and stayed in the Twin Peaks area according to "Secret History."
So people should have just been up for Fire Walk With Me back in the 90s, right? Or did they just 'not get it'?
I don't get this either. Why don't people think it can in the same tone as the original show and still be good? Do they have no faith in Lynch/Frost to be able to make something just a little more accessible than this?
I'm deeply disappointed with the most recent episode. And it sucks because part 7 was so good.
Would be interesting. I want to know who is Judy and the monkey. This entire thing is a figment of that damn monkey's imagination, isn't it? lolI still think it'd be really interesting if the boy in 1956 turned out to be Gordon.
Are there reviews on this episode? I'm curious to see how the media took it.
I still think it'd be really interesting if the boy in 1956 turned out to be Gordon.
What are you even talking about? I never said anyone didn't get it. I didn't mention FWWM.
Conversely, am I supposed to be down with James having a side story with some lady from another town that has literally nothing to do with the rest of the show?
Are there reviews on this episode? I'm curious to see how the media took it.
Why is it so hard to understand Lynch/Frost don't want to do that and you have no right to make them do that?
It's not a matter of faith. They don't want to make the show you want them to. If you want that story you are going to have to do it yourself.
At least that subplot ended and was only like 10 mins an episode compared to the 5 mins of broom-sweeping that we've had to see.
The background. CONSPIRACY.
Why is it so hard to understand Lynch/Frost don't want to do that and you have no right to make them do that?
It's not a matter of faith. They don't want to make the show you want them to. If you want that story you are going to have to do it yourself.
Will have to rewatch it after this morning but as of right now, I also believe this yes. It felt like one.Clearing my thoughts, I think this episode will go down as one of the best hours on TV, and will be remembered for years.
Ha I remember an article earlier this year saying that Twin Peaks in this day and age wouldn't be interesting because shows like Legion were doing weird better already.
I wonder what this guy thought of last night's episode.
It was several episodes spanning and was only one of a few terrible sub plots. The show went from soap opera parody to just a soap opera. Season 2 is a mess, again cause fans thought they wanted something, and that caved killed the series.
Maybe someone from TP will win an Emmy or something. Who knows. It's the double-edged sword that is art.