A quote from the time of Twin Peaks, 1990, explains what Twin Peaks was to television:
“American network television has long been considered the home of the bland, the cautious and the predictable, so it was with some trepidation that the ABC network recently launched a new series that was none of those things.
“Twin Peaks, which began airing in America two weeks ago, has already been described by one critic as ‘the series that will change TV.'” – Tracey Macleod, BBC2’s The Late Show
One season later, the show was almost cancelled. It carried on for one more season.
The show began on a high note. Talk about Twin Peaks being “unlike anything else on TV” brought viewers enough to make it the highest-rating show on ABC’s spring season. And this interest caused Twin Peaks to become one of the top-rated shows in 1990. But after a number of time-slot changes and the resolution of the one of the story’s most important questions, ratings plummeted during the second season, and the network put it on indefinite hiatus. It was brought back after an organized letter-writing campaign, but ratings did not improve.
Lynch himself enjoyed the making his only TV series:
“The beautiful thing about television,” the director said after the show began to air, “is you have the chance to do a continuing story, and that’s pretty neat to me. That’s the main reason for doing it.” – David Lynch 1990
Lynch co-wrote the show, “weaving the stories over the weeks” as he referred to it, with Hill Street Blues Story Editor Mark Frost.
As for the upcoming (originally 9- but now perhaps 18-episode) third series, Lynch walked away from it once already after reporting that Showtime, the network that will air the new Twin Peaks, was not willing to spend enough on the script the way Lynch thought it should be done, which may have had to do with issues around the original cast. After much public discussion and a series of self-made videos by as-yet-unsigned former Twin Peaks cast members about the necessity of having Lynch on for the new show (Showtime had considered going on with the project without the director), Lynch stated publicly that he was back on.
The third series will be notably different from the first two because it will be filmed all at once like a movie, and Lynch and David Frost will decide where to cut the story into episodes (which could be various lengths in minutes).
And on January 9, 2017, it was finally revealed that Twin Peaks’ all-important return date will be Sunday, May 21, with a two-hour premiere. It will also go on Showtime’s streaming services on May 21 – along with episodes three and four.
Twin Peaks 2017 Cast
Twin Peaks Discussion (We’ll post these questions, and if you have more, let us know, and you guys can comment on them)
So far, many Twin Peaks original cast members have confirmed that they are in the third season (airing early 2017):
FBI and Cops:
Special Agent Dale Cooper
Yes, signed and the only one who has seen the entire script, reportedly.
Sheriff Harry S. Truman
Uncertain, he may be replaced by another actor.
Deputy Andy Brennan
Lucy Moran, Secretary
Special Agent Albert Rosenfield
Special Agent Gordon Cole
Denise Bryson, FBI Agent
The Twin Peaks girls:
Laura Palmer/Maddy Ferguson
No. (But Fire Walk With Me’s Donna, Moira Kelly maybe.)
Died in the show, but might be in 2017.
Ben Horne and Jerry Horne
Guys in Town:
Mike Nelson, Bobby’s Friend
James Hurley, Biker
Twin Peaks Characters:
Mike, the One-Armed Man (Phillip Gerard)
The Log Lady
Bob’s actor is dead, although Leland’s actor is a possibility.
Later on, a full cast list for the 2017 series was announced. 217 members on it. Some are returning, some are new:
Mädchen Amick – Shelly Johnson
Dana Ashbrook – Bobby Briggs
Phoebe Augustine – Ronette Pulaski
Richard Beymer – Ben Horne
Catherine E Coulson – The Log Lady
Julee Cruise – Roadhouse Singer
Jan D’Arcy – Sylvia Horne
David Duchovny – Denise/Dennis Bryson
Sherilyn Fenn – Audrey Horne
Miguel Ferrer – Albert Rosenfield
Warren Frost – Doctor William Hayward
Harry Goaz – Deputy Andy Brennan
Andrea Hays – Heidi
Gary Hershberger – Mike Nelson
Michael Horse – Deputy Tommy ‘Hawk’ Hill
David Patrick Kelly – Jerry Horne
Sheryl Lee – Laura Palmer/Maddy Ferguson
Peggy Lipton – Norma Jennings
Bellina Martin Logan – Louie ‘Birdsong’ Budway
David Lynch – GORDON COLE
Kyle MacLachlan – Special Agent Dale Cooper
James Marshall – James Hurley
Everett McGill – ‘Big’ Ed Hurley
Walter Olkewicz – Jacques Renault
Kimmy Robertson – Lucy Moran
Wendy Robie – Nadine Hurley
Marv Rosand – Cook at the Double R Diner
Carlton Lee Russell – Jumping Man
Harry Dean Stanton – Carl Rodd
Charlotte Stewart – Betty Briggs
Al Strobel – Philip Gerard/ ‘Mike’ The One-Armed Man
Carel Struycken – The Giant
Russ Tamblyn – Dr Lawrence Jacoby
Ray Wise – Leland Palmer
Alicia Witt – Gersten Hayward
Grace Zabriskie – Sarah Palmer
New actors (alphabetical):
Eric Ray Anderson
Ronnie Gene Blevins
Juan Carlos Cantu
Grace Victoria Cox
Owain Rhys Davies
Ana de la Reguera
Rebekah Del Rio
Edward “Ted” Dowlin
Jay R Ferguson
Caleb Landry Jones
Jennifer Jason Leigh
Sarah Jean Long
Priya Diane Niehaus
Elias Nelson Parenzini
Carolyn P. Riggs
Erik L. Rondell
Sabrina S. Sutherland
Cynthia Lauren Tewes
Sharon Van Etten
Top 10 Films That Were Successful But Cost Nothing To Make, Or Could Have
This list is the top ten films that anybody — you included — could make today if you wanted to. These films required no extensive Hollywood-style production, and either cost almost nothing to make or could have. (What I mean here is that even though a few of these films actually cost hundreds of thousands, it wasn’t necessary to spend that to make the film per se, and you could make these films almost the same without any budget).
