We had one last year, may as well do it again. Post your thoughts, opinions, theories, jokes, memes, etc for the second iteration of True Detective. Hopefully even if the show isn't as good as last go round, our conversations about it will be.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
If this season lives up to half of the greatness that was last season, it'll be awesome.
That bike scene had me like
Did anyone else think Colin Ferrell's character was actually a good dad for the first part of the episode? Probably should've seen that coming
He's probably as good a dad as an alcoholic, drug addicted, corrupt, violent, impulsive, depressed, hopeless, criminal cop who's raising his ex-wife's rapist's kid is gonna be.
"12 years old my ass......Fuck youuuu."
This show on Netflix?
HBO
..ahh man :/
CLIFFHANGER
Well that escalated quickly...
i hear that...my jaw hit the floor.
Yeah.... Straight up GoT. Holy shit.
I'm just...so...confused!!!
I mean... just sayin....
I did notice in the scene after the initial shock of it, my thought was "Hmmm, there really wasn't a lot, or really any blood for a shotgun blast that close."
Thinking maybe rock salt or rubber pellets instead of shells perhaps.
Thoughts on this episode:
1. Car banter was better last season, but they should keep trying.
2. Is that Rick fucking Springfield? THAT'S RICK FUCKING SPRINGFIELD!
3. Nick Pizzolatto clearly loves trolling feminists.
4. CACAW MOTHERFUCKER!
Anybody else think Vince Vaughn is about to become a major badass?
Vaughn is badass, McAdams is badass.
I cannot wait for the scene where McAdams gets/has to use all of those knives.
Yawn. Stee-rike two. What a letdown after such a great opening season.
I look at it this way. Anyone comparing it to Season 1 is going to be disappointed. Not only because of the greatness of the first season, but because you have seen the first season in its entirety, so it is fleshed out and complete. Comparing the two, at this point, is unfair to this season for two reaons:
1. It is essentially a different show. The only similarities are the title, Nic Pizzolatto, and the style of the opening credits. If you watch it as a new series you can better judge it on its own merits.
2. We are only two episodes in, so we have no idea how well it will turn out. I would much rather prefer an episode or two of exposition and world building that leads to eventual awesomeness, than to have the first two episodes
end up being the best of the series. I thought this season was going to be a slow-burn, but the end or the second episode basically said, "Sike!"
After episode 1, I was dissappointed, but willing to give it a go on its own merits. Just didn't think it was fair to compare it to the brilliance of Season 1 after just 1 episode.
I will say I was happy with that decision after episode 2. it was the first feeling of...maybe discomfort is the word? that I definetely had watching season 1 (I mean that in a good way).
I think there is a good story to be told here over the remaining episodes. They are doing a good job building the darkness in these characters. From the opening monologue about being locked in the basement and literal darkness, to the additional hints about McAdams characters past experiences in a cult (which I would assume was against her will), and Tim Riggins having some serious issues about: his sexuality, his mother, his time in Iraq/Afghanistan.
The case itself was not that interesting in the first episode, but now I really want to see what is going on there too.
I don't get why everyone is so down on the second season. I didn't watch the first season until a couple of weeks ago because I couldn't get through the first couple of episodes. I think that is just how the writer writes and I have no doubt things are going to pick up quickly from here on out. I was already more interested during the second episode of this season than I was the first episode.
Well, I hope you're all right. I agree that it could be unfair (?) to compare or judge this offering by last year's standards especially after only two episodes, but all I know is I don't like it. Don't like the actors, the style, and how I had to try hard to watch the whole of both episodes because I wasn't interested in the people or the story. Entertainment enjoyment is largely a matter of taste, I guess this just isn't up my alley.
I just read a great review of episode 2 from Grantland, with perhaps the best quote about this season so far...
http://grantland.com/hollywood-prospectus/true-detective-season-2-episod...
No posts in a while, anybody else still watching? This was by far the best episode of the season IMO
I did something stupid last night. I had missed E3&4 thought I clicked on E3
but found out afterwards I had watched E4 and WTF!!
Ok so I am calling it now....my Sixth sense true detectiveness tells me the bad guy is......The onset movie photographer. He seemed creepy and involved somehow, thoughts???
I really have no inkling as to the ID of the killer yet. My best theory is that the Vinci mayor is directly involved somehow, and had his city manager killed. I think the fact that the manager was also stealing from Frank may just in the end be a coincidence to mislead all of us, including the detectives.
I'm really struggling with Vince Vaughn (and the actress that plays his wife). The acting is pretty poor whenever either of these two are on the screen. I love Vaughn in funny roles, but like Brad Pitt, maybe he should just stick to those. Just like Pitt's last "what's in the box?!?" scene to end Se7evn, Vaughn is just really distracting as a serious actor.
Farrell and McAdams are remarkably good and the Friday Night Lights kid is doing okay, but they need to give his character more than one emotion.
