# True Detectives on HBO Season 1 - Spoilers



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Anyone seen this yet? Stars Woody Harrelson and Matthew McConaughey as two detectives in Louisiana. The first episode reminded me a bit of Hannibal. It's pretty dark but is also well done, IMHO. Definitely worth checking out if you haven't seen it.


----------



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

We watched last night. But I was dozing off. Not because it was boring, I was pretty tired. Then again, it was pretty slow moving. Will need to rewatch.

I would liken it to Se7en then Hannibal though.


----------



## celtic pride (Nov 8, 2005)

I hate to say this because i was really excited about this,But my wife and i were both disapointed with this show ,no action and boring.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Watched it "almost live", we were so excited. And, we loved it. It's not an action series (at least not so far), but the acting and writing are very good. Woody is very funny in his role. And it seems that there's a lot of intriguing plot set up for the season.

It reminded me of _Homicide_ and _The Wire_ in its pacing and dialog, both of which we loved as well.

Looking forward to the entire season!


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

I liked this show a lot. It's only the first episode, but so far it has a lot of promise. I, too, was slightly sleepy from a long day so I missed a couple of minor points, and one I am still unsure about:

I didn't quite understand how they determined the name of the victim. It appeared that Cohle had the name one morning as Hart came in, but I couldn't quite follow how he figured it out.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

TAsunder said:


> I didn't quite understand how they determined the name of the victim. It appeared that Cohle had the name one morning as Hart came in, but I couldn't quite follow how he figured it out.


Fingerprints


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Thanks


----------



## ADG (Aug 20, 2003)

We thought it was excellent.


----------



## VegasVic (Nov 22, 2002)

I guess my expectations were high so I was a bit disappointed but I'll certainly keep watching and see how it plays out.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I was bored with it, but by the end, was really enjoying it. The last couple minutes kinda rolled everything together to help me understand what the heck was going on and what the rest of the season will be about. 

A coworker told me that this show will be different every season. That the two main dudes won't be back next season. The show will be about different detectives.


----------



## KenDC (Jun 18, 2001)

Hoffer said:


> I was bored with it, but by the end, was really enjoying it. The last couple minutes kinda rolled everything together to help me understand what the heck was going on and what the rest of the season will be about.
> 
> A coworker told me that this show will be different every season. That the two main dudes won't be back next season. The show will be about different detectives.


Correct and a new case. I believe this season will all be about this one case. That is if the series doesn't get killed as well.


----------



## VegasVic (Nov 22, 2002)

Makes sense. I wouldn't expect those two to commit to more than one season. I'm assuming 12 episodes?


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

VegasVic said:


> Makes sense. I wouldn't expect those two to commit to more than one season. I'm assuming 12 episodes?


8 episodes


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Finally got a chance to watch this. Loved every minute of it. Well written, well acted with a touch of 'crazy'.

Season Pass activated.


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

Also finally watched this last night. I enjoyed it.

A bit slow paced and has a low key atmosphere, somewhat like Top of the Lake, or Rectified. But after the hectic days days at work I have, I like shows like that.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

BlueMerle said:


> Finally got a chance to watch this. Loved every minute of it. Well written, well acted with a touch of 'crazy'.
> 
> Season Pass activated.


Same here. Enjoyed it start to finish. Looking forward to next week.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Not only will it be a new story with new actors a la American Horror Story, but there's no writer's room. One writer, and one director.

Forbes had a great article about it.

How HBO's True Detective Will Change The Way You Watch Television

Greg


----------



## markp99 (Mar 21, 2002)

Caught it from my hotel this week. Liked it.

Matthew McConaughey was less objectionable for me in this role. Always been a fan of Woody Harrelson.

Will follow via bit torrent...


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Boring. I wasn't tired before I started watching but this made me drowsy. That said, the last few minutes was better and the coming attractions looked better (which is interesting because some of the reviews I read said it went off the rails after the first episode...but I put little credence in reviews..I read them to find out what the series is about). So because of the last few minutes and coming attractions, I'll stick with it at least another week.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Great article, gchance.

American Horror Story kept a core group of actors. I would argue that they kept "most" of them and mixed up who had major vs minor roles. If True Detective comes back without the two leads, that would be a big deal. And if they can keep to the one writer / one director format, an even bigger deal.


----------



## cwoody222 (Nov 13, 1999)

I'm not a huge fan of either of these actors but gave this a shot and loved it. Very slow but the performances were great and I want to see where it goes over the limited run. I can devote 8 hours to this, no problem.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

the pilot was incredible, and well balanced between story and character development. i went in with low expectations (not a big fan of wh or mm), and was shocked by their perfect fit to the roles and how well it was written.


----------



## hairyblue (Feb 25, 2002)

I watched this too and liked it. They seem to not only make the killer a big mystery but are making the detectives one too.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Anyone else have a hard time following the dialogue? It seemed they were mumbling their lines quite a bit, or maybe it was just the accent. I think I'll watch Ep2 with CC on.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

I finally watched E01 last night. I really liked it. Some of the back and forth (time warp) was a bit strange for me to follow. 

I had to use my wireless headphones to hear everything. I have hearing problems with tinnitus so, on shows with a lot of mumbling and/or background noise, the headphones really make all the difference.

As for McConaughey - Did he do this project right after some movie where he lost a ton of weight, or was this the thing he lost the weight for? Is it just me? He looked so very thin -to the point of emaciation.

I think they are good together and am looking forward to the rest of the series.


----------



## KenDC (Jun 18, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> Anyone else have a hard time following the dialogue? It seemed they were mumbling their lines quite a bit, or maybe it was just the accent. I think I'll watch Ep2 with CC on.


I think Woody's accent is talking with marbles in his mouth...so, no it was not just you.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

sharkster said:


> As for McConaughey - Did he do this project right after some movie where he lost a ton of weight, or was this the thing he lost the weight for? Is it just me? He looked so very thin -to the point of emaciation.


Yes.



> Matthew McConaughey is receiving Oscar buzz for his Dallas Buyers Club, which comes out next month, though it's possible some who see it may not even realize it's him, as the actor lost about 50 pounds to play a Texas electrician who contracts HIV.


Greg


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

gchance said:


> Not only will it be a new story with new actors a la American Horror Story, but there's no writer's room. One writer, and one director.
> 
> Forbes had a great article about it.
> 
> ...


:up:

Really enjoyed that article, thanks.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

A little slow, but I'll give it another chance.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

pmyers said:


> A little slow, but I'll give it another chance.


slow is an understatement! but for some reason, i find it riveting to watch unfold, and i'm disappointed when an episode ends.

the plot development had better pay off, or i'll end up mad i wasted my time - but for now i'm hooked.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

NorthAlabama said:


> the plot development had better pay off, or i'll end up mad i wasted my time - but for now i'm hooked.


I think you'll be a little disappointed. This is a character study.

Greg


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Just an incredible show. Its only flaw is that it would be really hard to binge watch without feeling suicidal afterwards.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

I enjoyed the 2nd episode enough to keep the SP. 

I am not really a big fan of "flashback" type shows in general.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

While watching the second episode, I was questioning if it was worth watching. When the episode ended, I was like NOOO!!! So, I guess I'm enjoying it.


----------



## KenDC (Jun 18, 2001)

I liked Woody's girlfriend.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

KenDC said:


> I liked Woody's girlfriend.


I saw a GIF of her on Reddit yesterday. You can probably image what segment of the show it was from.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I found episode 2 much better. I'm in.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

KenDC said:


> I liked Woody's girlfriend.


Woah, Daddy!


----------



## KenDC (Jun 18, 2001)

As much as i liked her...and I did. I have this feeling that she is going to be one of the victims. Just from the way the Woody's character went out of his way to tell her not to leave her place. I hope I'm wrong. I want to see her, again.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

KenDC said:


> As much as i liked her...and I did. I have this feeling that she is going to be one of the victims. Just from the way the Woody's character went out of his way to tell her not to leave her place. I hope I'm wrong. I want to see her, again.


I'm thinking it's more about Matthew's character about to fool around with Woody's wife, and this is a reason why this will happen.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

I'm hoping this show is smart enough to avoid having Cohle be implicated as a suspect. It almost seemed to be hinting at this with his visions. I'm hoping it's just the more straightforward plot of throwing him under the bus for the incorrect arrest.


----------



## TampaThunder (Apr 8, 2003)

I'm amazed at the flashback Rust and present day Rust. He looks like he's 20 years older and not just with makeup - it's in the eyes and posture. Just a totally depressing but well played character.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

TampaThunder said:


> I'm amazed at the flashback Rust and present day Rust. He looks like he's 20 years older and not just with makeup - it's in the eyes and posture. Just a totally depressing but well played character.


I was thinking this yesterday too. Like wondering if they shot the future scenes months after the past scenes so he had time to get himself messed up looking. Being a TV show, I assume they shot one episode at a time and weren't able to do this? I know this show was written and shot differently, so who knows.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

I think there's some stellar make-up work going on there, but it does seem possible given how this show is being made that it is instead scenes shot much later.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Yeah, it was all one director, so they probably shot it movie-style as a single unit. It wouldn't make sense not to, with the money they could save.


----------



## VegasVic (Nov 22, 2002)

KenDC said:


> I liked Woody's girlfriend.


Yes yes YES


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

KenDC said:


> I liked Woody's girlfriend.


Everyone likes Woody's girlfriend. 

Totally hooked on this show now. It delivers in spades imo.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

BlueMerle said:


> Everyone likes Woody's girlfriend.


I much prefer Woody's wife.

Then again, I've much preferred her to just about anyone since Kiss Kiss Bang Bang.


----------



## markp99 (Mar 21, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I much prefer Woody's wife.
> 
> Then again, I've much preferred her to just about anyone since Kiss Kiss Bang Bang.


This


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I much prefer Woody's wife.
> 
> Then again, I've much preferred her to just about anyone since Kiss Kiss Bang Bang.


Oh, I actually agree. She's smokin' hot in very subtle and sultry way. Loved KKBB.

But she didn't get nekked.


----------



## zaknafein (Jul 17, 2001)

Stil getting caught up on the first couple episodes, but when the theme first came on, I thought it was going to be Del Shannon's "Runaway".

First few bars are exactly the same.


----------



## tlc (May 30, 2002)

That scene about Rust threatening to apply a couple of pounds of pressure to snap Woody's wrists -- Is there really a hold like that?


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

tlc said:


> That scene about Rust threatening to apply a couple of pounds of pressure to snap Woody's wrists -- Is there really a hold like that?


I couldn't quite see what was happening but certainly under the right conditions a double wrist-lock could mess up the wrist pretty badly.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

BlueMerle said:


> But she didn't get nekked.


Watch the latest episode.

Greg


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

gchance said:


> Watch the latest episode.
> 
> Greg


I didn't any nudity 

This show is really great. I'm enjoying it. I am, however, pretty sure I have lung cancer just watching Cohle smoking...


----------



## VegasVic (Nov 22, 2002)

Yeah no nudity in #3. I'm enjoying it too. It moves slow but that's ok with me.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

I feel like the story really progressed in Ep3. 

I'm really enjoying this show, which is strange for me because it is really slow and methodical pace.


----------



## KenDC (Jun 18, 2001)

So, wait, was I the only one that saw Woody's wife semi-nude in this last episode? Maybe it was wishful thinking but I though when he said he didn't know what he was doing, she kissed him and they went into a sex scene?

Anyway, still liked the girlfriend better...but she is no more. She was only slated for the first 3 episodes. 

I really like the story, too. We have to wait for two weeks for the next installment.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

KenDC said:


> So, wait, was I the only one that saw Woody's wife semi-nude in this last episode? Maybe it was wishful thinking but I though when he said he didn't know what he was doing, she kissed him and they went into a sex scene?
> 
> Anyway, still liked the girlfriend better...but she is no more. She was only slated for the first 3 episodes.
> 
> I really like the story, too. We have to wait for two weeks for the next installment.


I didn't see anything in that sex scene that would not be seen in a bikini...

As to the girlfriend, it seems that once she...ahem...did his thing a little, that was his line in the sand...it's a darn shame, too.


----------



## markp99 (Mar 21, 2002)

Anubys said:


> I didn't see anything in that sex scene that would not be seen in a bikini...


Ummm, look again


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

markp99 said:


> Ummm, look again


Yeah, they showed some breasts for about a second. No clear view of the face in the same shot though, so it might have been a body double.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

markp99 said:


> Ummm, look again


I thought I saw a nip slip but convinced myself I did not (Seinfeld's nip slip episode was rerun just this week!). Trust me. I WILL look again.

On that note, you should look again in very slo mo to that sex scene with the girlfriend (episode 2). Full frontal as she gets off of him.

Wow. I am a real pervert.


----------



## KenDC (Jun 18, 2001)

At least I am not going CraZy. A real concern of mine.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

great...now I have to watch those scenes again (again,again)...thanks


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Thank goodness a show this good and deep has 2/3 of the thread devoted to the sex scenes and nudity.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

TAsunder said:


> Thank goodness a show this good and deep has 2/3 of the thread devoted to the sex scenes and nudity.


But why does man like sex scenes and nudity? Do you ever wonder about the conceit of thinking that pleasure is but a way to convince ourselves that we exist? that we matter? that we are individuals with independent thoughts and feelings when, in truth, we are bad people and monsters?

I bet you didn't wonder about any of that. I need a smoke.


----------



## KenDC (Jun 18, 2001)

TAsunder said:


> Thank goodness a show this good and deep has 2/3 of the thread devoted to the sex scenes and nudity.


Well, most of them missed it. So, maybe that says something about the show?

New Slogan: Our show is so good you won't even notice the nude scenes. :up:


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

KenDC said:


> New Slogan: Our show is so good you won't even notice the nude scenes. :up:


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

KenDC said:


> Well, most of them missed it. So, maybe that says something about the show?
> 
> New Slogan: Our show is so good you won't even notice the nude scenes. :up:


A fair point.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

KenDC said:


> So, wait, was I the only one that saw Woody's wife semi-nude in this last episode? Maybe it was wishful thinking but I though when he said he didn't know what he was doing, she kissed him and they went into a sex scene?


It was there. I still have it recorded, so maybe I need to do more research, but I saw the same thing. She kissed him, and they went to a sex scene. It was from the side briefly, but I saw nipple. Research time. 

