I would say watch it. If you're already a fan of the show, it expands on what we know and what we don't. It goes into both the last days of Laura Palmer, with some of the previously unseen parts of the town's activities, and the case of Teresa Banks. Plus some characters announced to appear in the new series (the Jumping Man and Carl Rodd) were only in parts of Fire Walk with Me. So it would be worth seeing the movie just to understand their role in the world.

So anyone watched the first episode?

I did and it's weird

Good weird (Mulholland Drive, Eraserhead) or bad weird (Inland Empire)?

Definitely yes. Obviously we know the main plot points of Laura Palmer's death from watching the series but in FWWM there is some interesting bits about the Black Lodge / the room above the convenience store / it's inhabitants. Also FWWM is not only a prequel - it's in part also a sequel, as time in the Black Lodge / dream scenes is not always linear and there are things that happen around the time at the end of the series or after the series ie. the appearance of Annie.

I just watched FWWM yesterday. Next up "Missing pieces" and then the new season.. can't wait!

Well, then I just hope it's better than what I heard about it. THen again, it has David Bowie, so even if it's terrible it can't be a total waste of time :D

Still, that means that before I get to the new season I have to actually finish season two and then watch Fire. I feel kind of bad about it, but I never watched the last 1/3 of season two. After the central mystery of "who killed Laura" was solved the series just sort of fell apart and try as I might, it just got somewhat boring for me.

Breja, the middle of the 2nd season is kind of bad. Not extremely bad, but i hate all those stupid sub-arcs they introduced (James' sub arc, Wheeler's Arc and the stupid Nadine/Mike parts). If they had concentrated on the mythology it would be a 9/10 (if i reviewed it now) or a 10/10 (if i reviewed it back then).

I don't recall much of the original series any more. I recall it was interesting, then it started to get weird, then they were going in different directions (I recall something about a killer and chess games). I don't know if the writer was improvising but it looked like they had run out of the original plot. I never saw the movie.

So what were the good parts or the worse parts of Twin Peaks?

Also, has anyone seen Wayward Pines?

Yes, the first season had some very good moments. But after they revealed the mistery, it went downhill very fast.

The second season was a complete trainwreck, I try to forget that it even existed.

Can't blame you, there really are some boring/annoying things in season 2.
Word of warning though, the ending part in season 2 and also FWWM are really very different than for example the 1st season. There's a lot more of the weird stuff going on. FWWM is a dark movie from start to finish and doesn't have that light humor side that the series had.

I personally think FWWM is a great movie and prequel/sequel but I can see why a lot of people disagree - it's different.

Edit. I think the scene where Bowie appears is one of the best, if not the best in the movie. But it is not the easiest to understand. :)

I just like to think of Twin Peaks as a balancing act - on one hand you had the almost proto-Xfiles FBI investigation into a paranormal case with a mysterious mythology building up, on the other the sort of soap pera of the twon itself. And as long as the show balanced the two well and kept it all focused with the central mystery of Laura Palmer's death it worked perfectly. Then in the second season the balance was off, the show got more meandering and once the mystery was solved, it felt like the show has no reason to keep going, but it did.

So both Twin Peaks and Wayward Pines suffer from the same problem? Good until the mystery is resolved, and then poor second season?

Hmm... Is this a story (history) repeating itself? Was Wayward Pines too much of a homage to Twin Peaks (I have seen only the trailer, but it seems very influenced by it)? Did the writers of Wayward Pines learn nothing from the faults of Twin Peaks? Perhaps a good second season is too difficult to pull off (kind of the second-system effect).

The problem was much worse with Wayward Pines. The story was completely told at the end of season one. My guess is that a second season never was planned and they just did it, because the first one was a huge success.

They couldn't even get most of the actors from season one (or couldn't tell more stories with them because the characters were dead) and so they had to begin something new with an almost complete new cast. It was absolutely awful.

Twin Peaks Season 2 on the other hand had flaws (mostly because it was unfocused in the middle of the season), but it still had some charme and wasn't a complete trainwreck.

Now season 3 on the other hand... It might have some more uhhhm.... let me use the word "calm" times, but everything feels connected to the MYSTERY and doesn't have random bullshit (love stories that no one cares about) like Season 2.

My 2 cents after watching the 4 episodes.
It seems we're off for a great season ladies and gentlemen!

I see. Something like True Detective? I have seen only the first season, but it seems like that story ended and they did something very different (and not as good) with season two.
I don't watch much TV, so I don't know how common this is.