Right now, I would compare the entertainment value to more like The Others or The Bridge, not TD1, GoT or The Affair. Solid TV, but not "can't miss it" TV.
I thought ep2 of The Brink was much better than ep1. Ballers just seems like "Black Entourage."
Vaughn's acting seems a lot better to me when he's in mobster mode, not discussing land contracts. I think Farrell keeps getting better with every episode. I was amazed how "cop like" he was in the final scene, not what I really expected from his character.
Farrell is really the surprise of the show for me. I would not call myself a fan of his persay, but his character has really grown on me as the season progresses. For all his f-ing up, you see glimmers of good detective work in there more and more frequently.
I also like his interactions with McAdams. But I agree I think the writers havn't given her character or Taylor's enough meat to work with yet, but I could see that changing as we get more into some of the freaky deaky cult "club" stuff.
The problem is that there are only 4 episodes left...
Vaughn's acting seems a lot better to me when he's in mobster mode, not discussing land contracts
I read a comment on some other blog suggesting that perhaps this is intentional. Vaughn's character "Frank" is not a good actor. Doing land deals and running legitimate businesses aren't what he is good at. In those situations, Frank is "acting" and not doing a very convincing job. But when the real Frank shows up on screen, the notorious crime boss that controls everyone with fear and intimidation, he is much more comfortable in his own skin and Vaughn comes across as better inhabiting the role. I think that gives a lot of weight to his comments about the world being a facade covered in paper maiche that can break at any time. His legitimate businessman facade is cumbling so he is reverting to his old ways. I think that by the end of the series, Vaughn's acting will be less harshly judged.
If you want to talk about bad acting, Taylor Kitsch has the acting range of a telephone pole. Ferrell and McAdams are knocking it out of the park.
My left-field prediction: I think Frank's red-headed assistant (not his love interest) is the one that is screwing Frank. He wasn't late that one time because he was "with his girl" he was late because he killed the other henchman of Frank's and was cleaning himself up. Dead henchman probably discovered what the red-headed dude was up to.
Yeah, seems like that red-headed guy is offered up too early as the easy target. Like in TD1 when they went to the trailer in episode 4. You knew it was way too early to "find the bad guy."
I expect Frank will kill the red headed guy while torturing him, or something, then the next episode, somebody is still fucking with him.
I have also seen the theory that the red-headed guy is the real father of Velcoro's kid/rapist of his wife and Frank just gave him some other guy's name and address in order to gain a "favor" from him. Frank seems to be big on favors.
Yeah, he only seems capable of showing one emotion. I do think his character is very interesting though, and I'm guessing he'll play a big part in the rest of the season
I thought the guy was pretty good in Friday Night Lights. I just think the show hasn't given him much to work with so far.
The character has been written to imply a lot of depth, but his lines are very one note.
You were spot on with your prediction.
Interesting tidbit regarding the ID of the killer. I hadn't noticed this, but apparently the theme song changed ever so slightly from Episode 1 to Episode 2. They moved a couple of lines from the end of the song into the an earlier portion of the tune.
The key line in question is "I live among you, well disguised".
Leading to a lot of speculation that this is a hint that the killer is a main cast member (not necessarily one of the 3 detectives), but a person we met in the first 2 episodes and features prominently in the series.
Another little tidbit from checking out the blogs: the masks found in Caspere's home represent a group called the Hamatsa. This was a native American secret society that believed in a group of man eating monsters, which included Gwaxwgwakwalanuksiwe...who was a raven that pecked men's eyes out. Cool connection.
Ok, I'm struggling to follow some major subplots, and looking for some clarification/confirmation (WARNING SPOILERS BELOW):
Colin Farrell:
Rachel McAdams:
Taylor Kitsch:
Vince Vaughn:
Anything I'm missing? It seems like the three cops are bonding, despite their conflicting interests/orders from above
I feel like the motive for Casper's murder has something to do with the Mayor and Vince Vaughn wanting different things, and I'm sure our three cops will get caught up in the middle of it.
My long shot is that Vince Vaughn killed him....in a sort of dual personality way....because " he is better when we are at our worst" or something along that line...he is better as a gangster....he can't get his wife pregnant - Casper got shot in the nuts...
Long, long shot is that it was the biker cop. No theory here except he is whacked with personal stuff....
I have been pleased with the show....good character development so far...
Without spoilers I'll just say that was a crazy final scene this past Sunday. That should get the story moving.
I really liked this past episode. I find myself really getting drawn in to what exactly is going on here.
Again, my thoughts on Farrell's character continue to improve. Watching him show up and beat the hell out of Rick Springfield was a highlight. The bombshells that were dropped on him this episode...wow...will be interesting to see if he is off the wagon next week.
McAdams "handcuff" line was pretty funny considering the actress delivering it.