Greg


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

No, wait! HBO Go at lunch...

Greg


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

TAsunder said:


> Thank goodness a show this good and deep has 2/3 of the thread devoted to the sex scenes and nudity.


Not to mention complaints about what other people are discussing.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Not to mention complaints about what other people are discussing.


That has been only one post out of the entire two-page thread (now two pages), out of which a fair amount has been devoted to discussion of nudity.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Well, you have to admit that the scene with the girl friend was spectacular!


This show continues to deliver, on all levels imo. I loved the conversation they had outside the revival tent. 

I'm surprised at just how big a db they are making WH's character.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

TAsunder said:


> That has been only one post out of the entire two-page thread (now two pages), out of which a fair amount has been devoted to discussion of nudity.


i agree - reading this thread, you'd think this was the first series on hbo with nudity. look!  boobies!!! 

It's Not Porn. It's HBO.​


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

TAsunder said:


> That has been only one post out of the entire two-page thread (now two pages), out of which a fair amount has been devoted to discussion of nudity.


We'll try to do a better job keeping the discussion percentages in the ratios that you prefer. If only you would do a better job specifying the precise ratios of the topics that you will allow us to discuss.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

NorthAlabama said:


> It's Not Porn. It's HBO.​


I notice she has the obligatory "I am not a prude" (she said "priss") in her rant. If they have to say it....


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Hey, nudity is nudity. It's in the dissolve, the wife shows one breast while lying down as Woody takes off her shirt. I made a screenshot if you want it. 

Greg


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I heard 2 things on the radio yesterday:

1. this show is a mini-series of just 8 episodes
2. this season is just 8 episodes and next season will be an entirely new cast

Both of these "facts" disturb me. I'm off to find out what is correct (but I have no faith in my search abilities).


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

Anubys said:


> I heard 2 things on the radio yesterday:
> 
> 1. this show is a mini-series of just 8 episodes
> 2. this season is just 8 episodes and next season will be an entirely new cast
> ...


check out the link in  greg's post #17


----------



## KenDC (Jun 18, 2001)

Yes, these are both true and don't upset me since I knew it going in. 

That being said, each season will be treated differently by me as well. If the next cast doesn't do it for me, I see no reason to stay. I feel the next cast will have a hard time living up to this one.


----------



## brebeans (Sep 5, 2003)

NorthAlabama said:


> i agree - reading this thread, you'd think this was the first series on hbo with nudity. look!  boobies!!!
> 
> It's Not Porn. It's HBO.​


Really.....I guess these forums are to discuss what we want about the shows, but geez........aren't there a LOT of other ways to get video and pic of boobies and everything else? Sounds like a bunch of 13 year old boys getting their ya-ya's out talking about the nudity, what nudity, which parts, how often, how clear , was it really her, etc. etc.

Sorry about the rant...it's sometimes just so annoying that with all that's going on in the show, the nudity itself (not the dynamics of the sexual relationships and their relationships to the characters) is what gets focused on.......


----------



## KenDC (Jun 18, 2001)

brebeans said:


> Really.....I guess these forums are to discuss what we want about the shows, but geez........aren't there a LOT of other ways to get video and pic of boobies and everything else? Sounds like a bunch of 13 year old boys getting their ya-ya's out talking about the nudity, what nudity, which parts, how often, how clear , was it really her, etc. etc.
> 
> Sorry about the rant...it's sometimes just so annoying that with all that's going on in the show, the nudity itself (not the dynamics of the sexual relationships and their relationships to the characters) is what gets focused on.......


That's fine. I am often accused of acting like a 13 year old boy.

Anyway, what did you think of the show?

As someone that is not religious I kind of enjoy MM outspoken offense of religion and the people who follow that path, coming from a main character in a good story. Even though it really doesn't have anything to do with the murders (At least at this point) it is this banter of the good and bad about religion and it's influence on it's followers that I enjoy the most.

I read a review in The Washington Post, I think (reviews I have seen have been mixed) that said that the writer has created speeches, mostly from MM, that are more from someone that IS writing a story and not one that would actually come out of someone's mouth. Not sure what to make of that. I will see if I can find the review and see what the peeps here think.

Here is the review: http://www.washingtonpost.com/enter...99e634-771d-11e3-8963-b4b654bcc9b2_story.html


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

brebeans said:


> ...aren't there a LOT of other ways to get video and pic of boobies and everything else? Sounds like a bunch of 13 year old boys getting their ya-ya's out talking about the nudity, what nudity, which parts, how often, how clear , was it really her, etc. etc.


my thoughts, exactly, but not stated nearly as clearly.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I agree about the speeches. Nobody talks like that. But I guess if you never sleep and are as nuts as this guy is, maybe you practice those speeches as the thoughts whirlwind in your mind.

I did love it when he said (not an exact quote) "the world needs bad people to keep the other bad people from the door". 

THAT was excellent and I can picture someone smart saying that off the cuff.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Then again, nobody talks like anybody talks in TV shows or movies...if TV actors spoke with the ums & ers, the stops and starts, the incomplete sentences, etc., that normal people use without thinking about it, it would drive us crazy.

All television dialogue is very stylized. Some writers just go for it more than others (Aaron Sorkin, e.g.).


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

brebeans said:


> Sorry about the rant...it's sometimes just so annoying that with all that's going on in the show, the nudity itself (not the dynamics of the sexual relationships and their relationships to the characters) is what gets focused on.......


I seem to have missed your post where you tried to start a non-nudity topic of discussion and no one responded because they were too busy talking about nudity.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

john4200 said:


> I seem to have missed your post where you tried to start a non-nudity topic of discussion and no one responded because they were too busy talking about nudity.


They probably went elsewhere with that topic of discussion thinking that most people in this thread were incapable of such a conversation. I know I did. "If the mountain won't come to Muhammad" and what not.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I go back and forth with this show. I thought the pilot was boring but interesting. I thought episode 2 was streets ahead of the pilot and really enjoyed it and I thought episode 3 was boring again. I get that this is a character study, but unfortunately I find much of the banter between characters pretty boring. I guess I'm in the minority though. I'm still in because the ultimate story is interesting, but I've yelled at the TV more than once, SHUT UP ALREADY and GET ON WITH IT!


----------



## KenDC (Jun 18, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> I go back and forth with this show. I thought the pilot was boring but interesting. I thought episode 2 was streets ahead of the pilot and really enjoyed it and I thought episode 3 was boring again. I get that this is a character study, but unfortunately I find much of the banter between characters pretty boring. I guess I'm in the minority though. I'm still in because the ultimate story is interesting, but I've yelled at the TV more than once, SHUT UP ALREADY and GET ON WITH IT!


I assume you don't like Sorkin, either? You would think he gets paid per word.

Again, I like both and enjoy deep meaning of life conversations much more then mindless car chases or dating shows, for example.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

TAsunder said:


> They probably went elsewhere with that topic of discussion thinking that most people in this thread were incapable of such a conversation. I know I did. "If the mountain won't come to Muhammad" and what not.


So, your claim is that the pessimists with poor judgment avoided making posts discussing the show without mentioning nudity, but instead made posts complaining about what other people wanted to discuss about the show.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

john4200 said:


> So, your claim is that the pessimists with poor judgment avoided making posts discussing the show without mentioning nudity, but instead made posts complaining about what other people wanted to discuss about the show.


Seems like good judgment to me, based on your rabid defense of the discussion of ogling nude women in a supposedly family-friendly and female-friendly forum.

I would think of it more like, "this conversation seems inappropriate and makes me want to discuss this show elsewhere."


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

TAsunder said:


> Seems like good judgment to me, based on your rabid defense of the discussion of ogling nude women in a supposedly family-friendly and female-friendly forum.


Rabid defense? 

Some people were discussing what was shown in this program that this thread is about. If people watched the show, it is absurd to imply that discussing something that was in the show is somehow not family-friendly or female-friendly. As for the latter, I'm pretty sure that most women have seen breasts and discussed breasts, so I don't see the problem.

If you want to censor discussion about breasts, feel free to start your own breast-free thread. I'll certainly refrain from talking about breasts in your thread (assuming it is clearly labeled).

By the way, your continuing posts on this subject are increasing the discussion about it. If you want to minimize the discussion of breasts, then you would be better off just posting about what you do want to discuss. That would demonstrate good judgment.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Some people were discussing what was shown in this program that this thread is about. If people watched the show, it is absurd to imply that discussing something that was in the show is somehow not family-friendly or female-friendly. As for the latter, I'm pretty sure that most women have seen breasts and discussed breasts, so I don't see the problem.


Yeah, I agree, you don't see the problem. I've been trying to point it out, but given your history in these threads, I am not hopeful that you specifically will get it or acknowledge it. I was hoping that others might. We shall see...


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

TAsunder said:


> Yeah, I agree, you don't see the problem. I've been trying to point it out, but given your history in these threads, I am not hopeful that you specifically will get it or acknowledge it.


That is because there is no problem. Except for people who believe they know better than others what is permissible for people to talk about.

And you still haven't given us your guidelines for what you will allow us to talk about, and what you will prohibit us from talking about.

How can we follow your rules if you don't tell us what you will permit us to do and what you will not allow us to do?


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Then again, nobody talks like anybody talks in TV shows or movies...if TV actors spoke with the ums & ers, the stops and starts, the incomplete sentences, etc., that normal people use without thinking about it, it would drive us crazy.
> 
> All television dialogue is very stylized. Some writers just go for it more than others (Aaron Sorkin, e.g.).


Granted. But some shows succeed in making it seem like normal people WOULD talk like that. Sorkin and this show do not do that. Which is ok. I like it. So I'm not complaining. I still think Deadwood is one of the top 5 shows of all time, for example.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

KenDC said:


> I assume you don't like Sorkin, either? You would think he gets paid per word.
> 
> Again, I like both and enjoy deep meaning of life conversations much more then mindless car chases or dating shows, for example.


I do like Sorkin, but yeah, he gets a bit wordy as well. Part of the problem here is that I find that the characters are hard to understand as well, so I find I have to turn on CC to catch everything, so it becomes more like reading a book than a TV show, especially since there's very little going on except conversation quite often.

I'm not a fan of mindless car chases and definitely not dating shows, but I'm also a fan of the story moving on and not some endless exposition.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Anubys said:


> Granted. But some shows succeed in making it seem like normal people WOULD talk like that. Sorkin and this show do not do that. Which is ok. I like it. So I'm not complaining. I still think Deadwood is one of the top 5 shows of all time, for example.


Right, my point is just that the people who are complaining about "unrealistic dialog" don't seem to realize that this applies to everything. It's just a question of whether the writer wants to cling to the illusion of "realistic dialog," or embrace the artificiality of it and make the most of it.

Of course, both can work. And of course, both aren't to all tastes. But to claim that "realistic dialog" exists in TV shows is, well, unrealistic.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Right, my point is just that the people who are complaining about "unrealistic dialog" don't seem to realize that this applies to everything. It's just a question of whether the writer wants to cling to the illusion of "realistic dialog," or embrace the artificiality of it and make the most of it.
> 
> Of course, both can work. And of course, both aren't to all tastes. But to claim that "realistic dialog" exists in TV shows is, well, unrealistic.


I would think of the perfect retort here but for the fact that I live in the real world!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Anubys said:


> I would think of the perfect retort here but for the fact that I live in the real world!


I'm so sorry...


----------



## VegasVic (Nov 22, 2002)

Alexandra Daddario topless. Stunning. If that makes me a 13 year old boy so be it.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

Another great episode, especially the second half.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

cherry ghost said:


> Another great episode, especially the second half.


Cohle really knows how to stir up a hornet's nest. That was a great scene with the attempted drug heist (stash boobie-trapped with a  grenade!) and then the getaway.


----------



## VegasVic (Nov 22, 2002)

Things sure ramped up this week, holy cow. Still four to go, I'm looking forward to it.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Those meth-head bikers must have been historically high if they thought wearing cop uniforms would make them look like anything but meth-head bikers wearing cop uniforms...


----------



## markp99 (Mar 21, 2002)

I was mostly lost in this episode. I think is was partly due to Cohle's monotone speaking, always just above a whisper. I had a hard time understanding him or the intent of this week's plot. 

I was totally IN on this program, but now I don;t feel compelled to go back a re-watch this episode. Maybe was a time of day/mood thing for me...


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Pure entertainment! The low talking is a bit of a pita, but I'll get over that if they can continue to deliver this level of quality programming.

I cracked up when they were in the bar talking about WH's divorce et. al. and MM says "you can't spot crazy ***** when you see it!" lol.....

Hard to believe they have to wrap this up in only 4 more shows. Can't wait!


----------



## phox_mulder (Feb 23, 2006)

I read on another forum that the last scene of the latest episode was one continual shot, no editing.

SteadyCam following Cohle and the red headed biker from the stash house, through the projects, even through other houses then over the fence.

They did shoot it multiple times with places they could do an edit if needed, but ended up using one of the continual shots.

I rewatched that scene to see if I could spot the possible edit points, realizing what an excellent piece of cinematography it was.


phox


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

john4200 said:


> Cohle really knows how to stir up a hornet's nest. That was a great scene with the attempted drug heist (stash boobie-trapped with a  grenade!) and then the getaway.


which is monumentally stupid since you also blow up your cash...you put a trap on the FAKE hiding place!

I did not like this episode (and I love this show). I can't believe anyone can be on the ball after ingesting so much (and so many different) powerful drugs. It was all a bit too much.

I did like how Cohle pointed out that he was banging a younger version of his wife. I also think he is right on the money that his wife will take him back in a couple of months.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Anubys said:


> which is monumentally stupid since you also blow up your cash...you put a trap on the FAKE hiding place!


There was a safe there too, but it did not look like he opened it. I suppose a safe might be grenade-proof.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

about ep5 last night - was anyone else wondering where the "tall man with a scarred face" was after they finished raiding the suspects and rescuing the young girl? why didn't they notice or even question the missing suspect that was witnessed and described by dora's revival tent church friends?

sure, they are still leading us to cohle's ongoing search for "the yellow king", but to start celebrating and close the case after the raid without a mention? this has been the first major plot fail for me - did i miss something?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Ledoux fit the description close-enough for government work. He was certainly tall, and his face did have some marks.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

I just can't get enough of this show. It's the best thing on TV imo.

