Ah, Twin Peaks. What more needs to be said about David Lynch’s strange and wonderful TV series? Part soap opera, part science fiction horror, part mind-melting art film – Twin Peaks is one of those rare creations that genuinely earns the adjective unique.

The show’s basic premise, and the plot point on which the entire show pivots, is the murder of Homecoming Queen Laura Palmer. Dale Cooper, an eccentric FBI agent with a penchant for great coffee and cherry pie, is sent to the sleepy town of Twin Peaks to investigate her murder and soon finds himself enveloped in a world of intrigue, parallel universes and demons. The rich storyworld of Twin Peaks is peppered with memorable, lovable characters, bizarre plot twists and edge-of-your-seat revelations. Besides that, it can be downright hilarious at times too.

However, Twin Peak’s biggest strength is its deliberate ambiguity. Season 3 just finished airing, a whole 25 years since the cliffhanger ending of season 2 in 1991, and left the audience with more questions than answers. I won’t delve into spoilers here – not knowing what each episode has in store is definitely part of the show’s charm – but the latest season takes so many left turns that many we’re somewhat disappointed with the season’s bleak finale.

I have to say, they’re wrong to be.

I’ve only recently discovered the work of auteur director David Lynch but one thing is for sure – his films never yield anything easily. The default reaction to his movies is “what the f**k was that all about?”

We’re living in a media landscape of neatly packaged narratives that tie up every loose end so this reaction is understandable. Audiences hunger for narrative closure. But Lynch’s work, I argue, expects more from the audience. Lynch aggressively challenges viewers to fit the pieces of his stories together in any which way that makes sense to them. David Lynch is so opposed to the idea of his films having any one meaning that he refuses to discuss such matters interviews. Film critic Mark Kermode infamously asked Lynch in an interview if the electricity imagery in his work represented the audience’s synapses firing as they try to make sense of it. He simply replied, “No.”

Although this may at first seem frustrating, Twin Peak’s deliberate ambiguity leaves space in the narrative for fans of the show to theorize and contemplate. Twin Peaks is a prime example of what John Fiske calls a producerly text. Producerly texts leave gaps in their narratives “wide enough for whole new texts to be produced in them.” Though many plot threads in Twin Peaks are satisfyingly resolved by the end of the last season, many more are left dangling, tantalizing fans of the show and leaving them grasping for meaning.

I admit, I would not have enjoyed my experience of watching Twin Peaks half as much if it wasn’t for the fantastic community on Reddit who worked tirelessly to decipher the shows deeper mysteries as each episode aired. When the first season came out way back in 1989, it practically invented the “water cooler conversation” – just who did kill Laura Palmer and why? 25 years later, these water cooler conversations take place across social media with thousands more people putting forward theories and ideas. It’s fascinating and exciting to be a part of.

It expects a lot of you, but Twin Peaks is must-see television and I can’t recommend watching it highly enough. There will be times when your mind is left reeling but Twin Peaks offers an extraordinary tale that is intensely rewarding, especially once you start delving deeper into its enigmas. The questions left unanswered by season 3 only work in the show’s favor – everybody is left wanting more. Here’s hoping we don’t have to wait another 25 years for the answers.