To me, the big "bomb" this episode wasn't even a surprise. In the first episode, we see a picture of the alleged rapist. He's a very skinny hispanic. The genetic math doesn't really add up, since very skinny hispanic plus skinny dark haired woman doesn't tend to equal fat ginger kid.
Yeah, he knew it wasn't his genetic kid but, it doesn't matter to him.
Not what we're talking about. Aaron Moorehead set him up to take out some dude by saying it was the wife's rapist, and it wasn't. So now Colin Farrell realizes that he sold his soul for nothing.
The thing I find intriguing about TD2 is it has gotten better with each episode...I think if NP plays this story right this season might "end" better than TD1.
Episode 5 was the best of the bunch so far. I am pretty interested to see how this story resolves.
As for Season 1, I thought the last episode ended up being fairly weak in a few ways.
I read his novel "Galveston" after watching season one. In both, he wrote a very good story, and just didn't seem to be able to end it the right way. Hoping he breaks that cycle this season.
An early critic, I have warmed up to this season somewhat, but to me, nothing about this season is going to be better than TD1.
So those two Hispanics that came into his club are going to come back with a vegeance, aren't they? And things are too cozy with his wife, bad things are coming her way.
Between the wife or Ani's sister. I think one of them has the red shirt on before the end of the season.
So...any thoughts after episode 7?
*Spoilers follow if you havn't watched yet*
I thought through the whole episode that 1 of the 3 (4 with VV) characters were going to bite it before the end of the episode. Kinda sad that it was Paul. But it sets up a really neat nihilistic angle to the finale. None of these 3 left seem like they care about living or not (Frank seems to care a bit I suppose, with the plans he is putting in place, but that could be to make sure his wife is taken care of). The other 2 have literally no one left to support/support them.
Thought the idea of the assistant being the girl from Caspere's office made some sense, and would not be surprised if the brother was the photographer that was on the movie set (access to the Cadillac for example). Would also explain why they didn't kill Velcoro in the house. They may be enacting some vigilante plot, but they arn't evil.
It also seems more and more like Caspere stealing money from Frank and then being murdered might be more of a coincidence than anything. If the kids that survived the robbery are the killers, they had no reason to go after Frank specifically, and Blake admitted that he killed Stan for finding out what he was doing.
I called the movie set photog 2 weeks ago!! I knew that dude was involved with Caspere's death. Turns out he probably wasn't "the bad guy" but as you said a vigilante seeking his parent's death. They never wanted Velcoro to die or they would have killed him, they needed him to keep diggin!
nm
I have to admit while I was watching last night. I found my brain swimming a bit as I was trying to keep up with who was who and who did what to whom. Confusing.
Same. I had to read a recap this morning just to piece it together. This season has had a lot of moving parts and hasn't necessarily made it clear what's important and what isn't. I feel like the story might've worked better as a book. Next Sunday, I'm gonna binge watch the first seven and see if it's clearer that way.
The story would have worked better if they had about 4 more episodes to work with.
There are just too many players and complexities for it to be absorbable in just 8 episodes.
I think this season has been great. Maybe not the same as #1 but fabulous none the less. Tough to follow at times with all the characters but watching it twice helps. WSJ has a good summary as well.
Characters have been excellent in my opinion. Vince started out kind of painful but I think his acting has improved. The other 3 have been outstanding from day 1 plus the secondary folks have been great as well. Can't wait for the finale....
This season has been on the upward swing...I had to start using closed captioning while I watch the episodes so I could understand what the hell they were talking about.
I wonder if Franks wife and the Russian mobster might be in cahoots as well.
The best part about the last episode is that there is only one more episode to drop beauts' like this one:
Uggghhhhh...
To steal two lines from The Atlantic's roundtable review:
"I wish you well in your bid for dramatic respect, Vince Vaughn. But you've chosen the wrong muse in Pizzolatto."
"I sincerely doubt that motel offers room service."
So, with one episode left I still have no idea what the hell is going on with this season. I mean last season was pretty cut and dry. Two cops looking into the cult killing of a girl and digging on that. This one is around "casper's" death but I just think there are too many back-stories and characters in this one. Nowhere near up to season one which is disappointing.
My feelings exactly.
I feel like this season took the same form as last season, but then went one level up so to speak.
What I mean by that is last year, the 2 detectives started off investigating the Dora Lange case, and ended up uncovering a greater conspiracy involving some powerful men in the state (Rev. Tuttle, etc.)
But by the end of the season, beyond interacting with a handful of said people, the gran conspiracy itself really had not be unraveled. Now perhaps it is implied that it will be, given that they found "Carcosa" and the evidence that Rust had collected/videos/etc.
In this season I feel like we get the same setup, a few detectives investigating a case that leads them to a greater conspiracy. Except this time, we are getting to see the conspiracy in its entirety. Caspere's death has really taken a back seat to the bigger picture, as finding his killer or killers at this point has really taken a back seat. It remains to be seen if by the end it gets wrapped up, but I think it has certainly gotten stronger episode to episode.