Loved the latest ep. I have no idea where this is going and that's what I like most about it. I hate a show where they're trying to keep the conclusion under wraps but it's obvious none the less where it's heading - that or they pull an Agatha Christie dump new clues and characters in the final scene then wrap it up. Hopefully that doesn't happen here.


----------



## NatasNJ (Jan 7, 2002)

SO may general take.

Matthew & Woody are current day being interviewed about their history together and about the wood stick figure killer. Aka YELLOW KING.

New cops suspect something is up with Matthew since he has been seen at current day crime scenes, and pushed case in direction of suspects he may have had ties with?

The history being told is based on some lies to cover up some of the BS that went down back in the day.

Ledoux was thought to be the killer but years later it seems he was not the killer and that there may be some major conspiracy going on here (task force, prisoner killing himself, etc..) 

After prisoners death Matthew is still searching for killer. 
Got that all right so far for the most part?


Going forward Matthew continues to look for the Yellow King even though the cops think he may be the killer or involved somehow?


I still don't know how they ended up pinning Ledoux for the crimes. Missed how he was all connected...


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

NatasNJ said:


> Going forward Matthew continues to look for the Yellow King even though the cops think he may be the killer or involved somehow?


yes, i figure that's one of his reasons for the bar job with the apartment out back - it allows him to continue the search (and drinking).

i also suspect his investigation and related evidence is laid out in the storage building he refused to let them search - it would only give them more of a case that he's the killer, when in fact he's only guilty of still searching.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

They seem to be trying very hard to steer us to think they are after MM for something.

While he does say some weird sh*t, I think the real loose cannon here is WH.


----------



## NatasNJ (Jan 7, 2002)

BlueMerle said:


> They seem to be trying very hard to steer us to think they are after MM for something.
> 
> While he does say some weird sh*t, I think the real loose cannon here is WH.


There is no doubt. WH is the one who killed the guy in cold blood and is out to lunch with his family.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

NatasNJ said:


> There is no doubt. WH is the one who killed the guy in cold blood and is out to lunch with his family.


Yeah, and the one that has no problem beating up a guy on a date with his _mistress!_


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

NatasNJ said:


> I still don't know how they ended up pinning Ledoux for the crimes. Missed how he was all connected...


Ledoux was the boyfriend of the girl who got killed years ago (they talked to her grandfather in his fishing boat). He was also the cellmate of the guy who was married to Dora (the current victim). He had 2 children bound and captive in his place where he made meth. One of the children was dead. it wasn't difficult to say "got our man" and close the case at that point.

I could be wrong about many things here...that's just the way I recall things...


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

Good article here about the show and a bit of info on Carcosa and The King in Yellow

http://grantland.com/hollywood-pros...tisfyingly-weird-mysteries-of-true-detective/


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Anubys said:


> Ledoux was the boyfriend of the girl who got killed years ago (they talked to her grandfather in his fishing boat). He was also the cellmate of the guy who was married to Dora (the current victim). He had 2 children bound and captive in his place where he made meth. One of the children was dead. it wasn't difficult to say "got our man" and close the case at that point.
> 
> I could be wrong about many things here...that's just the way I recall things...


That is the way I remember it, too. Also, I think there was one of those stick sculptures near the meth lab where Ledoux was staying.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

cherry ghost said:


> Good article here about the show and a bit of info on Carcosa and The King in Yellow
> 
> http://grantland.com/hollywood-pros...tisfyingly-weird-mysteries-of-true-detective/


Wow... excellent article. Thanks for posting.

I loved the comparison to Twin Peaks, I've had that same vibe from the beginning.

Though I will say that to this day there has been no show that so completely and thoroughly engaged me as the first season of Twin Peaks did. TD is climbing the ladder fast but I doubt it will get to that level.

The author hit the nail on the head, imo, when he pointed out the flaws in Twin Peaks, X-Files and Lost that eventually left viewers with a sense of being let down or a less than satisfactory explanation of what was really going on, and how TD due to its format doesn't have to fall into that same category.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

the show's prod/writer gave insight to cohle's 2012 interview on the official site for ep5.

remember near the end, hart (wh) said "if you two talked to rust, and you weren't gettin' a read on him, he was getting a read on you"? cohle only agreed to go in so he could see what they had. the writers said there was a reason cohle asked for the beer - he knew that if they did suspect him for the new murder, and he was drinking during the interview, nothing he said would be admissable.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

NorthAlabama said:


> the show's prod/writer gave insight to cohle's 2012 interview on the official site for ep5.
> 
> remember near the end, hart (wh) said "if you two talked to rust, and you weren't gettin' a read on him, he was getting a read on you"? cohle only agreed to go in so he could see what they had. the writers said there was a reason cohle asked for the beer - he knew that if they did suspect him for the new murder, and he was drinking during the interview, nothing he said would be admissable.


And we saw last episode that he is capable of working at a very high level when extremely intoxicated/high, so the beer was no big deal even though he made it seem like one. I suspect he was also intentionally playing them by making figurines from the beer cans.

I am pleased with the way they have handled the "Cohle is the killer" plot that they've been broadcasting since the first episode. It is clear to us the audience that he isn't because we see "what really happened" but Brother Mouzone doesn't know that and just sees holes in the story. That is a lot better than either him actually being the killer or us as the audience being led to believe he is the killer. Both of those would have been pretty cliched and annoying directions for the plot.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

I have to say, that Grantland article certainly describes me. This show is getting under my skin in a good way.

Incidentally, The King in Yellow is part of Project Gutenberg. Free, free, free. I downloaded the Kindle Edition from Amazon.

Greg


----------



## KenDC (Jun 18, 2001)

Whoever said the school would come back into play was spot on (I'm too lazy to see who). This show is just great. I hope the climax is as good as the journey.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

I'm really enjoying this. I'm also hoping that in the back half it takes a bit of a turn toward the twilight zone and the supernatural, but even if it doesn't, it's still a fun ride.

I thought this article on i09 was a good read: http://io9.com/the-one-literary-reference-you-must-know-to-appreciate-1523076497

Also: I'll register my suspicion here that the governor's cousin, the Rev Tuttle, who visited the police station in episode one is the King. Cohl's suspicion about the task force being hot to take the case away from them was raised in this latest episode (5) and not really explored, but I think he's onto something there. And one of the criminals (was it Charlie, or was it the guy who seems to have killed himself?) made a comment about "big men" (which might mean "important" rather than "large") when Cohl was speaking to him. I think that Cohl and Hart are still working the case, trying to get to the Governor, and Cohl's being a present-day drunk is just part of his undercover work - the falling out between them that's been alluded to is probably as made up by them as their story of Ledoux firing an AK at them.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

danterner said:


> I'm also hoping that in the back half it takes a bit of a turn toward the twilight zone and the supernatural, but even if it doesn't, it's still a fun ride.


I could not disagree more. I sincerely hope they do not go supernatural with this. The Yellow King stuff is great as long as it stays a motivation for the crazies, but if it starts becoming "real", then the integrity of the show will be ruined.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

danterner said:


> I'll register my suspicion here that the governor's cousin, the Rev Tuttle, who visited the police station in episode one is the King.


when the tent revival preacher mentioned he studied with tuttle, i suspected there'd be a tuttle connection to the killer...


> And one of the criminals...made a comment about "big men"...when Cohl was speaking to him.


...but when that was offered out of the blue, it was almost too convenient - and made me start to question my tuttle connection suspicions above...oh, well, we'll know soon...


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

danterner said:


> Also: I'll register my suspicion here that the governor's cousin, the Rev Tuttle, who visited the police station in episode one is the King. Cohl's suspicion about the task force being hot to take the case away from them was raised in this latest episode (5) and not really explored, but I think he's onto something there. And one of the criminals (was it Charlie, or was it the guy who seems to have killed himself?) made a comment about "big men" (which might mean "important" rather than "large") when Cohl was speaking to him. I think that Cohl and Hart are still working the case, trying to get to the Governor, and Cohl's being a present-day drunk is just part of his undercover work - the falling out between them that's been alluded to is probably as made up by them as their story of Ledoux firing an AK at them.


I think they'll find Tuttle's fingerprints on the cookie jar in some capacity. He may be the King, maybe not, but he's involved imo.

Not sure about Cohl being undercover all this time. Unless we're being intentionally deceived, and that's not completely out of the question, we'd have to believe he's been undercover for over 10 years now. I'm not sure anyone could handle that, and given what he already went through in TX it just seems unlikely to me.

I think their falling out is genuine. I suspect it has something to do with Hart's wife. Not that Cohl slept with her per se, but somehow he said or did something that sent Hart into orbit.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

A couple more thoughts:

Missing the clues right under your nose is a repeated motif, it seems. It's been mentioned several times (the "Detective's Curse"), in several episodes. I've got to believe that the writer is speaking to us with that, telling us the viewer that we're missing the obvious. I wonder if there's another "under the nose clue" that's being overlooked, during Cohl's interrogation: the cut up beer cans. As he's been talking, Cohl has been carving up his empty Lone Star cans. (A brand of beer he specifically requested, by the way). In this latest episode, we finally get a clear view of what he's been making:










It's a tableaux of men with yellow stars for heads, standing around a fallen person. Are the stars figurative crowns (as would be worn by a king?) Are they symbolic of yellow hair? (And if so, does that somehow implicate Marty?) Or are they stars like police badges? It's that last one that I keep coming back to. Is it possible that Cohl is dropping a clue right in front of the 2012 detectives' noses, telling them that they should be looking internally at the force for the answer, but they are failing to see the clue he's left right under their noses? When he leaves the interrogation room he says the day was a waste, except for the beer. Maybe he wasn't talking about the free drinks; maybe he was saying "everything I told you was pretty much BS, except for the beer tableaux I made."



BlueMerle said:


> Not sure about Cohl being undercover all this time. Unless we're being intentionally deceived, and that's not completely out of the question, we'd have to believe he's been undercover for over 10 years now. I'm not sure anyone could handle that, and given what he already went through in TX it just seems unlikely to me.


Then again, Cohl did explicitly tell Marty (and us) that he had been sent undercover "with no expiration date." Why should we assume that it expired in the first place? Maybe Cohl has been undercover right from the start, even from the point that he first met Marty.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

danterner said:


> Then again, Cohl did explicitly tell Marty (and us) that he had been sent undercover "with no expiration date." Why should we assume that it expired in the first place? Maybe Cohl has been undercover right from the start, even from the point that he first met Marty.


** I'm going back to referring to them as MM and WH. You're confusing the hell out of me switching between the characters first and last names. You're talking to a guy here that took a year before he could remember that Dick Van ****'s name on the show was Rob.... and that's only because MTM said "Ohhhh Rob!" at least 3 times per episode.  **

That is entirely possible. But wouldn't that mean that he was sent there prior to the first killing? How do it know?

As for the beer cans, there's no doubt they're some kind of clue or they have a meaning beyond just killing time during the interview. You've listed some very interesting possibilities.

The multiple mentions of the "Detectives Curse" caught my attention as well.

Separating the meaningful from the incidental (red herrings) is where we'll go insane - a la 'The King in Yellow'. 

Still, I have to know!


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

BlueMerle said:


> That is entirely possible. But wouldn't that mean that he was sent there prior to the first killing? How do it know?


Ah, but what was the first killing? When Hart and Cohle were on the scene of the first victim, Dora, didn't Cohle make some sort of comment about her not being the first, or the last? ("This is gonna happen again. Or it's happened before. Both.") The common-sense reading of that statement is "there were other victims, and there will be more victims in the future." But the show seems to be steering us toward a more metaphysical reading of his comment now, doesn't it? Almost like he's saying this one moment is going to repeat again and again, as it has before in the past. And didn't Reggie Ledeaux, right before getting shot, say something that sounded awfully precognitive, too, about his meeting up with Cohle, as a part of the conversation about time being a flat circle? The whole thing reminds me a bit of Battlestar Galactica and its "all of this will happen before, and all of it will happen again" (which, incidentally, is the opening line of Peter Pan, as well - both are expressions of the philosophical concept of Eternal Return as espoused by Nietzsche, among others - which is why Cohle called Ledeaux "Nietzsche" during their flat circle conversation).



BlueMerle said:


> ** I'm going back to referring to them as MM and WH. You're confusing the hell out of me switching between the characters first and last names.




Call them MM and WH if you like, but you are short-changing what the show does with names, if you do:

Martin Hart: The name Martin comes from Mars, the god of war. And Hart could mean "heart" or it could mean a hart like a stag. (Remember the antlers? And Martin's conversation about hunting a 10-point buck?) So we have one lead with a name that means "warlike heart," maybe, or "violent antlers"? And then there's Rustin Cohle. Rust and Coal - that's pretty evocative. Now put the two of them together and stretch a bit and you have Heart and Cohle (heart and soul)?



BlueMerle said:


> Separating the meaningful from the incidental (red herrings) is where we'll go insane - a la 'The King in Yellow'.


Speaking of which - I'd love to know into which of those categories this falls:


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Phenomenal episode tonight. Sharp writing, and incredible acting by all.

Two eps left, should be killer eps.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

astrohip said:


> Phenomenal episode tonight. Sharp writing, and incredible acting by all.
> 
> Two eps left, should be killer eps.


I continue to be amazed by the level of acting from the entire cast. It's really superb.

There's either going to be a really big twist at the end or the bad guys are Tuttle and some high ranking police officers.

Looking forward to the resolution. It's been a hell of a ride to this point.


----------



## MacThor (Feb 7, 2002)

Anyone else notice that Hart's "good" daughter is played by the same actress who plays Lizzie on The Walking Dead?


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

MacThor said:


> Anyone else notice that Hart's "good" daughter is played by the same actress who plays Lizzie on The Walking Dead?


I hadn't noticed that, cool. It certainly can't hurt her career having roles on two of the hottest shows going.


----------



## LlamaLarry (Apr 30, 2003)

Beth, WH's younger side lady, is also Rebecca on Cinemax's Banshee. She's definitely not shy on either series. 

