898 Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me

[Jean-Luc Garbo]

Having watched the film recently, I still have a problem with that scene. It feels like a forced happy ending. I love the close-up of Laura's tear-stained face and the burn to white, but it feels like an unsuccessful attempt to let the audience go away "happy" thinking that Laura is in a better place. I still love the movie, but every time I feel a little let down by the ending. I just leave it feeling that the film should have ended with her body being unwrapped at the end. After all the horror in the film, it feels a little cheap to end the way it does.

[Mr Sausage]

Having watched the film recently, I still have a problem with that scene. It feels like a forced happy ending. I love the close-up of Laura's tear-stained face and the burn to white, but it feels like an unsuccessful attempt to let the audience go away "happy" thinking that Laura is in a better place. I still love the movie, but every time I feel a little let down by the ending. I just leave it feeling that the film should have ended with her body being unwrapped at the end. After all the horror in the film, it feels a little cheap to end the way it does.

How does it feel forced? The movie has been preparing you for that scene with angel imagery and with various incarnations of good spirits and potential saviours (the series, also: think Sarah Palmer's visions of the unicorn). An angel floating down at the end is appropriate, not just because it's so desperately needed by the narrative (which purports to tell Laura's story, and so needs some kind of closure with her, especially since it's taken so much time building its metaphysics and making a space for Laura outside the physical world--ending with the shot of her in plastic closes her physical story only and leaves the rest hanging), but it's desperately needed by the character herself after she's been run through the depths of hell. If you love Laura even a small bit, you spend the whole movie hoping that, in some way, she gets her angel--and it's such a beautiful payoff when it finally happens. How hopeless and uncaring would this movie be if it didn't give her that angel?

The reason such an image works and doesn't feel out of place is because the tone of the movie runs to extremes. Like the way Julee Cruise's sublime Questions in a World of Blue, which soars to extravagant heights of melancholic beauty, crashes straight into the equally extravagent ugliness and relentlessness of the song The Pink Room, played in that club. Lynch loves to pair off extreme states of beauty and ugliness, and the end of the movie takes us to the bottom (Laura's murder) before soaring straight into heaven by way of the angel. It's a very childlike image, that angel, which makes it a great counterpart to the animal simplicity of Bob/Leland's murderlust. Lynch's sensibility works with contraries: if there is a boogey-man, there must be a corresponding opposite at the extreme end, and both figures may very well issue from the same place and the same substance. The Wizard of Oz is a central text for Lynch's movies: in this case, removing the angel from FWWM is the equivalent of keeping the bad witch but removing the good witch. What Lynch does, tho', in FWWM is use conventional figures or images (such as a picture perfect Christian angel in a clearly non-Christian movie) as abstractions for extreme emotions. One doesn't have to accept the existence of angels or Christian salvation to get pleasure from FWWM's final image: one simple has to understand the emotional plane it's representing--and after such a devastating movie, that cannot be very hard to do. I'm convinced that angel is one of Lynch's purest and most defining images.

[accatone]

(such as a picture perfect Christian angel in a clearly non-Christian movie)

My days of reading into Lynch are a long time ago - so there is no literate back up but i just rewatched the film some days ago (and read out of curiosity the diary that i grabbed for some pennys…uups) and never thougt about Twin Peaks nor the movie as non-Christian. There are of course the two sides/twins of the coin/peaks all the time but besides the madness goinig on ... in the end i always had the impression of a very conservative film and TV Show always putting the "good values/morals" on top (just to be clear, i like both very much - and comparing it to other shows of that time makes it of course very un-conservative, but thats not my point). However, i do not want or can start an insider discussion about Twin Peaks (because i am not an insider) but maybe you have some statements regarding FWWM that would show me its non-Christian "intention" - i am just curious.

[mfunk9786]

I'm glad to hear that so many share the enthusiasm I have for this film. I feel it's the quintessential Lynch picture, and the only thing that drags it down is the fact that you must watch the entire Twin Peaks series before fully appreciating it, which many critics must not have done at the time of its release, I can think of no other reason for it to have been dismissed like it was. Aside from being a great "real life" relocation of the themes of the television series, and a way to address the murder of Laura Palmer in a more adult way than allowed on television, it succeeds in being a fantastic horror picture. Lynch's ability to shoot a scene and remove most or all sound, relying totally on visual anticipation for a bone-chilling effect is unrivaled among even the finest of horror directors. When Laura leaves school mid-day to go home when she presumes the house is empty, and goes up the stairs to her room only to be shocked at what she finds, I can't recall a moment in any other film when my blood has run so cold, and I've jumped higher than I did upon her discovery (this type of thing was done very effectively once again behind the diner in Mulholland Drive) I feel that Lynch was at his creative height when he made FWWM, and put together a near-perfect film that has luckily not faded too much into obscurity, judging from this thread. Hopefully the people who purchased that giant Gold Box set of the TV series will know to seek this out once they're done watching it. It's a great springboard into his films for those who haven't seen many, because it's operating on a totally different level than the [still great] television show.

