MovieChat Forums > Twin Peaks (1990) Discussion > Contradictions and inconsistencies...

Contradictions and inconsistencies...

posted 8 years ago by engle_james
13 replies | jump to latest

Just rewatching the series again, and time and distance has helped me see how inconsistent this show was. Yet I suspect die-hard fans would say there aren't inconsistencies and that Lynch had it all worked out. Still, here are the ones that really irritate me:

1) Pretty much everything Bob did after he killed Maddy. For someone who tried to keep his existence a secret, he sure was trying hard to show Cooper the golf bag where Maddy's body was hidden; he toyed with Laura for years before he killed her but was going to kill Donna a day or two after he killed Maddy; why does an evil entity like Bob only kill pretty young women? I guess evil entities are a lot like your typical serial killer.

2) The Tremonds can apparently be seen by anyone, yet Bob can't. Then when they disappear, no one tries real hard to find them.

3) Albert doesn't believe Bob exists, but saw Agent Jeffries disappear in front of his own eyes in Fire Walk With Me.

4) Why would Bob take Ronette with Laura to the train? Why wouldn't he just leave her at the cabin? He didn't want Ronette, anyway.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, it's just interesting to see how much they were making it up as they went along. What other inconsistencies did you guys notice?

[–] Aeropacker 8 years ago

1. It seems to me that BOB wanted to get caught after Maddy's murder - by that point it was only a matter of time really, and his host had really outlived his usefulness. This explains his reckless, impulsive behavior (murderous intentions towards Donna, almost hitting Coop with the golf club).

2. I think the Tremonds can choose who sees them and who doesn't. BOB can only be seen by two types of people - "the gifted and the damned". Still not sure if the Tremonds are good or evil, but I will lean towards good as they seemed to be trying to help.

3. Albert had no way of knowing that the phenomena related to Jeffries could be tied to BOB. He seemed like the type of person that only believes what he can see with his own two eyes.

4. BOB enjoyed traumatizing Ronnette - as an entity, BOB feeds off of pain and suffering (garmonbozia) and Ronnette gave him plenty to feed on. The more puzzling piece of this is why he would let her live. He was in the hospital smothering Jacques and Ronnette was right down the hall....she was the only person who could positively identify his host as the murderer of Laura.

I do agree that much of this show, was made up as they went along - Mark Frost admitted as much recently saying that he and Lynch knew who killed Laura from the beginning, but that the motive and circumstances changed as the show went along.

[–] Medinensis 8 years ago

The more puzzling piece of this is why he would let her live. He was in the hospital smothering Jacques and Ronnette was right down the hall....she was the only person who could positively identify his host as the murderer of Laura.

Excellent point and one of several reasons I've always argued that it was Leland who murdered Jacques, not BOB.

[–] Aeropacker 8 years ago

I would tend to agree with you except I remember Jacoby stating that he smelled the scorched engine oil when Jacques was murdered - doesn't that signify BOB is present?

[–] Medinensis 8 years ago

And to further your point, Leland had that BOB look on his face when he muttered "hospital" as Doc Heyward retired for the evening.

I could suggest that BOB's presence surfaced when his host was committing the murder, but either way, the lines do get blurred a bit -- perhaps that's by design.

I mean, was it Leland having the affair with Teresa Banks or was it BOB? Leland made it clear at the time of his dying that he would not remember anything that happened when BOB took over. Yet he was aware of some of his actions, he did say that they "made him" kill Teresa, so . . . .

The question of why BOB left Rnnette alive at the train car or the hospital is a good one -- but why leave Jacques alive at the cabin? Or even Leo?

There is more here than meets the eye.

[–] nikkiweir 8 years ago

Well, remember Leo ran away from the cabin, leaving the girls alone (and adding greatly to his sins), and he and the murderer never confronted each other. That guy for his part seemed rather careful throughout not to be outnumbered (as in the woods at the MLB meeting of ep2), and not to pick on people who might be able to fight him off straight up as either Leo or an aware Jacoby might. He's a suckerpuncher, like Hank.

There do seem to be undercurrents flowing at multiple levels between the killer and Leo, Jacques, Hank, and maybe others. For instance, Jacques never got a look at the attacker outside the cabin, but Leo, being not too dumb at all, might have guessed who it was for some reason.

