It starts well, goes on quite good for a certain time and then deteriorates at an incredibly fast pace, falling as low as an unimpressive sweet-sweet ending for softies. Comparing it to "Twin Peaks" is misleading. This tricky comparison led me to watching it and to regret it badly. To start with, this product as a whole looks like a Britney Spears music video (no offence to the diva - she's OK, bombastic and quite cute). In the end "Wild Palms" gives you a candy bar with a happy smile: "Suck on it and be happy, people have won, the revolution goes all right, all creeps and tycoons have been properly punished and before us, common people, is happiness and joy only; relax, there will be a party tonight, everybody who owns a luxury car is invited, the drinks are on the house!" "Twin Peaks" was something different. It was teasing the viewer during its run, lurking in the shadows, kicking the viewer in the butt now and then (the ghost punches were also common) and on top of that it destroyed even the slightest possibility of a sugary finale. "That's foul!" you say? Yes, but if it's done artistically, with proper ideas behind these numerous kicks and punches, there is a reliable reward when it's all over. Here is the difference between a genuine masterpiece and a pop culture show-off.Were there any problems before the final part in "Twin Peaks"? You bet. "Twin Peaks" had also a couple of over-the-top moments but "Twin Peaks" was always walking the fine line between the true horror and an easy-going drama, always ready to amaze. It hit and run, it delivered its weird moments perfectly and with style. Many "Twin Peaks" characters were easy on the outside and creepy inside. It's vice versa in "Wild Palms". The characters are flashy and super-serious on the outside but soon you don't care for them, while they are one-dimensional, like cardboard heroes; the crowds of holiday-makers with slogans, some revolutionary chick with a bomb and a hoot (something like "We fight for freedom!"), cheap CGI (by the way, in "LawnmowerMan" the CGI was - and still is - haunting), etc. - it all adds to the flashy but juvenile picture of "Palms". Boring talks of boring characters in acid surroundings, some swimming pool is used as an entrance to the secret organization of freedom-fighters (isn't that kidstuff?).There is only regret: instead of re-watching a couple of decent Oliver Stone flicks from the past, my time was annihilated by this trash that started off so well...Can recommend this failure to teenagers only, while it's flashy, pretentious, seriously didactic like "Matrix Reloaded/Revolution" with bits of explosions, gunplay, lounge music, sexy dames, and eye-gouging. Oh, and there is a katana in one of the scenes. Wow, isn't that groovy? A 3 out of 10 for this serial, which could have been a 10 out of 10 and could have become a rival to "Twin Peaks" but turned out to be what it is – a "pop-popsy" sci-fi.

How to describe this series? Imagine if Shakespeare was alive during the late sixties and seventies and decided to write a sci-fi epic at the height of the early nineties hype about virtual reality, and you'd only be in the same ballpark.The story? Okay, the story revolves around an unassuming family man, Harry, who only begins to realize the strangeness that is going on around him. A secret police force are kidnapping people. His daughter refuses to speak. His son is developing some violent behavior. His wife is withdrawing into a bottle. And a strange woman from his past is offering him a glimpse at a world he could only imagine before.Combining elements of Japanese and Eastern myths, Phillip K. Dick's quest for reality, Twin Peak's surreality, a grand opera's sweep, and science fiction's imagination, Wild Palms sets up the dominos of a world that could be and then lets them fall.Harry is drawn into the New Age cult of a powerful senator who is about to transform the world by introducing a new form of media - one that is so close to being real that it's often hard to tell the difference. If you had the choice of this world, or a world of your own creation, which would you choose? But what if that world was being controlled by someone with their own agenda? And as the world starts to deal with those questions, a group of libertarian `Friends' attempt to stop the senator any way they can. Two powerful houses will fight until there is only one remaining.This is not a series for everyone. It isn't sci-fi in the genre of Star Trek like most television fans are used to. It's also told in the fashion of an opera, with high melodrama and amazing leaps of logic. And lest you think that it is heavy, it also has some great patches of absurdity. But it is thought provoking, and has something to say about technology, religion, power, politics, drug use, and a range of other topics. And it says it in a way that doesn't speak down or make the audience feel they are being unduly manipulated. It is fine television for a very small audience.

This is a cult favorite, and in my opinion, it is Oliver Stone's finest achievement in film. This film watches much more like David Lynch-- If you liked Twin Peaks, then get a copy of this as soon as possible. This film is actually very deep in the examination of our society in how it portrays the masses as being glued to their televisions and easily controlled by media giants, and how much religion is cultish no matter how big. I recommend you watch it if you have a brain in your head and like to use it. It's not just another action movie that seem to waste the projectors at movie theatres these days...

Wild Palms isn't just a movie, it's a commitment. A four and a half hour commitment. But it's well worth it. The story, set in 2007, has parts of it that are starting to come true, and others that very well may. The beautiful thing about it is this: Practically everything you see or hear in the movie has a double meaning. Every line, every plot point has been thought out to the point that you're almost watching two movies at once. I remember seeing this on TV, during the original miniseries broadcast, and thinking, 'TV isn't ready for this. The world isn't ready for this.' I was amazed, and you will be too. You won't miss the four-letter profanity that you'd get from a theater film. The only problem is that some of the actors aren't that great. Angie Dickinson seems to over-emote like she's in a soap opera, but that atually adds charm in my opinion. Ben Savage(who was pretty young then) seems to have trouble with strong emotions, and Aaron Metchik (another young actor) has trouble, period. But who can blame him? I can't figure out his character either. One minute he's strong, intelligent, witty, and calm, and the next he collapses into a simpering little boy. But what can you do? You only have 4.5 hours to develop all these characters, huh? My rating: Quite Good.