I see what you're saying and admire your commitment to the show. They certainly did pull up more of the curtain on this one. Maybe that's what defines the utter failure of the show, it was just too much detail for an 8-show arc. Waayyyy toooo much.
This show has been so bad that it may be watched in the future as parody of the genre. It will be a drinking game when you have to remember a minor character from 5 episodes before just because they are now a prime player. Watch, this week, that movie set photographer with his 90 seconds of previous screen time will reappear as the mastermind of the entire initial murder. Wisky. Tango. Foxtrot.
But the backstories in this one are insane. I mean in season one you could easily figure out the Woody's character had a struggling marriage and he liked the ladies. Mathew's character was a little different but very dedicated to the job in his own way.
this season everyone has some elaborate backstory. I don't even know enough of all of them to write them down but it seems a bit much especially for only 8 episodes as cds7c said.
I think getting that balance right about providing enough of the complexity of a story without getting too much in the weeds must be really difficult. Maybe we need to think about that the next time a storyteller doesn't give us enough of the background. The length of the arc may be the editor.
A lot of us also have been discussing GoT here as well and they had some problems this year jumping into story arcs. Did we spend enough time with Arya in the House of Black and White? Sansa at Winterfell was another one that may have benefited with a slower story telling pace. Sometimes you gotta get to the plot points before your time was up.
AZ has an interesting point, it's tough to complain about more backstory and complexity in a medium that often doesn't give it. But this seemed to come at the expense of much of any character development. People who are really into this show didn't know who Burruss was until last week, just think of the people who watch the show but don't care enough to go onto MB's to talk about it. They are really, really lost.
After reading through my own clumsily worded response, I noticed another glaring parallel. In Season 1, the Dora Lange case was closed after the boys took out those meth heads and shot up the foilage to make it look like a huge firefight had gone down. Before that we had spent a significant amount of screentime on interviews only to establish that the case that had been "closed" wasn't even close to being figured out. Even though as an audience we thought maybe they had found the guys.
In a flip of the script, we found out here at the midway point of the season that the Caspere case had been closed after the shootout, while the audience already had a pretty good idea that we were no where close to actually solving the case.
Kind of an interesting experiment...which structure works best? The general consensus seems to be the S1 was better. But my wife and I rewatched the first season over the weekend and there are some glaring holes. The police work was just not very good, for example. And as much as I liked season 1..."Green eared spaghetti monster....green paint...house repainted green..." was a stretch of storytelling that I feel like gets overlooked big time.
Good point. Two things stand out as far superior about Season 1: acting and the sexiness of the story. I'm in land development, I understand the deal, but this is still just mind-numbingly boring stuff.
And the acting. Which I've mentioned a time or two before. But McConaghey covered up for a lot last year.
On the acting I 100% agree. McConaghey was fantastic in season 1, and I feel like Woody might be one of the most overlooked good to great actors in the last decade+.
The supernatural element in Season 1 made the story seem like it was more than it really was in some was, but I can't argue that was also a big part of the appeal.
Just saw this article that helps sum up everything going on so far this season. I'm sure I'm not the only one a bit confused with so many minor characters and subplots:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/08/03/true_detective_season_two...
OMG that's depressing to read. The plot has been a clusterfuck from the start. Actually listing it out makes it even worse. Reminds me of the Fantastic Mr. Fox line: "That's just bad song-writing, Petey!" Modified to "That's just bad story-telling, Pizzolatto!"
It's almost over! We did it! We survived what will likely be Nic Pizzolatto's last show!
For my own curiosity, for the amount of disdain you have expressed for the show....why watch it?
I know, right. Because I loved the first one so much. Because I like complexity in plot. Because Colin Farrell has been really, really good. Because I've always had a crush on Rachel MacAdams (although that haircut is doing its best to tone down any attraction).
But it's not even the overcooked plot. The writing is horrific. And you could have expected that Vince Vaughn would be a struggle, but underrated in her awfulness is the actress who plays his wife (and her room-entering saunter! Swing those hips, my girl!)
Maybe I'm hoping it will come together the last 90 minutes. Maybe, like you put it, they gave us more of the conspiracy this time and it was too much, but that is a noble reason to overcook a plot to this extreme. Maybe we'll get to see that sad bar room singer again. No, wait, I don't want that.
I'll admit to coming around on Colin Farrell, I've never been a fan, also really like MacAdams, haircut and all. Vaughn is just not good and the plot seems gratuitously complicated. Add in the hard to take dialogues between Vaughn and his wife, well, I really hope for better next season.
I like the new season. Still trying to figure out if they are trying to make Vaughn a good guy after he did all that stuff
I have never watched season 1, only season 2. I wouldn't say it's the greatest crime drama ever made but I don't get the ridicule or the confusion.