If you have any films to add to this list, or you disagree with any of them, you had better comment underneath the article.
TOP 10 FILMS THAT COST NOTHING TO MAKE, OR COULD HAVE:
1. Kids – Even though out of this list this film had one of the highest costs, anyone watching this movie can see that they could make it themselves with a camera or two and a handful of local actors. This is possibly the “ultimate indie film.” Everything about the aesthetic, cast, writing and locations showed us all that anyone could make a movie — even if you were a couple teenagers sitting on a couch watching Kids, you were struck by how non-Hollywood this 1995 film was, and that you could get a camera and make this yourself. Anyone could make a full-length, in-the-theaters-and-on-talk-shows movie, if this was what a film could be.
All that was required, it seemed, to make Kids or a show like it, was writing a rough script (this seemed optional, actually, when watching Kids) and shooting some friends around town.
Kids was the first film directed by Larry Clark, and launched the career of writer Harmony Korine (and several of the actors in the show), and a lot of the reason it got so much exposure was the hype that surrounded its controversial subject matter.
Kids was filmed on city streets, parks, a public pool, a house, apartments and a club. The production may have had something to it the large budget, but it seems minimal when watching the film. The camera is hand held, and this was something mainstream audiences hadn’t really seen before in 1995.
2. Swingers – Anyone — or maybe any guy — around in 1996 or the few years after that will probably remember how much of an important movie this seemed to a lot of the people they knew. Other films of the time were more popular and grossed more, but guys talked about and recommended this film to each other, and when they talked about it, it was with a special meaning.
Swingers was filmed in locations anyone could easily shoot in: apartments, bars, a car on the highway, a trailer, a diner, a casino. The story didn’t have a traditional Hollywood plot, but it definitely took you somewhere, and took you somewhere different from where you started from, and whatever the message is, it seemed a worthwhile film.
3. Buffalo 66 – Somber, sober, absorbing. Christina Ricci, who was hung up on quite a few guys’ walls at the time, was at her most beautiful, with her hair dyed blonde, her voluptuous presence highlighted by an unusual-seeming outfit — a baby blue ballet suit — and her characteristic sensitive mien made a movie out of reactions to Gallo’s character — the tension and simple complexity of the states of mind traveled through during the hours portrayed in the film.
The cast of Buffalo 66 is small: 4 or 5 main characters. The locations: a dance studio, driving around in a small car, a hotel, a house, a restaurant. The script does not have a lot of dialogue. Again, the arc is not a traditional Hollywood one, but some of the scenes are unforgettable and it too definitely takes you somewhere.
4. Blair Witch Project – How many of you were just waiting for me to write “Blair Witch” on this list? This film exploded when it was screened in art house cinemas, then was picked up by and exploded in mainstream movie theaters. A lot of its success came, like Kids, from the hype surrounding it. It made $250 million — yes, $250,000,000 — and cost $35,000 to make, but you could see how you could make this film for even less over a weekend with some minor adjustments. It also resulted in a sequel film and a lot of associated Blair Witch products.
It was shot on a cheap (and low-quality) video camera bought from Walmart (and returned after use — there WERE no phone cameras at that time, but today you could shoot this on your cell). The settings: houses, trailer parks, the woods. The script: there was one, but most of the film was improvisation done by the three main characters. Like Kids, this film clearly shows that anyone they can make a film with nothing but a camera and a few local actors.
5. Clerks. A story about some people in a town. Watching this film anywhere in the world, you may think “it’s just like normal life.” This film was made for $25,000 by writers and directors Jay and Silent Bob. It was picked up quickly by Miramax chief Harvey Weinstein, who saw something in it that he thought would cause it to succeed with a wide audience. Like Woody Allen, there is a lot of dialogue in Jay and Silent Bob’s films. Everything is done with dialogue. And it’s funny: The jokes, because the film depicts people and scenarios at the level of the common blue collar man, are jokes that could be made about most people’s lives and social circles. People laughed out loud at this film, and you’re never going to fail if a film does that. It appealed to a certain demographic as well — like Kids and Swingers — and was kind of in the same vein as a lot of TV shows and pop culture things going on at the time.