I get why WH's wife would want to hurt him by sleeping around, a little "Fool me once" payback. I even get why she'd want to do it with MM. I don't get why she would name him to WH when she drops the bomb; this seems like exactly the kind of thing that would get a partner to kill the other.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

I couldn't place her, thanks for the Lizzie note.

My wife predicted that Cohle and Maggie were going to sleep together at some point. At the time I thought... well, that would be dumb. Once again, they've deftly made a plot twist that I thought would be stupid into something really good and enjoyable.

I liked the last shot of his tail light still being the way it was after that impressive throw in their fisticuffs. They seem to have him using aikido or something similar. Nice wrist lock too.

Was the book they referred to with the kiddie photos inside of it another King in Yellow reference?


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Alan Sepinwall's review

http://www.hitfix.com/whats-alan-watching/review-true-detective-haunted-houses-partners-in-crime

One great quote from it:



> The conclusion might not work at all, but the five episodes leading up to this one comprised some of the most exciting television I've seen in years that didn't involve Walter White figuring out how to make people explode.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

LlamaLarry said:


> I get why WH's wife would want to hurt him by sleeping around, a little "Fool me once" payback. I even get why she'd want to do it with MM. I don't get why she would name him to WH when she drops the bomb; this seems like exactly the kind of thing that would get a partner to kill the other.


Yeah, I did not get that part either. I suppose the writer would say that she was looking for the one person who would hurt Marty the most, so of course she had to name Cohle to accomplish her revenge. But that strikes me as out of character for her -- she is not the type to hurt Cohle as collateral damage just to hurt her husband. And we cannot say that she was hysterical or not thinking clearly -- she obviously thought things through.

I was kind of hoping she would sleep with the police commander and take a picture and send it to Marty. No good reason for it, except that I really don't like that guy and want him to see him beaten.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I cannot WAIT for that conversation! I have a feeling it's going to have "Emmy reel" written all over it.


----------



## teknikel (Jan 27, 2002)

astrohip said:


> Alan Sepinwall's review
> 
> http://www.hitfix.com/whats-alan-watching/review-true-detective-haunted-houses-partners-in-crime
> 
> One great quote from it:


Be careful. There is a pretty good spoiler in the comments.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

teknikel said:


> Be careful. There is a pretty good spoiler in the comments.


Spoiler for what?


----------



## teknikel (Jan 27, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Spoiler for what?


Its a casting spoiler. I can't put it in spoiler quotes right now on Forum Runner Android.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

john4200 said:


> Yeah, I did not get that part either. I suppose the writer would say that she was looking for the one person who would hurt Marty the most, so of course she had to name Cohle to accomplish her revenge. But that strikes me as out of character for her -- she is not the type to hurt Cohle as collateral damage just to hurt her husband. And we cannot say that she was hysterical or not thinking clearly -- she obviously thought things through.
> 
> I was kind of hoping she would sleep with the police commander and take a picture and send it to Marty. No good reason for it, except that I really don't like that guy and want him to see him beaten.


The way I interpreted her comments is that she wanted to sleep with someone so that Marty would never take her back. She knew she would eventually forgive Marty and take him back (at least, Marty would never stop trying to get her back). This was the only way (in her mind) to end the relationship because it would be over on both ends.


----------



## LlamaLarry (Apr 30, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Yeah, I did not get that part either. I suppose the writer would say that she was looking for the one person who would hurt Marty the most, so of course she had to name Cohle to accomplish her revenge. But that strikes me as out of character for her -- she is not the type to hurt Cohle as collateral damage just to hurt her husband. And we cannot say that she was hysterical or not thinking clearly -- she obviously thought things through.


This.

I can only guess that she does not know WH's crazy like we know his crazy.

On the same issue, when WH went in for the choke and she taunted him until he didn't do it. And then called him a coward.

I think that stuff only works on TV because neither of those actions are on my playlist for the day a physically larger and stronger person has their hands on my throat with murderous intent.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

I just wonder what happens to this show next season with a different cast. MM and WH and just so amazing in this!


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Anubys said:


> The way I interpreted her comments is that she wanted to sleep with someone so that Marty would never take her back. She knew she would eventually forgive Marty and take him back (at least, Marty would never stop trying to get her back). This was the only way (in her mind) to end the relationship because it would be over on both ends.


Two problems with that explanation. One is that she said nothing about that. And two is that it does not make sense. Just because she seduced his partner is not going to make Marty suddenly decide to leave her as compared to her seducing someone (or someones) else. There is no reason to think she would believe such a thing.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Two problems with that explanation. One is that she said nothing about that. And two is that it does not make sense. Just because she seduced his partner is not going to make Marty suddenly decide to leave her as compared to her seducing someone (or someones) else. There is no reason to think she would believe such a thing.


What did she say to Cohle? I thought it was something along the lines of, this is the only way he would accept a divorce.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> What did she say to Cohle? I thought it was something along the lines of, this is the only way he would accept a divorce.


Yeah, something like if it were just some guy in a bar, he'd take her back, but this way it would be unforgivable.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

TAsunder said:


> What did she say to Cohle? I thought it was something along the lines of, this is the only way he would accept a divorce.


She said "this he won't live with". But I assumed "this" meant her seducing another man, since she just said "I almost went with a stranger". But I guess you could interpret "this" as meaning Cohle specifically. It still does not make sense that she would be willing to hurt Cohle so much just on the off chance that Marty would be slightly more likely to leave her because she seduced Cohle rather than a stranger (or strangers).


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> What did she say to Cohle? I thought it was something along the lines of, this is the only way he would accept a divorce.


Yes, I remember something like that, too.
Something like, "this is the only way he won't want me anymore".


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Here's the relevant dialogue

Cohle: What the f are you doing here, huh?

Maggie: Im sorryyou knowit wasnt youreally II wasnt even sure I could do it17 years is a long timeI almost went with awith a strangera barIm sorry Rusthe will have to go, you see, because thishe wont live with

Cohle: Get the f out of here.get the f out of here(repeating 3-4 more times as she apologizes) 

Maggie: Thisthis will hurt himIm sorry but thank you



Did she emphasize "This"? sort of...a little...could be because she was stuttering and could be because she was emphasizing. The way I understood it is that just a stranger in a bar wasn't going to be enough...She had to do something even worse...something he could not live with and could never forgive.

I think it's open to interpretation. But I think my interpretation is correct (shocker! )


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Anubys said:


> I think it's open to interpretation. But I think my interpretation is correct (shocker! )


I don't think it's open to reasonable interpretation. That was the plain meaning of the scene. Anything else is twisting things around to get some other meaning.


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I don't think it's open to reasonable interpretation. That was the plain meaning of the scene. Anything else is twisting things around to get some other meaning.


Right. And this is also why she was so deliberately upfront about telling Marty not just that she had cheated, but who she had cheated with.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

Anubys said:


> The way I understood it is that just a stranger in a bar wasn't going to be enough...She had to do something even worse...something he could not live with and could never forgive.


Exactly! If a stranger in a bar would have been enough, she could have lied about it.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I don't think it's open to reasonable interpretation. That was the plain meaning of the scene. Anything else is twisting things around to get some other meaning.


I totally agree...I just wanted to leave some wiggle room so that some people would not get their panties all bunched up and need to prove how right and smart they are...


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I don't think it's open to reasonable interpretation. That was the plain meaning of the scene. Anything else is twisting things around to get some other meaning.


Then why didn't she say, "you he won't live with"? So easy to make the point that it was Cohle rather than just seducing some man. Yet she did not use the obvious word for that meaning.

Furthermore, as I already mentioned, it does not make sense. If she has sex with a stranger and sends Marty a picture on his phone, how is that any less likely to make him leave her than if she has sex with Cohle? It could actually be the opposite. Keeping it in the family, as it were.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

john4200 said:


> Furthermore, as I already mentioned, it does not make sense. If she has sex with a stranger and sends Marty a picture on his phone, how is that any less likely to make him leave her than if she has sex with Cohle? It could actually be the opposite. Keeping it in the family, as it were.


Most of the time you just don't make any logical sense, but this is just plain crazy.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

BlueMerle said:


> Most of the time you just don't make any logical sense, but this is just plain crazy.


Unable to make a reasonable argument, you instead resort to personal attacks. Well done.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

john4200 said:


> Unable to make a reasonable argument, you instead resort to personal attacks. Well done.


Not a personal attack at all. It's a statement of fact.

Reasonable arguments have been made, by several, you ignore them or skip over the parts you can't refute or muddy with nonsense.

That you could even suggest that one spouse sleeping with the working partner of the other spouse might make it less likely they would separate is ... in a word... crazy.

Your words:

"It could actually be the opposite. Keeping it in the family, as it were."


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Michelle Monaghan seems to agree:

http://www.vulture.com/2014/02/michelle-monaghan-true-detective-maggie-revenge-interview.html


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

BlueMerle said:


> Not a personal attack at all.


If you explain why my argument is wrong, that is fine. If you call a particular statement I made crazy, that is fine (although it is better if you explain why the statement is crazy, otherwise it looks like a personal attack).

But your post made a statement about me personally: "most of the time you do not make any logical sense". That is not a statement about the show that this thread is about, that is a personal attack.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

TAsunder said:


> Michelle Monaghan seems to agree:
> 
> http://www.vulture.com/2014/02/michelle-monaghan-true-detective-maggie-revenge-interview.html


Not surprising.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

trust me.....put him on ignore. If you don't know how, just click on his name, then view public profile, then click "Add XYX to my ignore list".


----------



## goblue97 (May 12, 2005)

Anubys said:


> The way I interpreted her comments is that she wanted to sleep with someone so that Marty would never take her back. She knew she would eventually forgive Marty and take him back (at least, Marty would never stop trying to get her back). This was the only way (in her mind) to end the relationship because it would be over on both ends.


This is exactly the way I saw it too. In fact, didn't she say that was her plan all along. She tried to pick up a "Joe" at a bar but decided it had to have more meaning to Marty so that _he _would leave _her_.


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

I was fairly disappointed with this episode (1x6). I understand they have to move some parts around, get the story in place for the endgame, but nothing much happened that we didn't already mostly know. Marty was clearly divorced from Maggie. Marty and Rust broke up as partners in 2002. I even would have speculated that things happened pretty much as they did.

I guess I just think this one was kind of flat compared to the other awesome 5 hours of tv. I look forward to the last two though, and really want to see the Rust/Marty reunion.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

It seems like TD, and the search for The Yellow King, is all the rage.

I found an interesting article on Wired with their theories on who might be The Yellow King.

Who Is True Detectives Yellow King? Here Are Our 6 Favorite Theories

Most candidates are obvious, though they did have one that hadn't ever crossed my mind.

Fun read though.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I thought s01e06 was great. Yes, much of what happened was not that surprising. However I thought the acting was really well done and definitely worth watching anyway. The entire scene between Rust and Maggie was fantastic.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Renewed.

http://unrealitytv.com/hbos-true-detective-gets-second-season-order/

Greg


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

The timing on that report is off. The article is dated Jan 31, and the writer mentions that only 3 eps have aired so far. I have clearly read on various sites that HBO has NOT renewed this. So for him to write this a month ago makes no sense.

The latest I read (within the last week) is that HBO is waiting to see who they could cast in S2 before they give the go-ahead.