For me, it is precisely because of season 1 that season 2 is such a disappointment. I'm not the only one, most of my friends who are watching share my feelings, but we're all still watching, just not enjoying the show like last year's production.
It's obvious that we all have different tastes, glad you like it and can overlook, or not notice, the warts that jump out at some of us. Every single person I talked to last year about the show absolutely loved it. This year, not so much, but it is obvious from this thread that a bunch of folks here seem enthralled. Like I said, I'll finish it up and hope for better next year. I would recommend season 1 to you, but heck, you might not like it at all, tastes being what they are.
This. After every episode of season 1, I was yelling at the TV. Season 2, I'm just trying to keep up with characters and connections. It feels like I'm watching GoT, but skipping every other episode.
Yeah, this.
The only thing I'm getting in this years' is that there's 2 conspiracies, one with the Russian and one local. the piece that links them both is Caspere.
The 4 (now 3 after the shootout) cops are investigating Caspere's murder but know there's other stuff going on. Each is a mole for someone else as well as being a mole for the woman that's the State's Attorney General.
Each has enormous baggage.
The cute blonde was abducted as a kid, her Dad ran a commune, her sister's a prostitute of sorts and she herself has significant intimacy issues.
The skinny veteran guy is in the closet and has intimacy issues and had a death wish but managed to get his girlfriend pregnant and his Mom blames him for her trailer park life and stole a huge stack of money from him that he saved up when he was in Iraq.
Velcoro got played and killed a guy he thought was his wife's rapist (but was not) which turned his life into a death spiral and he got crooked.
There are so many characters in the drama that I did not even recognize the Chief of Police in the most recent episode. I can't even remember any one's name except Frank, Blake (because Frank says it so many times it would be a good drinking game) and Caspere and Velcoro from having just read it.
Every time someone appears in the frame, I spend time trying to remember who it is and what his story is so I can process the scene unfolding.
The Writer/director want everyone at this point to be guessing who Caspere's murderer is and who is going to survive the final episode.
What the audience is trying to guess is, Who is Velcoro's son's real biological father.
Yeah, I see a lot of people saying this but I don't get it. There really aren't that many characters to keep track of and only 4 had any kind of back story. One of them now killed.
I think your first sentence is more true than this. Who killed Caspere is less important to me as to the motivation and how it ties together all the pieces, or doesn't.
Could be wrong, but I thought the hair was a dead give away.
At this point, between the hair color and the fact that he person that produced the name of the "rapist" for Frank to give to Velcoro was the gentleman with said hair color, seems like the pieces are all there.
I agree that whomever actually killed Caspere at this point is not terribly important (just like in season 1, the individual case becomes much less important than the overall story happening behind the scenes). As said, there are two individual stories going on here crime wise. The involvement of Caspere is more or less coincidence that makes it look like they are more connected than they really.
As for people's disappointment with this season, the overall feeling I get is that "its because its not season 1". I loved Season 1, but have been able to enjoy this one on its own as a completely different story. If this show wasn't called "True Detective" I think the reaction to it would be more positive perhaps. Season 1 had its flaws as well, but the strength of the two leads really helped to overcome a lot of it.
this. totally agree, minus the season 1 stuff that I haven't seen.
reading the comments from not having seen 1 it just looks like everyone wants a simple story with only 2 or 3 characters. rather than the network of interrelated plotlines that are happening in 2. So apples and oranges really. Stop comparing it to 1, and enjoy 2 for 2.
The two main characters were what made the first season. It just seemed like the writers said "Ok, if it worked last season, than more must be better!" And then proceeded to overwhelm us.
Unless its a...
Red Herring
I have to say that my strong dislike of Season 2 is not a reflection at all of Season 1. It's a reflection of good story telling in short season arcs. I've never seen The Wire, but from Sopranos to Deadwood to GoT to The Affair to The Killing to Breaking Bad, our standard for what good TV is has been dramatically raised with the move to cable for drama's. My expectations are high because there is a lot of good TV out there competing for my attention. I really like Vince Vaughn, but I was skeptical about his casting and it's proven to be much worse than expected.
It's not about Season 1. It's about being a good TV show.
could be a rabbit hole but I'll bite. What exactly is wrong with the story telling and Vince Vaughn for you?
Again I'm not saying this is the best show out there, but it's not bad.
Yeah, it's a rabbit hole, I'll let it go. I've talked about it enough already.
I guess that's what I don't get. I've read all the comments above but I don't see any specific comments beyond: it's bad.