Clerks was filmed in a basement and a convenience store. There were no stars or outstanding beauties (as there were in Jay and Silent Bob’s later films). Did I mention it was successful despite being in black & white?
What are the next 5 of the “Top 10 Indie Films That Could Be Made for Nothing?” Click here to read on >>>
Top 10 Films That Were Successful But Cost Nothing To Make, Or Could Have, Part Two
So, the next 5 films on this list:
6. Run Lola Run – For those of you who are out there saying, “Yeah, you can do drama, documentary-style, and horror with indie, but not action films because they require too much special costs,” here’s a high-intensity, high-suspense, blood-pumping movie that gets its “action” from the premise and the execution of that premise: Lola has a very limited amount of time to get something done … otherwise, something she cares about will be be in big trouble. Not only is the plot an action-based one (or action-demanding — that is, to execute it action is required), but also the character is creativity-based: Lola must solve problems to get through each obstacle in order to continue the plot.
7. The Celebration – It was called “Festen” in Danish, and it was a 1998 film about a group of family members who congregate at a house on the father’s birthday. Family conflict and various relationships are the subject of The Celebration. The budget of this film was actually $1.3 million, but how they spent that much on a small cast of people in a house I do not know. You could shoot this for nothing. Maybe the money went to actor’s fees.
This film was the first to be shot under the “Dogma 95” set of 10 rules which strictened the indie requirements for film-making, at least for those interested in this movement. Dogme 95 was proposed by Lars von Trier and Thomas Vinterberg (The Celebration is Vinterberg’s work). The set of 10 rules supported a type of filmmaking that was cheap and stressed story, acting and theme over more expensive and elaborate film elements.
8. Shadows – In 1959, the successful film and TV actor John Cassavettes — who had taken the money he’d made and opened up a theater and put out ads for limited time free membership — made a film that had been worked out organically at his theater. The film was called “Shadows.” The subject was one most of Hollywood wouldn’t have touched in the pre-civil rights movement era: a black young woman starts dating white men, and what this means within her family.
Filmed on streets and in buildings in a city, the premise and its demands are intensified and amplified through the progression of the film. Cassavettes later made several other pictures in the same way, using actors from his theater and “scripts” that had been worked out organically by the acting troupe.
At this point I don’t care what the other films are. The most important have already been noted. So how much of a strict Top 10 list this is, I’m not too worried. Continuing:
9. My Own Private Idaho – Unforgettable scenes and based somewhat on some of Shakespeare’s better and more famous plays (those that revolve around the young King Henry IV and the father / father-figure in his life), this film cost $2.6 million dollars to make — it has a star-studded cast and was produced professionally. I would have enjoyed it just as much if it had no stars and was shot on a handheld video camera (so long as the stars were as magnetic as Phoenix, Reeves and the others). This film has a great script and some interesting happenings, some great shots and videography, great acting, memorable characters and situations. This is a film not every kid could produce because it succeeds based on a lot of quality elements — the kind of things not every film-maker is capable of — but for those indie writer/filmmakers out there it may be an inspiration for what great writing and film-making can be in the independent — and alternative — genres.
It was shot in a lot of locations, both in America and in Italy, so you’d need at least the price of a few plane tickets to shoot something like it, or transfer the Italy-element to some other location within or nearer to your country. Locations include motels, tenements, hotels, a city park, long prairie roads, and Roman outdoor architecture.
10. A bunch of films that you don’t need to watch if you know the ones already listed –For example, “Withnail and I,” a British film about some interesting characters who get into some interesting situations in the country. If the other films in this list hadn’t been made, I might cite this one. “Slacker,” a 1991 dialogue-and-normal-life film that preceded “Clerks.” Some other great films that could be made more or less with no money, but maybe not as seminal as the ones already listed: “Last Life In The Universe,” “Love & Pop,” “Linda Linda Linda,” “Lost in Translation,” “Drugstore Cowboy,” “Beautiful Girls,” “Millenium Mambo,” and “Fargo.”
11. Breathless – Yeah, I want to mention “Breathless” by Jean Luc Goddard. A lot of his films could be shot by anyone, anywhere, for no money. The remake with Richard Gere as well.
12. Naked – I want to mention this Mike Leigh film, too. Because it’s carried off excellently. Very deep and real characters, very good writing, and some laugh-out-loud humor — similar in some ways, perhaps, to “My Own Private Idaho.” “Naked” cost almost $2 million to make, but was shot in houses, streets, empty buildings at night, and a lot of the dialogue is improvised.
Once again, the films I listed here aren’t the most successful indie films or the cheapest successful indie films that succeeded; they are successful films that anybody could have made, including you.