I think they could have helped keep tabs on Laura, a project that also made them natural enemies of the preferred patsy for her killing or anything else unavoidably public that might have happened to her, Bobby. At a deeper level, maybe those guys are part of the "they," those others whose shame or ridicule had to be prevented by silencing those who knew the shameful facts.

______________________________________________________________
Bob's only afraid of one man. He told me once. A man named Mike.
--Laura Palmer's secret diary, Twin Peaks

[–] nikkiweir 8 years ago

That's who I think did all the killings in that thread of the story. Fits with the notion of denial as a primary theme of Twin Peaks.

We have a controlling person who thought of himself as a rational actor in relationship to specific goals, hence leaving Ronette for dead at the train car: he assumed she would not survive the knock in the head he'd given her. (Relying on faulty assumptions is another theme in many story lines. These are not the best Scouts.)

At the time of the false alarm he still did not realize that he might need a strategy for Ronette, but he probably did know that the alarm gave him only limited time without being discovered. Jacques was conscious, a threat, but Ronette so far as he knew still was not. Then he gets poked and poked.

Seeing the Bob flyer in Ben's office was in effect his realizing that some information had got out and that it must have been somehow from Ronette. And as others have said, as time passed and his crimes accumulated, he got more irrational and reckless, maybe thinking that he had some kind of mojo working for him --he'd never be caught since to that point he had not been-- or maybe just reacting to the building pressure. When yet more unwelcome news, about the secret diary, comes from Donna, the Bob image in the mirror looks to me like Bob is getting those dentures adjusted, i.e. the act is getting pretty old and might have lost its bite.

By the way, there are some things about the way the story unfolds that provide us with chances to wonder whether our sturdy law enforcement officers chat each other up occasionally. A second hospital incident involving a figure in the Palmer murder case? There's reason to think that the show writers are up to something here, that's all.

__________________________________________________________
Is the story true? One look at that picture will give you your answer.
--magazine publisher Hori, Shubun [Scandal] (1950; Kurosawa)

[–] Medinensis 8 years ago

. . . hence leaving Ronette for dead at the train car: he assumed she would not survive the knock in the head he'd given her.

Or as Albert suggested -- "either he didn't know or he didn't care."

[–] engle_james 8 years ago

Wow, thanks. Some of your answers do make sense! Here are 2 more:

1) Any idea why the show never told us who was watching Leo, Bobby, and Mike in the woods? Could have been Bob, but why would he bother wearing a mask? And why would he care about drug running? Weird.

2) I simply can't picture Bob sneaking into Ronette's hospital room and... injecting her IV with cleaning solution. This happened at the beginning of episode 10, I think. But who else could it have been? And with a 24 hour guard who didn't see anything, to boot. And why kill her now? Because she knew what he looked like? Then why was he stalking poor Maddy? Seems to me he would have kept a low profile at this point, knowing Ronette had ID'd him as the killer.

[–] Medinensis 8 years ago

My idea is not very considerate of the writers in all honesty. I'm not going to be very charitable here and just assume the writers ditched a direction that they initially wanted to pursue. But who knows? There are very insightful people on this board and maybe someone else can come up with something. I like to wrap it all up by making Bernard the man behind the tree -- still doesn't answer the question as to why he would be depicted that way. Bernard was working with Leo selling drugs so that fits ok, but why the mask and coat? And why show him briefly? So a better answer would be Leland, since we later discover he was running around in that garb on at least one other occasion. But I can't imagine why Leland/BOB would be prowling around in the woods with Leo to pick up money from Mike and Bobby either.

Josie, we are informed, also wore a coat and mask, during one of her own criminal pursuits. Is there a way to make an argument for Josie? Probably not. But I can't think of any other possibilities than those three characters.

As for your second question I think it's pretty clear that it was indeed Leland/BOB who snuck into the hospital to murder Ronette. But why now you ask? Well, could be that word finally got around that she had awaken from her coma, maybe even that she had identified him as the killer (remember Cooper holding up the sketches to Ronette to help identify the killer?). BOB couldn't see and know everything of course -- remember when he was informed of another diary and his reaction: "I had no idea."

So BOB probably thought Ronette was dead back at the train car, found out later she wasn't dead but in a coma and figured she wasn't worth the bother, but then he heard she was out of the coma and that was that -- time to take care of her as well.

