🚀 go-pugleaf

On Fri, 26 May 2017 19:17:07 -0600, "rms"
<rsqui...@MOOyossmanMOO.net> wrote:

>>I'm digging the setting.  Would like to see a little more Alan Wake /
>>Twin Peaks in actual storyline than Redneck Rampage though.
>
>    haha not a chance, nary a hint of supernatural mystery in previous 
>installments.  BTW Have you been watching the new Twin Peaks?  I felt 
>compelled to subscribe to showtime just for the duration of this run, and I 
>*love* the first 3 episodes:  All the weird Lynch stuff is there; the old 
>actors are still looking good, and are making a great effort; the lore is 
>just as exciting to try to follow.  It's wonderful (and apparently has sold 
>very few subscriptions so far.  Anything intellectually fun or inventive is 
>frowned upon in this era of shit-eating politicians).

Coincidence you should bring up the TV show, because I did the exact
same thing you did. 

When I learned of the new TP season, I started watching the original
shows on Netflix (for the first time --aside from occasional bits and
pieces I had never really watched the first two seasons.  Back in
1990, on-demand shows weren't an option, VCR recording was a pain, and
my life was just too hectic to carve out time to sit down and watch tv
at a scheduled time).

When I realized I had an unused free trial of Showtime that I could
invoke and manage straight from the Roku, I decided to sign up.

My first impression of the first few episodes of Season 1 were "this
is brilliant, I see what the fuss was about now".  That's saying a lot
about a show that aired 27 years ago.

I've only watched the first episode of the new season, but initial
impressions are that it is lacking something from the originals. 

Maybe that will change after I watch a few more episodes, but I got
this vibe of "contrived weirdness" in the first new episode, compared
to "organic weirdness" of the retro episodes.  Everything in the
original show felt spontaneous and natural, while the new show feels
to me like it was carefully scripted and mapped out to try to
reproduce the spontaneity of the first.  I hope my impression of the
new show changes.  

What's really interesting about this is that it is an example of an
unbiased A/B test of production from the late 80s - early 90s compared
side-by-side with its modern equivalent.  On this newsgroup, we talk
sometimes about things not being what they used to be, and sometimes
we play old games and think "why don't they make them like this any
more"?  This phenomenon happens with all forms of entertainment
(games, movies, music, etc.), and usually when it does, we wonder if
the original was better simply because we saw it first, or we are
clutching onto our nostalgic memories.   In this case, however, the
nostalgic bias is removed because I never saw the original until now,
and viewed both of them side-by-side in modern times.

Critics seem to think well of the new show overall, while conceding
it's very different than the original and shouldn't be viewed as a
continuation. After having watched some of the original, I would have
preferred more of same.  

Sounds like you're enjoying the new season and that's great, I hope I
get there too after a few more shows.