[Mr Sausage]

(such as a picture perfect Christian angel in a clearly non-Christian movie)

My days of reading into Lynch are a long time ago - so there is no literate back up but i just rewatched the film some days ago (and read out of curiosity the diary that i grabbed for some pennys…uups) and never thougt about Twin Peaks nor the movie as non-Christian. There are of course the two sides/twins of the coin/peaks all the time but besides the madness goinig on ... in the end i always had the impression of a very conservative film and TV Show always putting the "good values/morals" on top (just to be clear, i like both very much - and comparing it to other shows of that time makes it of course very un-conservative, but thats not my point). However, i do not want or can start an insider discussion about Twin Peaks (because i am not an insider) but maybe you have some statements regarding FWWM that would show me its non-Christian "intention" - i am just curious.

Might you be confusing "non-Christian" with "un-Christian?" Twin Peaks obviously doesn't share either Christian theology or metaphysics: its vision of spirituality and the afterlife is non-Christian. This, however, does not mean is it un-Christian, meaning against or opposed to Christianity. It could share quite a number of Christian values.

[accatone]

I must admit, i do not see the difference between "un" and "non" (at least in this case). If possible, please elaborate what makes this film NON christian but not UN? (i love semantic problems...but again my beloved german language might play me a trick here...
ps: after rereading your post (sorry, i am typing on my phone) i think what you say is that there are no christian themes on the surface or in the script, right? But isn't this irrelevant if the outcome of Good/Bad, redemption etc. is loaded full with the latter, intended in the first place or not?

[Mr Sausage]

I must admit, i do not see the difference between "un" and "non" (at least in this case). If possible, please elaborate what makes this film NON christian but not UN? (i love semantic problems...but again my beloved german language might play me a trick here...

It's not a broad distinction, but here goes: it's like the difference between non-American and un-American. If you're non-American, you're simply not from America, but you can still like America and share its cultural or social values. Someone who is un-American can be from America, but either does not share, or is against, American cultural and social values (a lot of Americans love to use un-American as a pejoritive term).

You and I are non-American, but that does not mean either of us are un-American. We could be, but it's a different catagory altogether. So, a movie that shows us an afterlife that does not involve Christ is non-Christian; but that does not mean it opposes or sets itself in conflict with Christian values, which would be un-Christian.

[accatone]

Ahhh...i see! Thank You! But only because there is no(N) christ after death makes it a NON?I mean, if this is the case where is besides biblical based films a christian movie? And what would be, in this terms, an UN christian movie? Salo, Bunuel etc.?

[dadaistnun]

As much as I love The Straight Story, Mulholland Drive, and Inland Empire (and certain elements of Lost Highway, a film I've cooled on somewhat in the intervening years), I don't think Lynch has made a better film since Fire Walk with Me. (Mulholland comes really, really damn close though.) I've seen FWWM many times (four alone in the one week it played in my hometown theater), and it never fails to both scare the hell out of me and make me feel like bawling by the end. Familiarity with the show makes it even more devastating. Not only do you need to have seen the series from start to finish to begin to make sense out of things like Heather Graham's one scene, but knowing all of the supporting characters, many of whom barely show up at all in the film, allows you to become more immediately immersed in the Twin Peaks world/atmosphere. I can't imagine watching this without having watched the show, though I wish there was some way I could have that experience.

I think the performances by Sheryl Lee and Ray Wise are among the best in the Lynch canon, certainly up there with Rossellini in Blue Velvet, Farnsworth, and Dern (she's good in all three Lynch films she appears in, but there's no question she really heads out in to the stratosphere in IE. (And a quick aside: Anthony Hopkins may be considered something of a ham these days, but he has several fine performances behind him, The Elephant Man's Dr. Treves being one of the best, imo.)

As far as the FWWM deleted scenes go, I'd love to see them, but never ever ever reintegrated into the film. The film as-is is so perfectly paced, a great example of pruning back to only what is essential (and I consider the Teresa Banks part of the film as essential, setting up the pace, tone, and almost free-associative quality the film has).