[–] nikkiweir 8 years ago

I don't think Leo was expecting Mike to come along. Bobby had taken to doing business with Leo alone. Maybe the soliloquy at the beginning of ep11 was originally intended by the character who recited it to have been used for this.

(The characters do a lot of cuts and retakes, a kind of joke Lynch uses from time to time. Was this one? Actually pretty funny, now that I think about it.)

_______________________________________
"We've got gods and demons placing stakes"
--"15 Minutes," Rahj Mason

[–] engle_james 8 years ago

Medinensis, I expressed confusion about whether it was Bob who tried to kill Ronette in the hospital because injecting someone's IV with cleaning fluid does not seem like something Bob would do. Look at the way he killed Teresa Banks, Laura, and Maddy. Even Josie, for that matter. Bob, the evil entity, who kills people in rages, would not lurk in a hospital armed with a syringe of cleaning fluid to inject in an IV. I think Lynch and Frost would agree with this assessment.

I mean, it made no sense for Bob to kill Ronette, anyway. She had already ID'd him for one thing and also, he was regularly stalking Maddy and Cooper. If you don't want people to ID you, maybe you shouldn't appear to them in psychic visions.

[–] Medinensis 8 years ago

I expressed confusion about whether it was Bob who tried to kill Ronette in the hospital because injecting someone's IV with cleaning fluid does not seem like something Bob would do. Look at the way he killed Teresa Banks, Laura, and Maddy

Teresa: Struck in the head with a blunt object.
Maddy: Had her head slammed against a wall.
Laura: Stabbed multiple times with a knife and died from loss of blood.

While there is some similarity with death due to head trauma in two of those cases, I don't necessarily think that death by IV injection can be ruled out. Besides, BOB was in isolation with each of those other victims, could make a difference.

Even Josie, for that matter

It is explained that the cause of Josie's death was fear. There is no indication that BOB was the source of that fear. On the contrary, Cooper and Earle explain that BOB, sensing the fear, was attracted to Josie exactly because she was emanating fear.

Bob, the evil entity, who kills people in rages, would not lurk in a hospital armed with a syringe of cleaning fluid to inject in an IV.

Not trying to be obstinate here but I don't see why not. In the act of killing BOB displays rage, but he knows ahead of time he is going to kill. It's not as if he suddenly loses control and kills someone. He certainly lurked when he approached Laura in her bedroom, no rage there. When killing time came, the setting dictated his temperament perhaps. I guess we just don't see eye to eye on this one, but I do understand your objection.

I think Lynch and Frost would agree with this assessment.

You may be right; I have no idea.

I mean, it made no sense for Bob to kill Ronette, anyway. She had already ID'd him for one thing . . .

I don't think BOB was worried about BOB being ID'ed (how would that matter if you're a spirit entity?), it was Leland that BOB was worried about.

[–] Medinensis 8 years ago

I'm a "die hard" fan but I can allow for some inconsistencies if they don't get in the way of what's important to the overall story.

1) This is an interpretive confab on your part, so I'll give you mine. Right before Leland/BOB rammed his head into the wall and pulled the plug on their relationship, he referenced Leland, as a vessel, being all used up. I think BOB was just squeezing in a few quickies before pulling the plug. After all, he didn't go out looking for a Laura-like match -- Maddy came to him. Once there, it was too hard not to indulge his thing. You also seemed to assume that BOB is only about killing, he "toyed" with Laura? I think you need to go back and listen to what MIKE explained to Cooper about the ring and fulfilling appetite.

2) I don't understand these two objections at all. Who says BOB can't see them and who should be looking for them?

3) It's not clear that Albert saw Jeffries do any such thing. In fact, in the missing pieces Albert left the room before Jefferies disappeared. Besides, we don't know that the scene was "real" in the conventional sense. We are shown Cooper saying to Cole right before the cut to that scene -- "let me tell you about a dream I had"

4) This is an inconsistency? The train theme turns up in other Lynch works (see Inland Empire). Dig a little deeper.

I do think you are justified in saying that they "were making it up as they went along," at least to some extent. I think this happens in most TV series for obvious reasons. The best we can hope for is that there is a broad outline of what is to be explored and what the end game will be -- no matter how many twists and turns and red herrings are spread out over multiple seasons.