Regarding Vaughn as Frank:
I've seen comments on other boards that Vaughn isn't believable in the role as a gangster because he comes off as too weak. Doesn't seem like a killer or ruthless enough to be believable as a bad man. You say you questioned him in a dramatic role. But my counter is that that seems to be exactly what his character is. Overall a weak pseudo-gangster that get's taken advantage of. Otherwise no way he gets ripped off for money and doesn't start just straight up killing people. To be sure, that's what the Russians would be doing. That's the character, a weak gangster that gets taken for money, and if so then Vaughn plays it very well. Until he reached his breaking point where there truly was no way out, and he starts killing people and burning shit down.
You want an exposition, I defer to Huey Lewis. "Sometimes bad is bad."
not an exposition, just something more substantive than: it's bad
no worries though. It's common for the comments I've seen elsewhere as well.
Fernley, I respect your analytical posts, but really, the reasons I don't love the show have all been mentioned already. The actors, the acting, some of the writing, the gratuitously convoluted plot all contribute to my feelings. I was just going for the joke with this post. In the end, though, I think this all boils down to taste, there is no accounting for it one way or the other. I also think if you watch season 1, you'll see, in the big difference between it and season 2, a lot of the reason folks are disappointed with this season. But if it's your cuppa tea, enjoy. Like I said, I'm looking forward to next year in hopes of another product as entertaining as last year's, which I really liked.
sorry, I didn't mean to ruffle any feathers. Let me rephrase:
I am sincerely interested in someone sharing specifically why they think it's bad. Having never watched Season 1 I am unencumbered with the expectations it fostered in those that did, and to me it really isn't that bad of a show. I find it enjoyable, sure that has something to do with taste but also I do know quite a bit about television and movies (full disclosure: I invest in them). What I see above in your comments (here and above in the thread) is that you think the acting is bad and the story overly convoluted.
Neither of those is about taste. You're making comments that should be able to be discussed with well reasoned thought, no? Why is the acting bad? What parts of the story are convoluted to you?
As I attempted to point out, I understand the criticism of Vaughn's Frank, but disagree with the core criticism for the reason I said. I would enjoy someone on the "it's bad" side of the table making the counterpoint. Same with the story to which I find complex, but not overly so and not to the point where I find it too difficult to follow what's going on. I think those are great discussions.
However, from most of the comments and sorry to say, yours included, the reason seems to start and end at:
It's bad
Season 1 was better
I could follow along easier in Season 1
Acting is bad
I will definitely watch Season 1, but after Season 2 is over. I am expecting it to be MUCH better. But as I said I would actually enjoy someone going beyond the basic criticisms.
Again, apologies if I came off abrupt.
Nah, no ruffled feathers here. I respect your attempt to have that discussion, it's just not worth the effort at this point to me, so just call me lazy and we'll be on the same page. I'm not incapable of understanding a complicated plot, just unwilling to go but so far beyond what I like (taste) to enjoy something I just ain't enjoying. That's the taste thing, I just don't like it all that much. I watch a lot of quality TV, so I know it when I see it, and to me, this ain't it.
I believe that was Justice Potter Stewart's justification as well
I considered that when I wrote what I wrote, and leg for the post. More appropriate would have been a discussion on likes and dislikes. There are a lot of things that folks love that I really don't like. I hate Lima beans, I hate green beans and green peas. Even the little ones cooked in butter and garlic. Just don't like them. I really don't like mayonnaise on a sandwich, to the point of I won't eat it. I dislike fresh cucumbers because as a youth, I worked a couple of years in a pickle plant. You know, at 65 years old, there are a number of things that I have not been able to learn to like. So really, I should not have posted in the first place since I just wanted to weigh in as not loving it, but got caught up in justifying an inconsequential opinion. I realize, of course, that the problem is that we are still 29 days from being able to spend time talking about what we really care about.
no worries. I certainly am not trying to single you out, even though I did (sorry), I just really am interested in someone giving me a more expansive take.
In regards to the storytelling, I think most people are looking at it from the wrong angle. What they of the "convoluted" side are looking for is the big bang theory of storytelling. Something happens and everything follows. Whereas Season 2 is the Implosion theory, something happens but it is only revealed a piece at a time through the development of the character(s). I would akin this to Memento by Christopher Nolan. That entire movie was frustrating because what you thought was the catalyst kept getting revealed to be only part of the story, but it was DAMN good. I see the same with the way the story is told for TD 2.
Perhaps the comment below about binge watching it would serve well for those that feel this way. Not sure.
respect your decision to not engage though.