[Westwood]

I cannot remember how much of Twin Peaks I had seen before watching FWWM, probably the first 5-10 episodes, and it wasn't even in English. To this day I still haven't seen the entire series, and all this time, having watching the movie about 6 times or more, hasn't made me love the movie any less.
As opposed to you dada, I guess I will be able to make some sort of comparison between seeing this movie before and after the tv show.
I think after watching the movie several times and loving it so much, loving so many things about it, made me love the movie as a stand-alone film. I know I am missing a lot, judging from all the things I've read in all these years, but they sure do not detract pleasure from watching this masterpiece.
I have the golden box, and honestly I don't think anyone who splurged out on it will pass the chance to watch this movie. I think the show itself is a real genuine cult item and it seems odd to think someone won't wanna research a bit more into the people involved in it. I rememeber in the late 90s, when getting a hold of the tv show was impossible for many, and being haunted by the theme, I snatched anything I could related to it: the soundtrack albums, Julee Cruise's album, singles, and even that wonderful art video of Industrial Symphony No.1.

[Jean-Luc Garbo]

The Wizard of Oz is a central text for Lynch's movies: in this case, removing the angel from FWWM is the equivalent of keeping the bad witch but removing the good witch.

That's a good point. I'd forgotten about Lynch's love for Oz (and the appearance of the angel near the close of Wild At Heart) so that makes sense. I'll have to consider your point more along with Laura's conjecture that she'd just fall faster and faster before bursting into the flames where not even the angels can save her. Which would be the point you're making because despite her pessimism, an angel (and the good Dale) do save her. However, my original point has to do with the film being so mired in horror and despair that it'd make more sense to end on her body being discovered. I come away from the movie quite chilled and very disturbed by what I've seen. Even despite the angels. (I feel the same way about the end of the film Xiu Xiu despite the narrator's hopeful assurances.) I guess I'm also thrown off by the angels because I've only ever been able to see them as Christian symbols and because the series had no angels at all so to see them here in the film seemed like a non sequitur. I'm sure Lynch had his reasons - your contribution here certainly helps as it's a good close reading - but I'm still figuring them out for myself.

[R0lf]

Thinking back on it I think Lynch's only movie where the characters are not redeemed at the end is Lost Highway. It is an ongoing theme in his work of reaching peace and understanding in chaos and often violence.

[accatone]

Yes, good point on Lost Highway. There you have something like a "closed" circle with no redemption - a self contained(?) world with no methapysical layer below or above, everything is locked in this world (methaphysical in the sense of something like redmption, spirituality etc. in religious terms). And if redemption has somthing to do with "stripping" off the original sin i think its if not the main but one of the most important topics of the Lynch films i have seen (i think i have seen all features). So i am with Rolf here and can still not see the NON christian in Fire Walk With Me. (of course "redemption" is not just a christian term/issue…so i should better say FWWM ist not NON religious to me...)

[Westwood]

Doesn't anyone think that the figures of angels are so commonly used that they ceased to have a strict chritian or chatholic (or whaetever) value and they are just creatures of good, and that not always do you need to read too much into every detail?

[Finch]

Has any other film had such a change in fortune since its release? (Peeping Tom is another vilified famous film that went on to become a critical darling) It is sometimes easy to forget that Lynch got some of the most poisonous reviews in his career for this picture. I vividly remember what it was like when FWWM came out. Most critics could hardly wait to give the film a decent kicking. At 13, 14 I was too young still to be able to see it in the cinema so I had to wait until my older brother got the VHS of it. I was just at the right, impressionable age when Peaks came out and it had a profound effect on me (the only series since to equal and even surpass its impact is David Milch's Deadwood). The pilot and episodes 2 (Tibet - need I say more?) and 14 especially were such an eye-opener. Peaks had an unbeatable blend of humour, darkness, kitsch and sincerity, suspense and comedy, the humane and the callous. One scene that perfectly sums up how Peaks managed to address so many different emotions at the same time was in episode 8 when Ed tells Coop and Albert how Nadine came by her eye-patch: it's heartwrenching because you feel for Ed and Norma but even more so for Nadine - the tragedy of that three-way relationship is so keenly felt - and just when you think it might tip over into mawkishness, the camera is on Albert wiping away tears of laughter, with his smug, almost Cheshire-like grin that Miguel Ferrer has down to a T. I can't help breaking out laughing myself if only because Albert's reaction is just so priceless while all the same thinking how much of a bastard (albeit a loveable one) he can be. Anyway, before I digress too much..