Again, odd timing on this story.

~~~~~~

ETA: Just to be safe, I did some quick googling. Here is one story I found...

http://www.nerdcoremovement.com/tru...ys-hbo-wants-season-2-but-not-guaranteed-yet/



> True Detective has become the must watch show of 2014 but despite great ratings and being a critical darling, the series hasnt been locked up for a season 2 as of yet
> 
> There are only two weeks to go until the first season of True Detective comes to an end, and the tension in the air is palpable as just about everyone waits with bated breath to see how this case that started in 1995 with the murder of Dora Lange will end.
> 
> ...


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Which makes sense... in effect, they'd be green-lighting a new show sight-unseen.

A little surprised Pizzolatto apparently didn't realize that and have something ready, but hey, writers...


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

My first thought when I read that was 'who are they kidding?'. I wonder if their is some other issue at play here? Contract negotiations?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

BlueMerle said:


> My first thought when I read that was 'who are they kidding?'. I wonder if their is some other issue at play here? Contract negotiations?


I don't know, it seems quite reasonable if you're going to spend a fortune making a TV show, you should have a pretty good idea of what that show is going to be.

And all they know now is, it ain't gonna be the same as the one they have now.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I don't know, it seems quite reasonable if you're going to spend a fortune making a TV show, you should have a pretty good idea of what that show is going to be.


True, to a point. They would certainly want to have some idea for season one. Now, given the success of season 1, I'd bet a simple one page treatment would be more than enough for them to green light season two.

They're dying to get a season two imo, and just need the slightest excuse.



Rob Helmerichs said:


> And all they know now is, it ain't gonna be the same as the one they have now.


They knew that before they gave the green light for season one.

Either way, I don't see them giving up on this franchise at this point.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

BlueMerle said:


> True, to a point. They would certainly want to have some idea for season one. Now, given the success of season 1, I'd bet a simple one page treatment would be more than enough for them to green light season two.


Except for the first season, they had a script and two genuine movie stars. I doubt they're going to write a blank check on a one-page treatment. And it sounds like the writer hasn't started working on it yet (which, again, blows my mind), and they have neither a story nor bankable (or any) cast.

If it's true that there's no there there yet, I would be very surprised if we saw a second season within a year. With one writer, it could take a year just to write the script, let alone casting, filming, post-production...

I'm sure it will happen, unless Pizzolatto completely flakes out on them. But I don't blame them for wanting some substance before they hand him millions of dollars, and there's no need to rush it (i.e., commit before it's ready to go).


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Except for the first season, they had a script and two genuine movie stars. I doubt they're going to write a blank check on a one-page treatment. And it sounds like the writer hasn't started working on it yet (which, again, blows my mind), and they have neither a story nor bankable (or any) cast.
> 
> If it's true that there's no there there yet, I would be very surprised if we saw a second season within a year. With one writer, it could take a year just to write the script, let alone casting, filming, post-production...
> 
> I'm sure it will happen, unless Pizzolatto completely flakes out on them. But I don't blame them for wanting some substance before they hand him millions of dollars, and there's no need to rush it (i.e., commit before it's ready to go).


Yeah, that all makes sense. I certainly don't know how hollywood actually works but I just thought that they would have addressed these issues long ago.

Maybe I'm too cynical when it comes to Hollywood.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> If it's true that there's no there there yet, I would be very surprised if we saw a second season within a year.


fortunately, hbo season schedules and premieres have historically proven to be _very_ flexible, so that won't be an issue.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

NorthAlabama said:


> fortunately, hbo season schedules and premieres have historically proven to be _very_ flexible, so that won't be an issue.


Oh, very true...which is why I qualified it with "within a year." I'd be surprised if it _never _happened...unless Pizzolatto turns out to be a one-hit wonder who doesn't have a second series in him. But if he really hasn't started writing yet, or even come up with a story, then there's almost no way it could be ready for early 2015.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Interesting night tonight. At about the same time that MM is winning an Oscar on ABC, we can watch True Detective on HBO.

I know where my eyeballs will be...


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Here's more interesting things... Pizzolato (huh, I typed that from memory, checked, and it was surprisingly right) tweeted, then deleted it quickly.

Someone tweeted:









And he responded:


> @friggenawesome One of the detriments of only having two POV characters, both men (a structural necessity). Next season&#8230;


http://www.uproxx.com/tv/2014/02/ni...-female-detectives-next-years-true-detective/

Greg


----------



## Squeak (May 12, 2000)

We haven't watched tonights episode yet, but what my wife and I find interesting is that the only scene we can think of that did not come for either WH or MM's point of view is when the two detectives interviewed WH's wife.

Ironic, given what Greg just posted.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

I know a lot of sites do recaps of the shows, but does anyone have any suggestions as to what might be the best? I've just binge watched to catch up but my attention span is limited and I'd like to see what I've missed.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Sparty99 said:


> I know a lot of sites do recaps of the shows, but does anyone have any suggestions as to what might be the best? I've just binge watched to catch up but my attention span is limited and I'd like to see what I've missed.


Did you try darknessbecomesyou.com?


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

I've been meaning to mention this for a few weeks now but keep forgetting. I think the title music is perfect for this show. A slow, wistful and melancholy bit of music. 

MM's storage unit was exactly what I pictured it would be. He better hope those two cops don't ever get a warrant or he's going to fry. 

I absolutely loved the ending of this episode.... the second appearance of lawnmower man.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

BlueMerle said:


> Did you try darknessbecomesyou.com?


I hadn't, but that's not really what I'm looking for. I'm more interested in the recaps from Slate/Rolling Stone/Grantland, and if anyone's got a suggestion for the best of them.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

BlueMerle said:


> I absolutely loved the ending of this episode.... the second appearance of lawnmower man.


I think it was the third time we've seen him, although people with a better memory than me will be able to tell us which eps, and at what time marker.

And should we now call him scar-man, or the monster man, or ScarFace?


----------



## Carlucci (Jan 10, 2001)

astrohip said:


> And should we now call him scar-man, or the monster man, or ScarFace?


Mowing Spaghetti Monster.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

BlueMerle said:


> I've been meaning to mention this for a few weeks now but keep forgetting. I think the title music is perfect for this show. A slow, wistful and melancholy bit of music. MM's storage unit was exactly what I pictured it would be. He better hope those two cops don't ever get a warrant or he's going to fry. I absolutely loved the ending of this episode.... the second appearance of lawnmower man.


It took me a few episodes before I spotted in opening credits that it is T-Bone Burnett. I love much of his stuff. "Slow, wistful, melancholy" is a good description for it. One of my favorite songs is his "When the Night Falls."


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

astrohip said:


> I think it was the third time we've seen him, although people with a better memory than me will be able to tell us which eps, and at what time marker.
> 
> And should we now call him scar-man, or the monster man, or ScarFace?


I must be missing something here. I know for a fact that in one of his previous appearances MM talked to him face to face. I don't recall seeing any scars on him then or in the closing scene from this ep. And there's no way that MM wouldn't have remembered him now that they know they're looking for a man with scars.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

danterner said:


> It took me a few episodes before I spotted in opening credits that it is T-Bone Burnett. I love much of his stuff. "Slow, wistful, melancholy" is a good description for it. One of my favorite songs is his "When the Night Falls."


Yeah, I'm going to check out his work as well.


----------



## duroyprofundo (May 24, 2012)

Sparty99 said:


> I hadn't, but that's not really what I'm looking for. I'm more interested in the recaps from Slate/Rolling Stone/Grantland, and if anyone's got a suggestion for the best of them.


It's not on your list but the best TV recaps, in my opinion, are by Alan Sepinwall. You can read all his recaps (including True Detective) on Hitfix.com.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

BlueMerle said:


> I must be missing something here. I know for a fact that in one of his previous appearances MM talked to him face to face. I don't recall seeing any scars on him then or in the closing scene from this ep. And there's no way that MM wouldn't have remembered him now that they know they're looking for a man with scars.


With his beard, the scars seem to be highly visible only on his right profile. In episode 3, we only really saw his left profile. But we did get a fraction of a second view of his right cheek in episode 3 when he turned his head as Marty honked at Rust:


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I know this is a small detail, but it didn't make sense why Marty was estranged from his 2 girls. He may have been a cheater, but he wasn't the kind of dad grown children would stay away from.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

duroyprofundo said:


> It's not on your list but the best TV recaps, in my opinion, are by Alan Sepinwall. You can read all his recaps (including True Detective) on Hitfix.com.


Thank you, Sepinwall's perfect. I just read his book and don't know why I didn't think of him.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Anubys said:


> I know this is a small detail, but it didn't make sense why Marty was estranged from his 2 girls. He may have been a cheater, but he wasn't the kind of dad grown children would stay away from.


I don't know if this would apply here, but I've known women who were absolutely amazing at alienating their children from their ex-husbands. And being a violent drunken cheater, I can see where he would supply ample ammunition for such a woman.

I suspect we'll never know, though...it looks like they've told us all they're going to tell us about those relationships.


----------



## ewolfr (Feb 12, 2001)

Spoilered because it talks about casting for season 2, if HBO ever decides to get around to announcing that they are going to make more episodes.



Spoiler



http://variety.com/2014/tv/news/matthew-mcconaughey-wont-do-a-true-detective-season-2-1201124448/



> Oscar winner Matthew McConaughey has made it official  he will not be returning to True Detective for a second season.
> 
> When asked about his potential season two return to the hit HBO show at a backstage Academy Awards interview session, McConaughey announced, No, I wont be back for season two. Season one was finite.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Finally catching up with the thread after falling behind during the Olympics. Absolutely an amazing series, and I was on the fence after 3 episodes, but now I can't get enough. Comments:

I mentioned early on I thought MM and WH's wife would sleep together (or whatever it was they did). I think I thought so when MM first came to dinner at WH's house.

My theory based on some clues (and discussed in the link earlier) is that it's Marty who's our ultimate baddie. Things like him trying to butcher MM's undercover operation with the drug guys, his treatment of women, his reaction to the pictures in this last episode. His name has been mentioned too. And his curiosity of what was in MM's storage locker.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Steveknj said:


> My theory based on some clues (and discussed in the link earlier) is that it's Marty who's our ultimate baddie. Things like him trying to butcher MM's undercover operation with the drug guys, his treatment of women, his reaction to the pictures in this last episode. His name has been mentioned too. And his curiosity of what was in MM's storage locker.


I'd be stunned if that turns out to be the case. I hope they don't go down that road. I see Marty as a man with flaws, but not a pedophile.


----------



## VegasVic (Nov 22, 2002)

It's confusing much of the time (for me anyway) but I still dig it, anxious to see how it turns out.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

ewolfr said:


> Spoilered because it talks about casting for season 2, if HBO ever decides to get around to announcing that they are going to make more episodes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think it's fairly definite that it's coming back, but HBO is waiting to cast the next 2 leads before they announce.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

So if it comes back, it will have the same writer and director? I thought they were going to change everything each season.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

That's my understanding, everything changes with season two.... cast and crew.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

BlueMerle said:


> That's my understanding, everything changes with season two.... cast and crew.


No, just new stories and characters. Same writer and director.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> No, just new stories and characters. Same writer and director.


No, that's not the case.

Cary Fukunaga Will Not Be Back to Direct True Detective Season 2

I'm sure I read that both writer and director will change with each season but so far can only find a reference to the director.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

BlueMerle said:


> No, that's not the case.
> 
> Cary Fukunaga Will Not Be Back to Direct True Detective Season 2
> 
> I'm sure I read that both writer and director will change with each season but so far can only find a reference to the director.


Guess I was wrong about Fukunaga (he said last summer that running a show was too much work and he wouldn't be back as director for the second series). But I've never seen a hint that Pizzolatto wouldn't be back, and everything they're saying now is that the delays in picking it up formally are down to him not having the story ready yet.


----------



## MacThor (Feb 7, 2002)

MM's acceptance speech was kind of jarring considering his character's "pessimist" views. I know, I know, it's called "acting" but I noticed the irony, especially since his speech was so far to the other end of the spectrum.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Guess I was wrong about Fukunaga (he said last summer that running a show was too much work and he wouldn't be back as director for the second series). But I've never seen a hint that Pizzolatto wouldn't be back, and everything they're saying now is that the delays in picking it up formally are down to him not having the story ready yet.


According to Wikipedia at least, this is Pizzolatto's baby (he's signed for two years), but the director will change. I guess I was half right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_Detective_(TV_series)


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

How much can you change a show and still have it be considered season 2?

"Okay, next season will have new cast and crew, a new director, the story won't be a continuation of what came before but will be a new plot with new characters in a different setting. But the writer will be the same. It's season 2!"


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

danterner said:


> How much can you change a show and still have it be considered season 2?


If the story still fits the title "True Detective", then I suppose that is your answer.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

danterner said:


> How much can you change a show and still have it be considered season 2?
> 
> "Okay, next season will have new cast and crew, a new director, the story won't be a continuation of what came before but will be a new plot with new characters in a different setting. But the writer will be the same. It's season 2!"


Yeah, it's a bit different. One of the articles I read about it called it 'a movie on steroids'... seems apt to me.

Personally, I like it. I don't want every show to follow this format, but I think it will work for some, especially if the writing is good and they have a good story to tell.


----------



## BrettStah (Nov 12, 2000)

danterner said:


> How much can you change a show and still have it be considered season 2?
> 
> "Okay, next season will have new cast and crew, a new director, the story won't be a continuation of what came before but will be a new plot with new characters in a different setting. But the writer will be the same. It's season 2!"


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Horror_Story


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

BrettStah said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Horror_Story


I know, and it works very well for AHS (and I'm looking forward to the same being true for True Detective). But AHS uses many of the same players, season to season, so it's not quite as extreme as the concept here.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

What Marty Hart saw on True Detective





Greg


----------



## MacThor (Feb 7, 2002)

I know it would seem too much of a cop-out (and I don't think this is the reveal), but it's still possible that Rust is the big bad, right? I mean, just because he told Marty he stole the pictures and VHS from Tuttle's doesn't make it so -- like almost all of the other evidence in the mystery so far. 

We've not seen anything that definitively proves it's NOT Rust, or am I forgetting something?


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

danterner said:


> How much can you change a show and still have it be considered season 2?
> 
> "Okay, next season will have new cast and crew, a new director, the story won't be a continuation of what came before but will be a new plot with new characters in a different setting. But the writer will be the same. It's season 2!"


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthology_series


----------



## Queue (Apr 7, 2009)

Is the yellow king the same person as the killer?


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

wow...torturing the sheriff is a big leap. How do you recover from that?


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

pmyers said:


> wow...torturing the sheriff is a big leap. How do you recover from that?


Not sure there's going to be any recovering.


----------



## Carlucci (Jan 10, 2001)

MacThor said:


> We've not seen anything that definitively proves it's NOT Rust, or am I forgetting something?


No, nor have we seen anything that excludes Marty (WH) from consideration, at least as a co-conspirator. He seemed eager, but did not want to appear overly eager, to have the case turned over to the task force, where it might have been quashed (assuming the cult has as far-reaching tentacles as we are led to believe) and taken away from Cohle's control.

I think Marty's daughters are damaged, either by abuse or by some knowledge of it. Maybe they're not his and Maggie's daughters at all. That scene where he calls them to dinner and they have a bunch of male dolls posed standing over a naked female doll, plus his older daughter having gotten in trouble for drawing explicit pictures in school, seems meant to steer us to the conclusion that they have lost their innocence somehow.

If you turn up the volume on the scene where Marty walks to his daughters' room, the girls are saying something like "They (we?)don't have any parents anymore. They died in a car crash." In this mostly red-herring free show, with carefully crafted dialogue, that has to mean something.

Plus, Marty executed Reggie Ledoux while he was handcuffed and caught. Could that have been to silence him and not the result of his rage, as we are meant to assume?


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Why can't they just find a ring of serial pedophiles and killers and bust them?

why does it have to be more complicated than that? Maybe Rust is killed while arresting them or something. But I don't see any reason for anything more.

I would hate to have an Agatha Christie ending where info that were never given or shown pops up at the last minute. I don't see any need for a twist coming out of left field.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Carlucci said:


> No, nor have we seen anything that excludes Marty (WH) from consideration, at least as a co-conspirator. He seemed eager, but did not want to appear overly eager, to have the case turned over to the task force, where it might have been quashed (assuming the cult has as far-reaching tentacles as we are led to believe) and taken away from Cohle's control.
> 
> I think Marty's daughters are damaged, either by abuse or by some knowledge of it. Maybe they're not his and Maggie's daughters at all. That scene where he calls them to dinner and they have a bunch of male dolls posed standing over a naked female doll, plus his older daughter having gotten in trouble for drawing explicit pictures in school, seems meant to steer us to the conclusion that they have lost their innocence somehow.
> 
> ...


Yes, there are lots of clues pointing to Marty. I think it's him.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Steveknj said:


> Yes, there are lots of clues pointing to Marty. I think it's him.


Let me put it this way: if it's Marty, I will eat my shorts and post it on youtube.


----------



## KenDC (Jun 18, 2001)

Does anybody know if the final is longer than the usual hour? I sure hope so.


----------



## Carlucci (Jan 10, 2001)

Anubys said:


> Why can't they just find a ring of serial pedophiles and killers and bust them?


They have those kind of shows, the Law and Order, CSI type stuff. I don't think you get an 8-episode, HBO original series greenlit with just a plain 'ol detective story, but I'd be happily proven wrong, and will have enjoyed the ride either way.

Whereas "The Killing" employed every lazy red-herring, cheap trick, and misdirection technique known to Hollywood, "True Detective" may very well have been laying very subtle clues in front of us the whole time. I think that would be quite a feat, as long as it's not a total out-of-left-field, mindfreak magic trick like, say, making Maggie the killer.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Anubys said:


> Let me put it this way: if it's Marty, I will eat my shorts and post it on youtube.


:up: I hope for your sake that this goes better than Werner Herzog's similar bet.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

I really hope it's not Marty or Rust. That would seem like such a cheap shot imo. 

Honestly, I don't think it's either of them. Time will tell though.


----------



## Carlucci (Jan 10, 2001)

I'm totally sure neither Rust or Marty are the Antler Killer. But I think Marty is either a participant in the satanic cult or complicit in the ongoing cover-up of their crimes, either willingly or through coercion.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Carlucci said:


> I'm totally sure neither Rust or Marty are the Antler Killer. But I think Marty is either a participant in the satanic cult or complicit in the ongoing cover-up of their crimes, either willingly or through coercion.


I do not see how Marty could actually be involved in the killings of the girls -- it just does not fit with what we have seen of his reactions to people who have harmed children (his reaction to the video, his reaction to seeing the children Ledoux had taken). Also, the way he behaved with the Sheriff in the last episode makes it seem like Marty is not involved (unless the Sheriff is also not involved).