Well, I didn't feel singled out, really, given your obvious interest in the show and having read your posts again, I just really caught the "invest" thing, so I can see your interest in a more substantive discussion on the perceived flaws of the show. I am usually easily motivated to be expansive, so I can understand your wanting to engage in more than "it's bad" observation. I loved Memento, by the way, so it wasn't just the style. I think the reason it seemed overly "convoluted" may have a lot to do with me losing interest often which led to inattention. I honestly wouldn't be interested in binge watching this show, I didn't like it enough. After last night's episode, I had had more than enough. My wife and I discussed this a bit, and she paid more attention than I did and still didn't like it. We laughed out loud at Frank's blood dripping drag through the desert and felt that Colin's ending was pretty lame, too. Not sure you'll love season one like we, and most folks I've talked with did, but I hope you will because it was definitely quality tv. My taste in tv runs to shows like Justified, Prime Suspect, Mad Men, Ray Donovan just to name a few. In the end, though, I just didn't like the show, and 'splainin' why is a bit like justifying my dislike of green peas. Why? I don't know, I just don't, you know?
yeah, you caught my not-so-subtle subtle hint there as to why I am interested. It's hard to say those kind of things without coming off like a douchebag.
I am not a huge fan of the ending of TD2 to be honest. I knew the "who" killed Caspere was going to be the lesser interest, as to the thing that tied everyone together. And that to me is where it fell short. I see a lot of gripes about killing off Frank and Ray, and really I don't have an issue with either being killed but I plot points in the finale were off for me.
Frank and Ray go rogue and blast a log home full of baddies black ops style. Then they separate for some reason when they are both going to the same location. Yeah, Frank wants to get the diamonds for the "just in case" but it's not like Ray can't know that. Ray wants to see his kid one last time. Frank could have talked him out of it or spotted the car while he did so... and give the man the suit. Just palm the diamonds and take them with you. how hard is that.
no worries. I get that the show isn't perfect but yeah I was looking for more specific critiques. Question on the story telling though, binge watching aside, do you think the show would have been "easier" to follow had it been a Netflix type thing that was released all at one time? You could watch as many as you like when you like.
Yeah, you think those 2 wouldn't have been on hyper alert?
And the drug dealers knocking off Frank because the club burned down? Really?
They weren't his anymore, he got muscled out. That part was a tough to swallow.
Ray would have run to a remote place in his fast car to evade the SUV? Nah, he's not that dumb.
He'd have run away from his family and new girlfriend to protect them but, not up a dirt road in a charger after he ran all the gas out of it.
I don't know. I don't do Netflix but probably will be dragged kicking and screaming into it soon enough. I watched this show, week after week, so I guess I would watch it in a Netflix type of release. Easier to follow is misleading. I have little problem following complicated plot when I am engaged, but too often during this show, I found my attention wandering and I'd miss something. This generally doesn't happen to me if I am being genuinely entertained.
Good luck with your endeavors. By the way, agree with your take on Frank's ending. As for Ray, he had his knife out, he could easily have popped off the transmitter and kept it in his car while taking them on a wild goose chase, then, after the boat had sailed, he could have tossed the transmitter and lost them. Hard to take on assault rifles with a shotgun and a pistol, seemed like a dumb move.
Sorry you don't like it cds7c. I really like it - to each their own I guess.
So Blake is the kid's dad? Seems obvious.
Is Caspere Paul Woodrugh's dad? ....
Except the guy more recently confirmed through DNA testing as the rapist looks no more like the kid than Ray (but he does look EXACTLY like the guy behind the counter in the Miller Lite/'Carry On My Wayward Son' karaoke commercial...").
My guess is that there is either a lot more to this story or the kid is simply Ray's...red hair and all.
What is Casper was the one who raped Ani at the commune...what would tie the story together even more.
I feel like the fact that Ani told her father she remembered the name of the man but didn't reveal it...leads me to think it may very well be a character we already know. Could be anyone from that picture (Caspere/Chessani/Pitlor)
To those who say the plot is too complicated and convoluted (of which I have been one): binge watch the series. I did it last night, and it's much clearer if you watch it as if it were an 8 hour movie. It becomes clearer that Pizzolatto is trying to do a modernized, Chandler-esque take on Chinatown, and unfortunately for him the format of a weekly television show just isn't conducive to that. This season is a lot better than most give it credit for, but unfortunately, it just doesn't work that well in the chosen medium.
Well that's 3 for 3, Pizolatto can't end a story to save his fucking life.
I thought the ending was fine. Maybe not perfect, but it worked.
I'm curious as to what specifically you thought was acceptable about the ending. Not picking a fight, just wanna see where you're coming from. To me, the ending came off as nihilistic for the sake of nihilism. Like Pizzolatto's grand theme was "life sucks, then you die." It felt pretentious. Not to mention full of tropes (one night stand baby, men sacrifice themselves to save women, women now do little but grieve for the dead men, "bad guy" has to die as atonement for his sins, running away to a foreign country, guy gets killed by his dirty partner). Not to mention the massive plot holes. There were high points, but it certainly wasn't the finale you'd expect from a show of this caliber.
I try not to spend much time overthinking my way through TV dramas. If one looks hard enough, one can find plot holes and overused plot devices in virtually any show or movie - at least to that person's way of thinking.