FWWM was a ballsy move on Lynch's part in many ways. In some respect, the series (up to Episode 17 anyway) may have been too much of a good thing because it raised expectations for the film not only sky-high but it's also made people go into the film with a certain mindset, not being able to shed the emotional baggage of the series and hence being unable to see the film for what it was. This includes me. When I saw FWWM for the first time, my response was mixed. It took me the distance of a few years to appreciate it for what it is. It's Peaks but not in the ways most people anticipated it to be. When the familiar and loved characters from the show popped up and disappeared again almost like an afterthought, like ghosts almost, when the town itself appears different, stripped of the places (the warmth and coziness of the Double RR for example) we've come to associate with it (so much so that one critic at the time suggested that it could just as well have played in any other place), it required a lot of acclimatisation on my part and an understanding that this is, more than anything else, Laura Palmer's film. Lynch wasn't kidding when he said that he wanted to explore what it was like to be radiating life on the outside and yet to be dying on the inside. FWWM is the closest Lynch has ever come to making a full-blown horror film and one of his cruellest visions of the neighbourhood.

Peaks the series used its humour as a release from the darkness; FWWM multiplies the horror ten-fold and even the comedy (which IS there) offers no counterbalance; instead it's bleakly, bitterly, even disturbingly comical and ironic (one of the film's strongest scenes has got to be the Palmer family dinner sequence and I don't think that Lynch has ever done such a piercing indictment of the American suburban idyll before or after as in that scene - how utterly absurd and deeply ironic it feels when Leland becomes disgusted by the dirt under Laura's fingernails, how he is almost hilariously oblivious to the fact that he is the architect of the very things that he is repelled by).

There are many things I like, even love in FWWM: the score is quite possibly Angelo's very best. Falling apart, no other song in the series (not even The World Spins) touches such a raw nerve in me like Questions in a World of Blue does. When Laura mentions how it feels to be freefalling in space and you catch fire. When Mike screams at Leland, pointing an accusatory finger at him and is all but drowned out by the blaring horn of the truck passing by.. Laura on a drug-incuded high when Bobby kills the courier (Sheryl Lee is pitch perfect in that sequence)..

The film's final 15 minutes is, with perhaps the exception of Mulholland Drive's, the finest coda Lynch has ever done. When Leland holds the torn pages to Laura's face and says "I thought you always knew it was me" (paraphrasing from memory), it's all the more blood-curdling because it seems to imply that Leland was rather knowingly implicit in what he did (which would, in fact, contradict what Bob Engels and Mark Frost stated in Episode 16). But if there is one scene in FWWM that resonates with me most strongly, it is the very ending in the Red Room. You couldn't ask for a better score than The Voice of Love, triumphant and yet sad and with Badalamenti's trademark aura of mystery; the lighting is exquisite; the camera looking down on Laura and Coop, zooming out slowly and dissolving into white, to the tunes of Cherubini. So many people initially wanted to have a narrative closure from the film and were disappointed when they didn't get it but the emotional closure FWWM offers is so much more fulfilling.

And yet, while my reaction to the film has definitely evolved over the years, I don't feel quite ready to join in the chorus and call it a great film. It suffers from the same problem that almost any film based on a series seems to be plagued by: it requires too much advance knowledge and I feel that the script as written by Lynch and Engels doesn't give the film enough independence to stand on its own. I think it's pretty clear from the film that they approached writing FWWM with the intention of filling in the gaps that the series left in reconstructing the timeline of events leading up to Laura's death. That in itself is not a problem. But I feel it does becomes an issue when you close the gap but don't give the uninitiated the context to it. In its weakest moments, FWWM feels like a succession of, for the lack of a better word, narrative checkpoints to be ticked off a list. The short scene with Harold (who is never seen again after that; equally, the blink and you'll miss it cameo by the Log Lady - check? yup, moving on...) is a key example of this and even if you are an attentive viewer (and like any other Lynch film, FWWM demands and rewards active particpation) and make educated assumptions about what the larger context of such scenes is, it still sticks out and makes the scene feel clipped. Even the most ardent defenders freely admit that to anyone who comes to FWWM fresh without any prior knowledge of Peaks, the film will seem like an incoherent mess. And I have to admit that, no matter how many interpretations of it you can read on dugpa.com and elsewhere, Lynch still loses me with the Bowie sequence every single time. It doesn't hold any interest for me and smacks of self-indulgence.

