All praise Grail
Frailty was pretty awesome.
Yeah, instead we got 50 minutes of TV time giving character backgrounds. It's a 4 way split - whose character is most messed up?! - competition. It could've worked if we were given snippets of each's personality as the case went along. Or maybe from here on, now that they've got that outta the way, they're gonna go Ludicrous Speed into the investigation.Griffith said:Well, that was very busy. I would have rather the episode started where it ended. Always better to start interesting than to tease it.
Yeah, I didn't want to get all snooty about the logistics, but since you asked! Basically, it wasn't a bunch of gibberish, the locales were recognizable and made sense, and that was actually pretty cool, but I'm wary as Hell that they're going to treat 34,000 square miles of urban sprawl across five counties like a small town, which they already sort of are as you pointed out.Walter said:Griff, you live in California. It must be a pretty close-knit area, right? Because this show makes it seem pretty normal to run into your sister AND your dad in the same day while just doing your regular police work.
Rule numero uno for series writing is that you don't launch a series in print before you have the entire thing written. Why? Because corrupt cops could beat you up- No, in seriousness it's because you don't want to have to go back on your promises. Say a source you were counting on for Part 3 gets scared because of the attention the first piece in a series got, and then bows out. Say you had a hot lead on something, but were off on a few assumptions about the direction your investigation would take and then it turns into a dead-end. Writing, and interviewing people, is a very fluid process. Best to have it all solid before you go out and say you have A SERIES.Griffith said:BTW, similar question to you: as a journalist, if you're breaking a HUGE story, the first part of which has already been published, so presumably much of the work has already been done and your editors and publishers are all well aware of the scope of it, and then you are viciously attacked in your apartment over it... does that really make a big corruption story stop in its tracks and completely go away!?
I hoped the plot would make a big push forward but it dilly-dallied again with the same character-background story and less on the actual investigation. Spoilers -Griffith said:That episode was worse than the last and the only interesting thing about it won't even carry over.
I usually find that I enjoy watching a full season in one sitting or two, spread out over a weekend maybe. The first season of TD flowed better watching it together but the week-to-week episode watch was equally thrilling, nerve racking ... not as nerve racking as Breaking Bad. This season hasn't caught on yet ...In any case, I'm sure happy I get a week off between episodes.
It's a no win; they're either getting rid of or undoing the best thing about the season so far, and it'll be lame either way. Still prefer the latter to the former though, but that's because I've already given up on the show since only the former scenario could be at all respectable. =)IncantatioN said:I hoped the plot would make a big push forward but it dilly-dallied again with the same character-background story and less on the actual investigation. Spoilers -my favorite bits from the two episodes was Ray (he's just brutal in the first ep) and I hope there's hope for him after how the episode ended.
I don't know if people are doing that so much as just crapping on this one. I think most people would credit, and not wrongly, McConaughey and Harrelson and blame Pizzolatto for failing to live up to the previouis season in every way, writing, acting, and directing ("I can just get anybody to read and shoot my spun gold!"). In any case, while Fukunaga certainly deserves recognition, do we have to always give the credit to one person? How about Adam Arkapaw's cinematography, the aforementioned McConaughey and Harrelson, and yes, Pizzolatto for writing and running it. It was a show that managed to transcend the sum of its already quality parts, and Fukunaga was definitely a big part, but it was a collaboration, and reducing it to an individual accomplishment is the same myth that has Pizzolatto doing all these insufferable 'genius' profiles and thinking he could do it all on his own in the first place.NightCrawler said:I'm glad people are actually noticing that what made the first season great was Fukunaga.
I think it went something like this:NightCrawler said:Now that Pizzolatto won that war and has full control we can enjoy this convoluted and boring mess of a 2nd season.
Yeah, nobody else has even come close, except maybe his sleazy old partner.Walter said:Totally agree regarding Farrell's Velcoro, Griff. He's the heart of the show, the only casting choice that makes any sense, and the only character worth the screen time invested in (so far).
Now that you mention it, that would suffice, but each episode I feel like they're dragging their feet until the end when I realize, "oh, that's it." After last night's episode I'm starting to think "this is it" on a permanent basis. I think we should adjust our expectations accordingly.Second episode was a huge improvement, at least from my perspective. This one took me off the cliff. It makes me wonder why they dragged their feet so much with the first episode. Although so far this season doesn't feel nearly as unique or special as the first--Oh well, I'll take what I can get. It's far from masterpiece material. It's pulpy, modern noir, and that's okay with me.
You're hyperbolizing, it's too medicore to merit such scorn; you're almost making me sympathize with it (it still has, like, production values and stuff =). I enjoyed the beginning, some clever dialogue throughout, but it was definitely disappointing and probably the third best episode of the second best season of True Detective. Scary thought: what if the first two episodes directed by Justin Lin are the best? I hope he comes back.Johnstantine said:Episode 3 was probably one of the worst episodes of any TV series I've seen in my life.
It's not a good sign when I catch myself considering whether or not your joke would legitimately improve the show. Also, I think it would, Diesel would blow everyone else away on this set. =)Walter said:He's back, and he's brought the surprise final cast member to the show:
IDK, in hindsight that might have been the best episode of the season if Nic Pizza is now openly using the goddamn show itself to publicly air his resentments of Fukanaga! In any case, this is certainly apropos:NightCrawler said:Sigh, just saw it. I'm not even gonna bother commenting, i'm done with this show. I'll keep an eye on this thread to see if it gets any better.
http://www.vulture.com/2015/07/nic-pizzolatto-cary-fukunaga-true-detective-feud.html said:if Pizzolatto was so eager to bury the feud story last year, why is he taking potshots now? The answer could lie in the divergent paths each man's reputation has taken in the months since the season-one finale. After the underwhelming final installment, the wunderkind mystique fell off Pizzolatto like a heavy coat. His combative persona led to ill-advised tiffs with critics like Emily Nussbaum, particularly over the issue of the first season's female characters, and he found himself accused of plagiarizing some of Rust Cohle's best lines. Fukunaga, by contrast, got off nearly scot-free. His post-finale interviews were full of sharp, sensitive answers, and by the time the Emmys rolled around, he'd become the patron hunk of the thinking-woman's internet. For a large portion of True D's fan base, the matter was settled: Everything good about the first season was because of Fukunaga and Matthew McConaughey; everything bad was Pizzolatto's fault.