It wasn't perfect by any stretch. But I thought it was a better ending than the season 1 ending and was the best episode of an otherwise very uneven season. For me, its biggest challenge was that it had to make up for the fact that way too much was crammed into the other 7 episodes and it had to somehow put a somewhat comprehendible bow on the whole thing in just 90 minutes. Which it did, IMO.
Fair enough.
It was bad enough they did this, but they went and did this TWICE.
More, if you consider that Woodrough left his girlfriend and mother behind, and then Ray's ex found out he was almost definitely the kids father.
3? Are you including The Killing? Pizzolatto quit that show after two episodes.
the show did have a very unsatisfying ending.
I actually omitted the Killing. Was only counting the things he's done solo: his book Galveston, and the two seasons of True Detective.
Gotcha, so don't read his book then. Thanks!
If you liked TD1, you'll like the book. I read it after watching the show and a lot of the themes are very similar and the main character is basically Rust Cohle. It was just one of those where it seems like the author's thought process was "Well, I'm out of paper, so fuck it, THE END."
I must say this one ended better than the first....but man i can't wait for Sunday night football.
Holy crap. Still lost. A little cleared up but whatever I guess. I don't have the energy to devote to watching it all over again. When it was over, looked at my wife and was like.
Thank goodness.
Read this. It helps.
Well...I really liked the theme song.
I felt like the finale was very predictable as it progressed, whereas in the first season I was at least held in suspense for a good amount of the episode.
The most accurate picture to sum up the season:
agreed. very predictable.
the Lost poster is some funny shit
Anyone catch this? i missed it.
http://uproxx.com/tv/2015/08/the-spectacularly-cool-detail-you-probably-...
Ray's death was foreshadowed
I did. Surprised others didn't? It was very Twin Peaks.
I think Twin Peaks wins the self-aware foreshadowing though. Character says "I'll see you in 25 years," show comes back 25 years later. Can't wait for that OT thread come next spring.
So I finally got to watch the finale. For me, it was more of the same. The first two scenes typified my problems with the acting -- a great 5 minute scene about the background of Ferrell/McAdams and a horrifyingly bad scene between Vaughn and his sauntering wife, Jordan. Just compare and contrast the acting in those two scenes. If anything, this show gave me a lot more faith in McAdams than I have had before.
But the fundamental question is how to end a show. There was a lot of discussion about how Season 2 ended compared to Season 1 (like this), but as I've said before, I didn't view the True Detectives as comparables. My problems with Season 2 was that it wasn't well written or acted as compared to other good TV shows, not that it wasn't as good as Season 1. However, the discussion about how Pizzolatto had Season 2's ending reflect the criticisms of Season 1's ending is interesting.
My thought process was more comparing it the now infamous Fade To Black ending of the Sopranos. That was an ending that I liked, that it seemed like The Sopranos was always a slice of life, not a start-to-finish story that needed to be wrapped up. This ending was literal, tangible. Whenever you have that "and now we flip 6 months ahead to see how it all ended up!" ending, I'm a little put off. I know some people like the story to actually "end," but its not something that I personally need. What's the best way to end a story?
It also depends on the show. The Sopranos was essentially a family drama set against a mob background. You called it right, it was essentially a look at seven years, and it wasn't important to have a plot that went from a hard beginning to a hard end, but rather just show character development across time, and the open ended conclusion was fantastic. Compare that to Boardwalk Empire, another mob show, but far more balanced between character development and a hard, definable plot (largely because of its basis in actual events). Because it was about the rise and fall of Nucky, it makes sense to show both of those things, and the ending was again very well fitting. True Detective is the opposite of the Sopranos. Very little emphasis on characters, and basically everything relates to one specific plot line. So it requires a definitive beginning and end, which it had. I think most people are happy with the TYPE of ending, but its the specific details of how it worked out that is getting the criticism.
TLDR: The best way to end a story depends on the type of story.
Ok, so I fell a few weeks behind, but I finally finished the season last night. Personally, I thought the finale was fantastic. For a minute, I could actually picture the 4 of them living down in Venezuela, being neighbors, raising kids together, etc. But I think we all knew that some combination of Frank, Ray, or Ani wasn't going to make it out alive. When Ray was driving down the highway to meet the boat, I knew he was going to try to see his kid one more time and that it would be a disaster. I was actually heartbroken that his message to his kid never got sent.
To me, True Detective is less about the crime, and more about the characters. I really became invested in the 3 detectives this season. I genuinely wanted them all to succeed. The tension in the second half of the finale was great. The image of all the bad guys taking office while Ani told the story to the man in the hotel (reporter? FBI?) was really well done.
Overall, I really enjoyed this season. Was it the best show I've ever seen? No. The Sopranos and Breaking Bad are tied in my mind for the best series ever. I'd probably put TD Season 1 in second place, but season 2 certainly holds its own. I know not everyone liked it, but that's ok, we don't all have to like the same shows.