So I guess, while I clearly like a lot about the film, I can't embrace it fully yet. It could be that my response to it is still evolving or maybe that's as far as I can go with FWWM. Definitely one of Lynch's better efforts but I'm not quite convinced that it's deserving of the critical rehabilitation to the extent of calling it a masterpiece. My two cents anyway, for what it's worth.

[Finch]

Just to add another thought to the previous post: I wonder if some of the props given to FWWM in recent years could have something to do with the fact that it's now regarded as a turning point in Lynch's career, as a "bridge" film between the more narratively conventional films like The Elephant Man and Wild At Heart and the Moebius-strip like plots of Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive and Inland Empire. It's tempting to think that in some ways the later films may have in hindsight validated FWWM's existence in the eyes of many critics who originally thrashed it. It may well have been one contributing factor to the film's re-evaluation of late.

[Westwood]

Expectations are just a b***h aren't they?
Very often when you are eager to watch a movie, tv show, or listen to a new song/album, you have certain expectations which alter your perception a lot. I have had this happen many times.
Often, I would play an album, not like it as much as I expected, and not play it again until something makes me curious about it again (usually finding out a certain detail about it), and then I would like it and play it more times and really fall in love with it.
It happened with movies as well. It's silly example but the only one I can think of right now: after seeing a plethora of Clueless teasers and trailers on MTV play every day (many would not even end up in the movie), when I first saw it, I didn't even like it. After I watched it again I liked it a bit, and after more than a dozen times I am so in love with it.

So, it is natural that many were disappointed by what they did not see in FWWM. Like I said, I was lucky I guess, because I had only recently been bitten by the TP bug and having seen just a couple of episodes, I was able to appreciate FWWM as a movie, a standalone movie if you wish.

I can't help but remember when TP first aired on tv in some European countries, it definitely looked like some kind of soap to me, not different than Dallas or any other big thing that you would read about so many people loving to bits. I always assumed the audience to TP was not any different than other tv shows.
What I wanna say is that I think the majority of people who watched the show were not Lynch fans or into TP more than just another show, and missing many things or simply not caring too much about stuff that has been talked since its demise.
So it's only natural that showing those people a movie like this, you would get that kind of cold reaction.
Like, the movie was made for real die-hard fans, and not fans of a tv show.

[dadaistnun]

There are many things I like, even love in FWWM: the score is quite possibly Angelo's very best. Falling apart, no other song in the series (not even The World Spins) touches such a raw nerve in me like Questions in a World of Blue does. When Laura mentions how it feels to be freefalling in space and you catch fire. When Mike screams at Leland, pointing an accusatory finger at him and is all but drowned out by the blaring horn of the truck passing by.. Laura on a drug-incuded high when Bobby kills the courier (Sheryl Lee is pitch perfect in that sequence)..

The film's final 15 minutes is, with perhaps the exception of Mulholland Drive's, the finest coda Lynch has ever done. When Leland holds the torn pages to Laura's face and says "I thought you always knew it was me" (paraphrasing from memory), it's all the more blood-curdling because it seems to imply that Leland was rather knowingly implicit in what he did (which would, in fact, contradict what Bob Engels and Mark Frost stated in Episode 16). But if there is one scene in FWWM that resonates with me most strongly, it is the very ending in the Red Room. You couldn't ask for a better score than The Voice of Love, triumphant and yet sad and with Badalamenti's trademark aura of mystery; the lighting is exquisite; the camera looking down on Laura and Coop, zooming out slowly and dissolving into white, to the tunes of Cherubini. So many people initially wanted to have a narrative closure from the film and were disappointed when they didn't get it but the emotional closure FWWM offers is so much more fulfilling.

Couldn't agree more with this; very well said.

And yet, while my reaction to the film has definitely evolved over the years, I don't feel quite ready to join in the chorus and call it a great film. It suffers from the same problem that almost any film based on a series seems to be plagued by: it requires too much advance knowledge and I feel that the script as written by Lynch and Engels doesn't give the film enough independence to stand on its own. I think it's pretty clear from the film that they approached writing FWWM with the intention of filling in the gaps that the series left in reconstructing the timeline of events leading up to Laura's death. That in itself is not a problem. But I feel it does becomes an issue when you close the gap but don't give the uninitiated the context to it. In its weakest moments, FWWM feels like a succession of, for the lack of a better word, narrative checkpoints to be ticked off a list. The short scene with Harold (who is never seen again after that; equally, the blink and you'll miss it cameo by the Log Lady - check? yup, moving on...) is a key example of this and even if you are an attentive viewer (and like any other Lynch film, FWWM demands and rewards active particpation) and make educated assumptions about what the larger context of such scenes is, it still sticks out and makes the scene feel clipped. Even the most ardent defenders freely admit that to anyone who comes to FWWM fresh without any prior knowledge of Peaks, the film will seem like an incoherent mess. And I have to admit that, no matter how many interpretations of it you can read on dugpa.com and elsewhere, Lynch still loses me with the Bowie sequence every single time. It doesn't hold any interest for me and smacks of self-indulgence.