But Marty seems to have some dirty secret that we do not yet know. That scene that his girls reenacted with dolls did not seem imaginary. What did the girls see, and where was Marty when they saw it? I suppose the girls could have somehow witnessed the killers doing their ritual and Marty did not see himself. But Marty saw the weird doll scene his girls made when he called them to dinner, and he did not ask them about it. His reaction to that was odd.


----------



## dslunceford (Oct 19, 2000)

Carlucci said:


> I think Marty's daughters are damaged, either by abuse or by some knowledge of it. Maybe they're not his and Maggie's daughters at all. That scene where he calls them to dinner and they have a bunch of male dolls posed standing over a naked female doll, plus his older daughter having gotten in trouble for drawing explicit pictures in school, seems meant to steer us to the conclusion that they have lost their innocence somehow.


That's my wife's theory as well. Other than a red herring, I don't know why they would have introduced the plot points of the daughter's drawings, etc. they could have illustrated the detached father angle certainly without using that device


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

No spoilers, just funny:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=cHWLpJRlBYA#


----------



## markp99 (Mar 21, 2002)

danterner said:


> No spoilers, just funny:
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=cHWLpJRlBYA#


I understood MORE in that clip than the real show! Too funny!


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

LOL!

It's crystal clear to me now.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

LMAO (video)

This is one of my shows that I have to watch using my wireless headphones or I don't hear/comprehend half of what is being said.

I still feel mildly confused but I made a point of watching E07 early in the evening last night so I wasn't falling asleep. I don't really have a strong theory but I almost feel like they want us to think it's Rust, but Marty is the one with some kind of involvement. I didn't even catch the thing with the girls playing with the dolls. d'oh! I think I need to go back and watch E01 through E06 again.


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

I will appreciate it if neither lead is involved. Why should every show feel the need for some kind of stupid twist like that?

And I think overall the show is just as much about Marty and Rust and who they are, and how the case has affected their lives and how they see themselves. We don't need an awesome end to the case to have an awesome show.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

billypritchard said:


> I will appreciate it if neither lead is involved. Why should every show feel the need for some kind of stupid twist like that? And I think overall the show is just as much about Marty and Rust and who they are, and how the case has affected their lives and how they see themselves. We don't need an awesome end to the case to have an awesome show.


I agree, and I'll add: To have an awesome end to the show there cannot be an awesome end to the case. The show has been pushing that time is a flat circle and so, to be true to itself, the show must avoid closure in favor of looping back in some way. I'll be disappointed if things wrap up.


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

danterner said:


> I agree, and I'll add: To have an awesome end to the show there cannot be an awesome end to the case. The show has been pushing that time is a flat circle and so, to be true to itself, the show must avoid closure in favor of looping back in some way. I'll be disappointed if things wrap up.


It's possible they solve the Dora Lange murder, but with the understanding that things just aren't going to change there. Women/kids will still disappear, even if they find the Yellow King. There would just be a new king.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

danterner said:


> The show has been pushing that time is a flat circle and so, to be true to itself, the show must avoid closure in favor of looping back in some way. I'll be disappointed if things wrap up.


"The show" has been doing that? I must have missed it. Rust babbles on with his weird philosophies, but that certainly does not imply that the "world" of the show has to follow Rust's philosophy.

I expect the show to provide a satisfactory wrap-up of the case.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

after the methodical 7 episode journey, following the characters accross 17 years to get to the finale, i'd be surprised if they didn't wrap up a good many loose ends...we'll know soon.


----------



## dslunceford (Oct 19, 2000)

Queue said:


> Is the yellow king the same person as the killer?


Well, there is this Yellow King theory video:


----------



## TampaThunder (Apr 8, 2003)

dslunceford said:


> Well, there is this Yellow King theory video:


I'd believe that video a lot more if the Yellow King looked yellow instead of orange.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Does anyone know when tonight's episode will hit HBO GO? Does that go live at 9 pm?


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

Sparty99 said:


> Does anyone know when tonight's episode will hit HBO GO? Does that go live at 9 pm?


It's out there, but it won't open on my Roku. Fail, HBO.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

billypritchard said:


> It's out there, but it won't open on my Roku. Fail, HBO.


Yes, I'm having problems logging on to the HBOGO app on my iPad.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

billypritchard said:


> It's out there, but it won't open on my Roku. Fail, HBO.





danterner said:


> Yes, I'm having problems logging on to the HBOGO app on my iPad.


Same here. My guess is there's high traffic tonight.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Brilliant!

I know some won't like the ending, but I did. I never believed, or wanted, it to be either Marty or Rust. 

There was a time when I thought they would both die. Glad that didn't happen.

Overall, best damn show in ages.


----------



## dslunceford (Oct 19, 2000)

Color me disappointed. Not in that it wasn't Marty or Rust...just seemed a bit weak.


----------



## tem (Oct 6, 2003)

Will everyone admit they were wrong now ?


----------



## Zevida (Nov 8, 2003)

That was a brilliant end to a damn near perfect show. I am blown away by the experience.

Rust nearly brought me to tears at the end. My eyes welled up.


----------



## Carlucci (Jan 10, 2001)

Any disappointment I felt about them not blowing the lid off a larger conspiracy was completely overshadowed by the amazing revelation that Cohle had at the end, in his near-death experience. Powerful stuff.

Now I need to rewatch to get all of Marty's daughters' scenes in a new context. Now that we know they are not clues, (and I refuse to accept them as just red-herring distractions) I guess they are meant to be commentary on how none of us are truly innocent, or how we can all pay for others' sin with our own innocence. 

And Rust's line at the very end....Spectacular! "It started off ALL dark. Seems to me the light is winning." That was perfect.


----------



## ADG (Aug 20, 2003)

The episode could have ended at the 45 minute mark and it would have been perfect.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I almost want to rewatch the whole series right now in light of the explicit revelation of Rust's mental illness. It makes him a much more heroic character...he seems to have been as functional as he has been through sheer force of will.

But I'll wait for the blu-ray.

And I like that there wasn't some vast supernatural thing going on...that the sad little man gained his mystery and power mostly through the efforts of the power elite to hide his crimes.


----------



## goblue97 (May 12, 2005)

What was that they were walking through toward the end? It seemed like a fairly complex building that had been overgrown. 

From the time they pulled up to the house until the hospital, I was on the edge of my seat. That was one heck of a finale, in my opinion.


----------



## dslunceford (Oct 19, 2000)

Carlucci said:


> Now I need to rewatch to get all of Marty's daughters' scenes in a new context. Now that we know they are not clues, (and I refuse to accept them as just red-herring distractions) I guess they are meant to be commentary on how none of us are truly innocent, or how we can all pay for others' sin with our own innocence.


I liked the Atlantic's review:



> I flat-out adored the show's first few episodes-and the two main performances have to be the best I've seen in years. (Dammit, McConaughey, stop making me cry with all that talk about your dead daughter!) But I was never excited about Pizzolatto's declaration/boast that the series would subvert the clichés of detective shows. That sounded like a show that would just have a handy excuse whenever it did indulge in its own clichés, being able to accuse critical viewers of not being able to grasp its cleverness.
> 
> And that I'm sure will be the retort of those who loved the finale in the face of questions like:
> 
> ...


...and this is what I meant by it felt "weak" (emphasis added):


> I vowed to watch the finale as a fan, not as someone trying to figure it all out. But even as a fan, *I still found these dangling threads and implausibilities frustrating because the show practically begged us to get into the weeds*, to wade into swampy waters. That's okay if it winds up giving viewers some extra insight. But it's another thing entirely if the show is just messing with us.


and:


> And it's true that Pizzolatto had been warning us, in increasingly strident (or perhaps nervous?) tones, not to expect some mid-blowing twist at the end. But maybe he could have offered at least a gentle puff on the cerebral cortex? Something? Anything? *It's as if he scrupulously combed through version after version of the finale script, carefully excising anything that might constitute even a moderate surprise or revelation.*


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I almost want to rewatch the whole series right now in light of the explicit revelation of Rust's mental illness. It makes him a much more heroic character...he seems to have been as functional as he has been through sheer force of will.
> 
> But I'll wait for the blu-ray.
> 
> And I like that there wasn't some vast supernatural thing going on...that the sad little man gained his mystery and power mostly through the efforts of the power elite to hide his crimes.


To what mental illness are you referring? His hallucinations? Must not be because they explicitly stated that before. I must have missed something...


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> To what mental illness are you referring? His hallucinations? Must not be because they explicitly stated that before.


Not that they are something he constantly experiences. As I interpreted it, before they could just have been the result of extensive drug use and an over-active imagination, not necessarily literal mental illness.


----------



## KenDC (Jun 18, 2001)

dslunceford said:


> Color me disappointed. Not in that it wasn't Marty or Rust...just seemed a bit weak.


I agree and with your backup as well. Still, I also agree it was a great series and well worth my time.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

goblue97 said:


> What was that they were walking through toward the end? It seemed like a fairly complex building that had been overgrown.


I had wondered the same thing. This morning I saw HBO had posted a behind the scenes short about Episode 8.






It was an old Civil War fort. FABULOUS location!

Greg


----------



## Zevida (Nov 8, 2003)

dslunceford said:


> > But maybe he could have offered at least a gentle puff on the cerebral cortex? Something? Anything?


If the two scenes at the end with Marty in bed realizing he'll never be fine and Rust in the wheelchair expressing his revelation about life and the universe didn't move your cerebral cortex, you weren't watching the same show that I was. That was what it was all about.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Loved it... MM really did a great job at the end. I was surprised. I haven't seen Dallas Buyer's Club yet and I know he won the Oscar but... I didn't really think he had that in him.

I do have to say that based on the knife wound and the length of time it took them to be found, there's absolutely no way Rust survives that. I'm not complaining though... see previous paragraph.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

Isn't it better to leave the knife in to prevent blood loss?


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Carlucci said:


> And Rust's line at the very end....Spectacular! "It started off ALL dark. Seems to me the light is winning." That was perfect.


Totally agree.

For a show that spent 7.99 episodes dealing with some very dark and disturbing issues, and exposed serious character flaws with the main characters it was a great way to end on a positive note. A small ray of light in the darkness.

I'm sooo in for season 2!


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

cherry ghost said:


> Isn't it better to leave the knife in to prevent blood loss?


That's what I was thinking also.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

cherry ghost said:


> Isn't it better to leave the knife in to prevent blood loss?


Yes, if you want to live. He was embracing the dark at that moment.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Not for the usual reasons, but color me disappointed. The show followed the path I expected. I did not expect or want a "Marty did it" twist. That would have been absurd.

However, after the rage and determination brought upon by watching the video, it seemed just as absurd that they both just shrug their shoulders and say that catching one of the men is enough. All they had to say was that the 2 other detectives were now hot on the trail and they will be caught soon. I'm not sure why they glib about that.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

madscientist said:


> I do have to say that based on the knife wound and the length of time it took them to be found, there's absolutely no way Rust survives that. I'm not complaining though... see previous paragraph.


I was thinking the same thing. That there was no way he would survive that (and we know now that he might not have wanted to, hence him pulling the knife out).

I was one of the "Marty did it" people, but I have to say that I'm glad he didn't. I guess I'm slightly disappointed in the ending (not that Marty didn't do it), but I'm not really surprised. As many have said, the show was about the two detectives much more than the crime they were trying to solve, and that's how it ended. I guess I'm not big on all that exposition, but it was well done. I have to say though, from the time they pulled up to the house, I was on the edge of my seat. My heart was actually beating fast. Kudos to the director for that scene. Really well done.

Looking forward to season 2.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Anubys said:


> However, after the rage and determination brought upon by watching the video, it seemed just as absurd that they both just shrug their shoulders and say that catching one of the men is enough. *All they had to say was that the 2 other detectives were now hot on the trail and they will be caught soon*. I'm not sure why they glib about that.


I think that's exactly what is going to happen, or that's the impression I'm left with.

This series was shot from Rust's and Marty's POV. This was just how the case ended for them, not the end of the case.

As Marty said, "We got ours.".


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

BlueMerle said:


> I think that's exactly what is going to happen, or that's the impression I'm left with.
> 
> This series was shot from Rust's and Marty's POV. This was just how the case ended for them, not the end of the case.
> 
> As Marty said, "We got ours.".


I guess part of the argument here is that Rust was SOOOO committed to finding out the truth in this case and catching the killers, that it's hard to imagine he'd just give up until everyone is caught. On the flip side, his brush with death might have changes his mind. So I can see both sides of the discussion as plausible.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Steveknj said:


> I guess part of the argument here is that Rust was SOOOO committed to finding out the truth in this case and catching the killers, that it's hard to imagine he'd just give up until everyone is caught. On the flip side, his brush with death might have changes his mind. So I can see both sides of the discussion as plausible.


I think, from his POV, the only other person he knew to be involved was Tuttle and he's already dead.

That, along with his near death experience, may have allowed him to let it be.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> I guess part of the argument here is that Rust was SOOOO committed to finding out the truth in this case and catching the killers, that it's hard to imagine he'd just give up until everyone is caught. On the flip side, his brush with death might have changes his mind. So I can see both sides of the discussion as plausible.


Rust is Rust. Why do we assume he gave up? Just because Marty told him to and we didn't see him jump out of his wheelchair and start using aikido on Tuttle?


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

BlueMerle said:


> I think that's exactly what is going to happen, or that's the impression I'm left with.
> 
> This series was shot from Rust's and Marty's POV. This was just how the case ended for them, not the end of the case.
> 
> As Marty said, "We got ours.".


I think the opposite. There was a snippet of newscast from Rust' hospital room basically saying the Tuttle family was denying any involvement with the killer. They will successfully cover it up, and the darkness keeps fighting the light.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

TAsunder said:


> Rust is Rust. Why do we assume he gave up? Just because Marty told him to and we didn't see him jump out of his wheelchair and start using aikido on Tuttle?


One glib counter is why not stop at episode number 7 and we can just assume they caught the lawnmower man  

But seriously, the show is about detectives spending a good chunk of their career trying to catch *a pedophile and serial killing ring*. Not just one man. All they needed was one throwaway line about the rest of the ring being caught (instead, we got a throwaway line about the senator denying that the guy was his cousin or something like that).

All we got was a dismissive comment from Marty "eh...someone else will catch the rest, it's not our problem anymore...we did enough".


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> Rust is Rust. Why do we assume he gave up? Just because Marty told him to and we didn't see him jump out of his wheelchair and start using aikido on Tuttle?


Very true. When he's fully recovered, I could see him on the case again.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

billypritchard said:


> I think the opposite. There was a snippet of newscast from Rust' hospital room basically saying the Tuttle family was denying any involvement with the killer. They will successfully cover it up, and the darkness keeps fighting the light.


They may well successfully cover it up, but it's not the end of the case.

And I prefer to think of it as the light fighting the darkness.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

My only dissapointment was the "scars" on the killer. They practically were non-existent. Nobody would look at him and remember him based on those especially after 20+ years.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

This Yellow King theory is pretty compelling:






(Some NSFW language at the very end)


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

danterner said:


> This Yellow King theory is pretty compelling:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


dslunceford already posted that 4 days ago in this thread.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

john4200 said:


> dslunceford already posted that 4 days ago in this thread.


Ah, I must have missed it.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> I have to say though, from the time they pulled up to the house, I was on the edge of my seat. My heart was actually beating fast. Kudos to the director for that scene. Really well done.


This for sure. However I think this show had an advantage that most shows don't: we all know that this was the last episode and that they won't bring back these characters or this case at all, even if there's another season. We also understand that a show like this is absolutely not afraid to have an ending that is difficult and challenging to the viewer.

So, that leads to an unusual amount of tension for a finale like this: usually you know that the main characters will survive but here we just had no idea what would happen. There are very few shows where this is true: _Game of Thrones_ (although not so much for those of us who've read the books) and a little bit _Walking Dead_ (although there are inviolable (IMO) characters on that show) are the only ones I can think of offhand.

It was fantastic! I'm not saying that the writing and directing weren't also responsible but a lot of it was the format.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

madscientist said:


> This for sure. However I think this show had an advantage that most shows don't: we all know that this was the last episode and that they won't bring back these characters or this case at all, even if there's another season. We also understand that a show like this is absolutely not afraid to have an ending that is difficult and challenging to the viewer.
> 
> So, that leads to an unusual amount of tension for a finale like this: usually you know that the main characters will survive but here we just had no idea what would happen. There are very few shows where this is true: _Game of Thrones_ (although not so much for those of us who've read the books) and a little bit _Walking Dead_ (although there are inviolable (IMO) characters on that show) are the only ones I can think of offhand.
> 
> It was fantastic! I'm not saying that the writing and directing weren't also responsible but a lot of it was the format.


Agree. I think this had more of a movie or mini-series feel than a regular detective series. Much much more interesting to watch.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

I watched this show over the past week on HBO Go and I really enjoyed it. A few times, I didn't totally follow their conversations when they were mentioning people from past episodes. Maybe I should have taken notes.

This show reminds me of some others I have seen over the past couple of years:
Broadchurch
Top of The Lake
The Killing

Are there any other serialized mystery/crime shows like this that I'm missing? I really like this format when it's done well. The Killing didn't pull it off as well as the others, but I enjoyed it.

True Detective was a little bit different from those other shows, in that it wasn't so much about the mystery. The two main characters' lives seemed to be more of the focus of the show, with the case being secondary. I also can't recall any real red herrings, which those other shows rely on pretty heavily.

I also enjoyed Rectify, though I'm not sure whether it falls within this genre.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

I recently watched and enjoyed The Fall - it's a serialized drama in the same vein. It stars Gillian Anderson. 

I actually thought that there were many red herrings in True Detective: 

1. Marty's father-in-law 
2. Marty's daughter's Barbie diorama 
3. The Yellow King - the identity of the Yellow King was presented as a central mystery, but it wound up being unresolved/allegorical 
4. The suggestion that Marty's daughter Audrey was sexually abused 
5. The hand-drawn spiral on Marty's kitchen wall 

Those are just a few that come to mind. I'm not complaining about them - I loved the season - but I wouldn't say it was a series without red herrings...


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

That's why I put the word "real" in front of "red herrings." Maybe not the best word choice. What I meant was those really strong red herrings, where there is some clue or evidence that makes it seem extremely likely that a specific person is the perpetrator. Early on in one of the shows I listed, there was almost a "red herring of the week."

I watched the first episode of The Fall a while back and I wasn't that interested, but I'll give it another shot.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

danterner said:


> I recently watched and enjoyed The Fall - it's a serialized drama in the same vein. It stars Gillian Anderson.
> 
> I actually thought that there were many red herrings in True Detective:
> 
> ...


I'm not sure if I'd call them red herrings as much as just unresolved storylines. I am not sure they were put there to throw us off who the killers were as much as to show some character flaws (and I admit, I read way too much into those things). The story of the killers was pretty straight forward detective work and we really kinda knew who it probably was toward the middle of the series, or at least we could see where it was headed. I think the problem is, we've seen SO many of these types of stories that we go off LOOKING for red herrings and have become so easily fooled.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

BlueMerle said:


> Brilliant!
> 
> I know some won't like the ending, but I did. I never believed, or wanted, it to be either Marty or Rust.
> 
> ...


I didn't think it would be either of them, either. I liked the ending. It certainly was exciting (and mondo creepy!) for a while there. I have to say that I thought Rust was going to die. I had a premonition of that almost as soon as the last episode began.

I figured he was going to give it ALL toward getting this guy, and hopefully the rest of them, and it would also serve to leave the opening for WH to do another season with a new partner.

I very much liked the evolution of the relationship between Rust and Marty, also.

Yeah, I'd have liked for the whole bunch to be caught. Maybe that's for S02? Who knows. But what they did, I thought they did well.


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

sharkster said:


> ...and it would also serve to leave the opening for WH to do another season with a new partner.
> ...Yeah, I'd have liked for the whole bunch to be caught. Maybe that's for S02? Who knows.


The people involved have made it clear that if there is a season two, it will be a completely new cast with a completely new story. While I suppose you could say that new characters chasing down the remaining perpetrators from this case would technically be a "new" story, I don't believe that's likely to be what they do. I think each season will be a complete stand-alone series, unrelated to each other in any way.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Dawghows said:


> The people involved have made it clear that if there is a season two, it will be a completely new cast with a completely new story. While I suppose you could say that new characters chasing down the remaining perpetrators from this case would technically be a "new" story, I don't believe that's likely to be what they do. I think each season will be a complete stand-alone series, unrelated to each other in any way.


I wonder if they will use the same locale (the Louisiana Bayou) or set it somewhere completely different. I have no idea if the writer is from that part of the country or has some knowledge of it, or just thought it was an interesting setting for that story.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

Ah, I see. Somewhere I had read some scuttlebutt that maybe WH was coming back. Probably just gossip. 

At any rate, I would watch another season and hope that they continue with good writing, good character development, and I cannot help but hope for another pair of stellar actors. I know the writers write the characters, but the actors create them.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

sharkster said:


> Ah, I see. Somewhere I had read some scuttlebutt that maybe WH was coming back. Probably just gossip.
> 
> At any rate, I would watch another season and hope that they continue with good writing, good character development, and I cannot help but hope for another pair of stellar actors. I know the writers write the characters, but the actors create them.


Considering how well written and how well received TD was, I'd think you might get some big actors on board for season two. There's always some big names who want to do projects like this for the artistic value rather than strictly the money.


----------



## MacThor (Feb 7, 2002)

TD Season 2, with David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson? Dennis Franz and Jimmy Smits?


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

Steveknj said:


> Considering how well written and how well received TD was, I'd think you might get some big actors on board for season two. There's always some big names who want to do projects like this for the artistic value rather than strictly the money.


Yeah, I think there'll be a long line of actors eager to be part of something like this.

This format really lends itself to that. It's not a long term commitment for the actors, i.e. a regular TV series, yet it's a lead role as opposed to a one time cameo.


----------



## Zevida (Nov 8, 2003)

I'm rewatching the show. In the first episode, Marty says to Rust:

"You attach an assumption to a piece of evidence, you start to bend the narrative to support it, prejudice yourself."

I think a lot of viewers fell into that trap, with the hunting for clues and creating their own red herrings and conspiracy theories.


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

Dell Shannon "Keep Searchin' (Follow the Sun)". I have a little trouble getting past that ripoff (or homage) at the start of each episode but I'm liking it after three.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

At the risk of becoming very unpopular (I'm pretty unpopular as it is though, so whatever), I don't get the hype. I saw people on my Twitter feed saying this belongs up there with Breaking Bad and The Wire, and to me that's just insane.

I started watching about a week before episode 7, and I caught up in time to essentially watch that live. So maybe I watched it too quickly and I'm certain I missed some things. But to me it had a few unique things going for it that hyped the show: one writer for all the shows, one director for all the shows, and two big movie stars doing an 8-episode stint on television before they went back to their normal gigs.

Aside from that, it was your typical cop show, complete with pretty much every buddy cop cliche under the sun. It was made all at once, so the writer could throw in a ton of red herrings and easter eggs for the internet to talk about during the 8 weeks it was on the air, but ultimately led nowhere. I get the whole, "Life is a flat circle thing," which helps to explain why the whole Yellow King issue wasn't resolved. But that means there are a ton of abused kids out there having their lives ruined, and that to me is utterly unsatisfying, and I can't imagine it's something that Marty or Rust would've been satisfied with (which means, that with this being a one season run for the two of them means it's ultimately just a partial story).

There's a part of me that would like to go back and rewatch the season, but at the same time I feel like it would be something I'm not particularly interested in spending my time on.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Many of those cliches are not really cliches, are being exaggerated for the article, or are just plain wrong. He did not take a hatchet to the aorta. Perhaps the author has not heard of a rib cage before?

There weren't really that many red herrings as far as I could tell. There was one big one, and it was clear from the start of the series that it wasn't really a red herring because we knew from episode 1 that they didn't get the right guy. 

Is it as good as the Wire? Heck no. I doubt anything ever will be. I think it stacks up well to the first season of Breaking Bad, though. Which I thought was fairly overrated (the first season, that is). BB didn't get "good" until at least the 2nd season, if not 3rd.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Sparty99 said:


> At the risk of becoming very unpopular (I'm pretty unpopular as it is though, so whatever), I don't get the hype. I saw people on my Twitter feed saying this belongs up there with Breaking Bad and The Wire, and to me that's just insane.
> 
> Aside from that, it was your typical cop show, complete with pretty much every buddy cop cliche under the sun.


There's nothing wrong with not liking a show, so no need to defend yourself.

For me, part of the attraction was the incredible acting. The story was very good, but WH and MM were incredible. I was mesmerized by their screen presence 90% of the time they were on.

The mystery was good. There wasn't the blatantly false red herring of the week (like The Killing). It's a mystery, so there have to be false leads, but they did a great job of mixing good leads with false trails. The way they cut between 1995/2002/2014 was well done. Helped us build the story in our heads as we watched.

And it bears repeating, WH & MM were just knocking it out of the park. I never felt they were simply slumming on TV before returning to their day jobs; they were creating a performance. That's all one can ask of an actor.


----------



## Zevida (Nov 8, 2003)

The acting and depth of the lead characters, the writing (dialogue), the cinematography/setting, and the story construct of jumping back and forth in time were all what made this an incredible must-watch show for me. The mystery was secondary.

So yeah, aside from all that, it might as well just be another few episodes of Law & Order.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

astrohip said:


> There's nothing wrong with not liking a show, so no need to defend yourself.
> 
> For me, part of the attraction was the incredible acting. The story was very good, but WH and MM were incredible. I was mesmerized by their screen presence 90% of the time they were on.
> 
> ...


Pretty much all of this. A good story, well written, with great acting.... sooo refreshing.


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

Zevida said:


> The acting and depth of the lead characters, the writing (dialogue), the cinematography/setting, *and the story construct of jumping back and forth in time *were all what made this an incredible must-watch show for me. The mystery was secondary.
> 
> So yeah, aside from all that, it might as well just be another few episodes of Law & Order.


I think what you say is true, but then when they lost the construct in eps 6-8, it lost a little of the pizzazz. It became a bit more straight forward, less awesome.


----------



## Zevida (Nov 8, 2003)

billypritchard said:


> I think what you say is true, but then when they lost the construct in eps 6-8, it lost a little of the pizzazz. It became a bit more straight forward, less awesome.


Agreed, but by that point, we care so much about the mystery we're invested, and the suspense helps make up for it a bit. But it was definitely better structure with the back and forth in time, especially when the story being told didn't match the flashback like in episodes 4 & 5.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Sparty99 said:


> At the risk of becoming very unpopular (I'm pretty unpopular as it is though, so whatever), I don't get the hype. I saw people on my Twitter feed saying this belongs up there with Breaking Bad and The Wire, and to me that's just insane.
> 
> I started watching about a week before episode 7, and I caught up in time to essentially watch that live. So maybe I watched it too quickly and I'm certain I missed some things. But to me it had a few unique things going for it that hyped the show: one writer for all the shows, one director for all the shows, and two big movie stars doing an 8-episode stint on television before they went back to their normal gigs.
> 
> ...


IMO much much better than Breaking Bad or The Wire (and I won't go into why I didn't like these two series as much as most of you, been there, done that). I liked the fact that because it was an 8 episode all encapsulated story, we didn't get a lot of the crap that you get in longer more drawn out plots. Life is like that, there are lots of unresolved parts. They made you wonder if Rust would actually let this go, and there's a lot of speculation either way. I liked that the Red Herrings weren't actually Red Herrings but parts of the culture and psyche of the region and the character. Unlike shows I'm invested in for years, it really didn't bother me that everything wasn't tied up in a neat little bow. I liked that you really wonder what happens with the characters (and if the writer was smart, he'd do a novel with these characters.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I should add, the scene in ep 8 where they are looking for the baddies was about as suspenseful as anything I've ever seen. This series was worth it JUST for that alone.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

it is a rare occurrence with any series that i feel disappointment when an episode ends, wishing it would continue, not wanting to wait until next week. even more rare that i re-watch an episode, immediately following my first viewing, just to catch what i might have missed. true detective met both of these conditions.

why? the writing, the character development of marty and rust, the progression and regression of the story over a 17-year span, the chemistry between wh and mm, the locations and cinematography, the supporting cast (much more deserving of recognition than they received) - the careful blending of all of these. mostly, i guess, because the story wasn't compacted into a 1-hour screenplay, dialog spitted at a neck breaking pace, with all plot lines wrapped nicely in the end, tied with a bow.

i would have never guessed a crime drama, based on uncovering a pedophile ring, with a serial killer twist, could have held my attention, much less be my favorite series of the year.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

NorthAlabama said:


> it is a rare occurrence with any series that i feel disappointment when an episode ends, wishing it would continue, not wanting to wait until next week. even more rare that i re-watch an episode, immediately following my first viewing, just to catch what i might have missed. true detective met both of these conditions.
> 
> why? the writing, the character development of marty and rust, the progression and regression of the story over a 17-year span, the chemistry between wh and mm, the locations and cinematography, the supporting cast (much more deserving of recognition than they received) - the careful blending of all of these. mostly, i guess, because the story wasn't compacted into a 1-hour screenplay, dialog spitted at a neck breaking pace, with all plot lines wrapped nicely in the end, tied with a bow.
> 
> i would have never guessed a crime drama, based on uncovering a pedophile ring, with a serial killer twist, could have held my attention, much less be my favorite series of the year.


I would say there's going to be more than a few Emmys for this series.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

This was definitely a great show and I agree with all the reasons mentioned above.

However, not nearly in the same league as _The Wire_. Sorry, but... no.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

madscientist said:


> This was definitely a great show and I agree with all the reasons mentioned above.
> 
> *However, not nearly in the same league as The Wire. Sorry, but... no.*


I agree. The Wire was AAA and this was the Majors 

We all like different things. Both were critically acclaimed. This was more in my wheelhouse than The Wire


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

Sparty99 said:


> At the risk of becoming very unpopular (I'm pretty unpopular as it is though, so whatever), I don't get the hype. I saw people on my Twitter feed saying this belongs up there with Breaking Bad and The Wire, and to me that's just insane.
> 
> I started watching about a week before episode 7, and I caught up in time to essentially watch that live. So maybe I watched it too quickly and I'm certain I missed some things. But to me it had a few unique things going for it that hyped the show: one writer for all the shows, one director for all the shows, and two big movie stars doing an 8-episode stint on television before they went back to their normal gigs.
> 
> ...


Just because you have poor taste doesn't mean we don't like you.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> I agree. The Wire was AAA and this was the Majors


 Yeah, the Wire was Professional AAA and this was Little League Majors.

So there.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

madscientist said:


> Yeah, the Wire was *semi*-Professional AAA and this was *Big* League Majors.
> 
> So there.


FYP


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Steveknj said:


> I agree. The Wire was AAA and this was the Majors


I think the biggest difference was that The Wire was on for five years, and True Detective for eight hours. If TD had been on for five years, I think its flaws would have become much more obvious, and possibly unbearable. So it was on probably just the right length.

The Wire being on for five years made it clear that it had no flaws.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> I agree. The Wire was AAA and this was the Majors
> 
> We all like different things. Both were critically acclaimed. This was more in my wheelhouse than The Wire


Look, art is subjective and we're all entitled to our opinions. But anyone who doesn't think The Wire was the best show to ever air is just wrong.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> I, Steveknj, admit I was wrong and now understand that The Wire was the greatest show to ever be aired on television, and that, while very good and with some great performances, True Detective is a mere shadow of its greatness.


FYP!!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

madscientist said:


> FYP!!


Oh, that's just wrong. What is the matter with you?

Making fun of the mentally ill. That's just MEAN!


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I let the whole series back up and just finished watching the finale. Took four days. Would have finished sooner but March Madness got in the way. It was very well done with great performances by the two lead actors. My only major problem was Rust banging Marty's wife. I just don't think Rust would have done that and it was a cheap literary wedge to drive them apart. I still give it four stars. 

A nice surprise was when the girl from Banshee with the reeeaaaallllly nice rear end showed up as Marty's psycho side piece.


What kind of crap search engine does this forum have? I typed in "True Detective" for a title search and it brought back a single thread with only a couple of posts, one of which pointed me to this thread. The only difference being the extra "s" on Detectives.


----------



## BlueMerle (Jan 10, 2007)

cheesesteak said:


> I let the whole series back up and just finished watching the finale. Took four days. Would have finished sooner but March Madness got in the way. It was very well done with great performances by the two lead actors. My only major problem was Rust banging Marty's wife. I just don't think Rust would have done that and it was a cheap literary wedge to drive them apart. I still give it four stars.
> 
> A nice surprise was when the girl from Banshee with the reeeaaaallllly nice rear end showed up as Marty's psycho side piece.
> 
> *What kind of crap search engine does this forum have? I typed in "True Detective" for a title search and it brought back a single thread with only a couple of posts, one of which pointed me to this thread. The only difference being the extra "s" on Detectives.*


I'd say 'Welcome to TCF' but you're not really new here... 

I kinda agree regarding Rust and Marty's wife, I just chalked it up to both of them were at an emotionally charged point in their respective lives.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

cheesesteak said:


> What kind of crap search engine does this forum have? I typed in "True Detective" for a title search and it brought back a single thread with only a couple of posts, one of which pointed me to this thread. The only difference being the extra "s" on Detectives.


Are you sure you did not have a typo when you typed "Detective"?

I just tried a "Search this Forum" for "True Detective" and this thread came up first out of 33 threads: "Showing results 1 to 30 of 33"


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

john4200 said:


> Are you sure you did not have a typo when you typed "Detective"? I just tried a "Search this Forum" for "True Detective" and this thread came up first out of 33 threads: "Showing results 1 to 30 of 33"


I experienced the same thing as him, which is what lead me to create that other thread that he did find (I first searched for True Detective and came up empty). Note that I did my search within Forum Runner on iOS: maybe it's an app thing and not the fault of the forum itself, which is why the search worked when you ran it?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

danterner said:


> I experienced the same thing as him, which is what lead me to create that other thread that he did find (I first searched for True Detective and came up empty). Note that I did my search within Forum Runner on iOS: maybe it's an app thing and not the fault of the forum itself, which is why the search worked when you ran it?


Hmmm, I've never tried "Forum Runner". I was just using the forum search directly, as you surmised.

Here is what is printed at the top of my search results:



> Search: Key Word(s): True, Detective ; Forum: Now Playing - TV Show Talk and child forums
> 
> Showing results 1 to 30 of 33
> Search took 0.93 seconds.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

john4200 said:


> Hmmm, I've never tried "Forum Runner". I was just using the forum search directly, as you surmised. Here is what is printed at the top of my search results:


Try advanced search


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

cherry ghost said:


> Try advanced search


Why? The standard search worked perfectly.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

If you use standard search, it won't search titles. So in this case, standard search will give you (well, me) 30 results, including this thread (because the words "true" and "detective" appear somewhere in the body of in this thread), and advanced search limited to titles will give you 2 hits not including this one (because the word "detective" doesn't appear in the title of this thread).


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> If you use standard search, it won't search titles. So in this case, standard search will give you (well, me) 30 results, including this thread (because the words "true" and "detective" appear somewhere in the body of in this thread), and advanced search limited to titles will give you 2 hits not including this one (because the word "detective" doesn't appear in the title of this thread).


I see. The forum search appears to be incapable of doing partial word matches. I tried using * for a wildcard "true detective*" and it did not accept the search terms.

I guess the moral of the story is to always do a "search entire posts" search if you use the advanced search, and hopefully someone in the thread will have typed the correct show name if the OP got it wrong in the title. (and, of course, the OP should try *very hard* to spell the show name correctly in the title)


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

john4200 said:


> I guess the moral of the story is to always do a "search entire posts" search if you use the advanced search, and hopefully someone in the thread will have typed the correct show name if the OP got it wrong in the title. (and, of course, the OP should try *very hard* to spell the show name correctly in the title)


Although often a show title will appear in the thread title, but not in the body, in which case "search entire posts" won't turn it up (it's bizarre and rather inexcusable that "entire posts" does not include the title, but that's the way it works here).

So I guess the true moral of the story is, understand the weirdness of how the search function works here and that it will sometimes let you down.

I've found a more effective way to search for existing threads can be to start creating a new thread...once you put in the title and it gives you possible existing threads, that list is often better than the one the search function will give you. So if you're sure there's a thread (or suspect there must be one) but the search doesn't find it, that's a way to track it down.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I've found a more effective way to search for existing threads can be to start creating a new thread...once you put in the title and it gives you possible existing threads, that list is often better than the one the search function will give you. So if you're sure there's a thread (or suspect there must be one) but the search doesn't find it, that's a way to track it down.


Good idea! :up:

*EDIT:*

Bad idea! :down:

I just tried starting a thread with "True Detective" as the title, and it did not turn up this thread in its search.

Probably what I said earlier is decent advice, assuming that someone would use a standard search first, and then if not finding any results, could try advanced search with "Title Only".

But probably the most foolproof search is google. Something like:


```
site:tivocommunity.com "True Detective"
```
finds this thread as the third hit in google. That obviously searches both the thread title and the entire posts in the thread. Perhaps less obviously, it also searches all the groups in the forum. I suppose you could try putting "Now Playing TV Show Talk" in the search terms if you wanted to prioritize this group in the search results (that brings this thread up to the second hit in the search results, the first hit, of course, being the one danterner started without doing a google search like this first  ).

http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ativocommunity.com+"Now+Playing+TV+Show+Talk"+"True+Detective"


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

john4200 said:


> I just tried starting a thread with "True Detective" as the title, and it did not turn up this thread in its search.


Wow, that sucks. That technique has worked for me in the past, but obviously it's not as reliable as I thought.

I've been to other forums where the search is so bad the only way to find anything is through Google. This one isn't quite that bad, but still, it's kinda sad when an external search is more effective than a forum's native search.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> This one isn't quite that bad, but still, it's kinda sad when an external search is more effective than a forum's native search.


tivocommunity appears to be a vBulletin forum, so it should be possible for the administrators to configure the search to be decent. I know the search on several other vBulletin forums works reasonably well.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Perhaps the best short-term solution is to correct typos in thread titles?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Time Is a Flat Circus

(Family Circus cartoons with the captions replaced by dialogue from True Detective)


----------



## Zevida (Nov 8, 2003)

That's great. I laughed out loud.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

Got HBO weekend before last. Binge watched True Detective and the first season of Game of Thrones since. Good stuff.

Very curious to see what is going to come of season 2 of True Detective.


----------



## BrettStah (Nov 12, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Time Is a Flat Circus (Family Circus cartoons with the captions replaced by dialogue from True Detective)


nice!


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

Well, after a couple of false starts for me, I finally got through the series this weekend. 

It really could have used subtitles for the whispery mumbles of McConnaghey and the "shlursh" from Harrelson (e.g., Sho here'sh what I'm tryin' to shay to you ...").

I predict several nominations/awards for these guys for great acting. :up:


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

getreal said:


> Well, after a couple of false starts for me, I finally got through the series this weekend.
> 
> It really could have used subtitles for the whispery mumbles of McConnaghey and the "shlursh" from Harrelson (e.g., Sho here'sh what I'm tryin' to shay to you ...").
> 
> I predict several nominations/awards for these guys for great acting. :up:


I had subtitles on for most of the episodes as yes, a lot of dialogue is muddled (and a lot of it is very obtuse, so I wanted to get the full gist of what they were talking about). I also found it slow the first few episodes, but I thought it picked up nicely with the episode where they were bringing in the drug dealer into the equation and they had the big shootout.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

Just a little thread bump - I didn't watch this when it was on because I was so behind on everything else, but I watched it all in the past week. 

Damn. Great show. McConaughey and Harrelson absolutely killed it. I did feel like the show lost a little something once they kept it completely in the present day, but by that point I was so into it that I didn't care.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I watched like the last 5 episodes of this show over the weekend. I thought it was pretty good too. Once McConaughy went undercover with the biker gang, it really got awesome.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Hoffer said:


> I watched like the last 5 episodes of this show over the weekend. I thought it was pretty good too. Once McConaughy went undercover with the biker gang, it really got awesome.


That was the turning point for me as well. That episode was totally awesome. I was close to pulling the plug before that one. IRC the next episode was only so so, but from that point on it was great.


----------



## loubob57 (Mar 19, 2001)

Just finished watching this on BluRay. Holy Crap that was good! Rather graphic and intense at times.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

loubob57 said:


> Just finished watching this on BluRay. Holy Crap that was good!


yes, td and fargo are _by far_ my favorites for 2014. hbo just started the trailers for td season 2, i can't wait.


----------



## nyny523 (Oct 31, 2003)

I binge watched this today and I loved it!

Excellent in every way.


----------