And I actually largely agree with this as well. I love the film dearly, but I certainly wouldn't argue with anyone on these points. As I recall, the Bowie sequence was originally conceived as a possible jumping-off point for another Peaks film, but I don't see how Lynch & company could have seriously thought that would come to pass. Lynch certainly makes the films he wants, not catering to popular tastes (with the exception of some of the soundtrack choices for Lost Highway, a flaw with the film that I've never really been able to completely get past), but even he had to know that FWWM wasn't going to set up some sort of new franchise.

Just to add another thought to the previous post: I wonder if some of the props given to FWWM in recent years could have something to do with the fact that it's now regarded as a turning point in Lynch's career, as a "bridge" film between the more narratively conventional films like The Elephant Man and Wild At Heart and the Moebius-strip like plots of Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive and Inland Empire. It's tempting to think that in some ways the later films may have in hindsight validated FWWM's existence in the eyes of many critics who originally thrashed it. It may well have been one contributing factor to the film's re-evaluation of late.

I think that's quite possibly the case, though I see the final episode of the series as the moment where this slight shift in style took place.

[Dr. Snaut]

Twin Peaks and especially the last episode of the series I think must have been influenced by the Epilogue of Berlin Alexanderplatz. Although there were a lot of surreal aspects to the Twin Peaks series, the series itself was heavily melodramatic in style. Yes, some of the dreams Cooper had were quite surreal, but the series itself played almost like a soap-opera.

This is how I felt BA was like, until the mind fuck of the epilogue simultaneously substantiated and destroyed everything we watched in the previous 13 episodes.

[Michael]

.... but the series itself played almost like a soap-opera.
.

Yeah but to be fair, name one drama series made for TV that is not soap-opera or melodramatic in any degree.

[Dr. Snaut]

Oh, that was totally not meant to be a criticism of the show. In fact, I think the melodramatic, soap-opera aspects of the show allowed for the surreal moments to be magnified ten-fold, and made the show even more shocking and exciting to watch. I felt that same way about Mulholland Drive, where the first half of the film takes place in this "ideal" Hollywood world where everyone's dreams come true, and the second half of the film opens the door to the gates of hell where life is an endless series of nightmares.

Although every television show has it's soap-opera moments, I think Twin Peaks was a lot more melodramatic and soap-operaish than anything else on television (besides soap operas, of course). But I felt this style was intentional to intensify the more serious and surreal moments in the show, which it did quite effectively.

[stereo]

Twin Peaks and especially the last episode of the series I think must have been influenced by the Epilogue of Berlin Alexanderplatz.

This is a smart connection to draw; agreed.

[Jean-Luc Garbo]

Thinking back on it I think Lynch's only movie where the characters are not redeemed at the end is Lost Highway. It is an ongoing theme in his work of reaching peace and understanding in chaos and often violence.

It's been awhile since I saw it last, but I recall the end of Mulholland Drive having little redemption.

[Dr. Snaut]

Upon re-watching the last episode of Twin Peaks recently, I am shocked that more people haven't praised this episode as being a high point to Lynch's most surreal, artistic, and subconscious vision. In retrospect to the series as a whole, this episode can be examined and broken down at so many levels, that it is almost a perfect episode. The 50 minutes is probably Lynch at his most terrifying, and I would probably nominate it as the best thing Lynch has ever done in his film making career, with FWWM right behind it.

[R0lf]

Thinking back on it I think Lynch's only movie where the characters are not redeemed at the end is Lost Highway. It is an ongoing theme in his work of reaching peace and understanding in chaos and often violence.

It's been awhile since I saw it last, but I recall the end of Mulholland Drive having little redemption.

I was operating on the assumption the chronological end of Mulholland Drive was when the cube is opened and that the first part of the movie was a sort of purgatorial set up to redeem both the characters after they died.