Admiral Woofington
Member
Apparently it wasn't just GAF. But according to some here we all just wanna be cool and are jealous and if we're so judging how come we don't write something better
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
True Detective - Season 2 - We get the Season we deserve - Sundays on HBO
- Thread starter Cornballer
- Start date
Grinchy
Banned
It's because we're all plugged into the GAF hivemind where opinions are given to us. We were told to shit on this show. It's impossible that it just so happens that a lot of people hated a terrible season of television.
The same Rust who had a pre-death hallucination of his daughter?
Cornballer
Member
Folks, let's knock off the metacommentary. If you want to criticize the show, make your argument. If you want to praise the show, take the time to explain what you like about it. Please refrain from rambling on about how "GAF thinks this" or "the haters think that". If you disagree with someone, refute their argument rather than insulting them. Thank you.
A few more pieces of recent content:
- Deadspin: True Detective Season 2 in 2 Minutes (video)
- NY Mag: The Modern Noir Has Atrophied (and Its Not All True Detectives Fault)
- Slate podcast: Spoiler Special: True Detective Season 2
A few more pieces of recent content:
- Deadspin: True Detective Season 2 in 2 Minutes (video)
- NY Mag: The Modern Noir Has Atrophied (and Its Not All True Detectives Fault)
- Slate podcast: Spoiler Special: True Detective Season 2
- Rolling Stone: Rick Springfield on Journey From Teen Heartthrob to 'True Detective'
It was Dungeons & Dragons.
ah so it was Satanism?
Tokubetsu
Member
Definitely feels like it we got an early draft.
Freedom = $1.05
Banned
probably because noir still has an air of legitimacy to it and, thus, makes any argument made against TD seem more legitimate as a by product. If youre ripping something that is a serious noir story it has more weight to it than something that touts itself as a pulp-y story.
Pulp makes it sound like something loose and not taking itself too seriously and, well, that's not at all what NP was going for.
While season one's scripts were actually "fantastic" on a line-by-line basis (plenty of clunky dialogue, shittyexcuse meno character development for anyone not named Rust or Marty), they were still much better than what we got this season. The plot on a basic level held together much better, and he had written a compelling world.
He worked on the first season for years and even borrowed a lot of material and ideas from a follow-up he was going to do for his book Galveston.
I get that to an extent, but, as I've said before in here to other members, we shouldn't judge this work based upon what Pizzolatto has said about it in interviews or based upon what we perceive his intentions to have been.
We should judge this work for what it is.
I suspect a lot of the severe backlash is loud but not really representative of how many people actually hated it. There's no way that HBO thought for a second about canning the series or doing any sort of major creative pivot. If the internet viewing community was as large as it is loud then there's no way Hannibal would be in its current situation.
It was weird seeing reactions to certain scenes and how vitriolic it was. It's obvious that certain scenes hinged on how invested you were in the characters. If you like Frank, then the scene at the station works far better than if you just laugh at him. If you buy into Ray's character then the bit with his son was an inevitability. A cheesy salute coming from a man who clearly has no clue how to connect with his son; a clumsy, heartfelt moment. Then from the other end it's seen as a painful attempt at unironic schmaltz. He wrote so many of these scenes hinging on investment in the characters and if you were then they ranged from ok to fine to great. If you weren't, well then they just really sucked I guess. It's why I don't buy into this idea that the writing was an abject disaster, I just think it didn't work for people like the first one did. His existential angle was infused with the characters more naturally and it worked better as opposed to hard-boiled ornate dialogue mixed with existentialism mixed with character. It was just too esoteric for most. I just dug it.
It was weird seeing reactions to certain scenes and how vitriolic it was. It's obvious that certain scenes hinged on how invested you were in the characters. If you like Frank, then the scene at the station works far better than if you just laugh at him. If you buy into Ray's character then the bit with his son was an inevitability. A cheesy salute coming from a man who clearly has no clue how to connect with his son; a clumsy, heartfelt moment. Then from the other end it's seen as a painful attempt at unironic schmaltz. He wrote so many of these scenes hinging on investment in the characters and if you were then they ranged from ok to fine to great. If you weren't, well then they just really sucked I guess. It's why I don't buy into this idea that the writing was an abject disaster, I just think it didn't work for people like the first one did. His existential angle was infused with the characters more naturally and it worked better as opposed to hard-boiled ornate dialogue mixed with existentialism mixed with character. It was just too esoteric for most. I just dug it.
Freedom = $1.05
Banned
Sure, but a fair means of comparison is to hold the current work up against an artist's previous work and to hold it up against other similar works.
My feeling, and apparently the feelings of many, are that this season doesn't hold up well in either of those categories. It's tonally all over the place, wanting to be part lynch, part wire, part hitchcock, etc but it's not only not exceptional at being any of those things but in an attempt to blend its various influences together it just feels like a complete mess.
That has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. The season was bad. I have been upfront about that since episode one, haha.
Our conversation was about a noir or pulp designation for the season.
What he says and intended doesn't matter. We judge the show based upon what it is. It's pulp, bad pulp at that.
Messypandas
Member
The problem was season 1 had these two gentlemen
Who had infectious, real and attention sucking chemistry. People complained that the villains were lacking or that several other characters weren't really notable but these two. DAMN. They made you overlook all the flaws.
Season 2 had 4 great actors that had ZERO chemistry with each other. It was practically like they were on different shows honestly. Go back to basics, give us a strong pair of leads. True chemistry.
Who had infectious, real and attention sucking chemistry. People complained that the villains were lacking or that several other characters weren't really notable but these two. DAMN. They made you overlook all the flaws.
Season 2 had 4 great actors that had ZERO chemistry with each other. It was practically like they were on different shows honestly. Go back to basics, give us a strong pair of leads. True chemistry.
Grinchy
Banned
One thing I really disliked was how Frank was so separate from everyone else the whole time (except Ray). Then, out of nowhere, he's teamed up with the whole crew. There was no buildup to that, there were no scenes that made us feel that uncomfortable transition. It was just, "Hey guys! I'm Frank! Nice to meet you guys, even the lady cop! I'll be helping you out from now on."
There were just so many missed opportunities like that for the characters to interact with each other to make us feel their connections. Instead, the show was filled with long scenes with vague dialog that barely hinted at who the characters were really supposed to be on the inside. I think that's why many people like myself felt nothing for these characters.
Messypandas
Member
Yeah exactly, also the usual short season with 4 notable characters meant a real lack of in depth internal exploration. Season 1 is basically 2 guys on different wavelengths grandually unspooling and establishing a strong connection with each other, the only thing they have in common is the dedication to their "duty". Little details like Woody's character mocking the size of the notepad Rust carried. Its subtle but very revealing. I felt no sense of detail or depth here. Colin and Mcadams were getting somewhere in the end but it was two little too late.
lol what? In 2015, there's better stuff going on at places like NBC, The CW, USA Network, and even Lifetime.
afternoon delight
Member
There's a gigantic difference between vocalizing an event and portraying it, if they had visualized Rust's fever dream it would have looked just as stupid and ridiculous.
Did not know it was an amalgamation. Interesting.
Marty's wife was a more well-drawn character than anyone in S2. She was a person, not a collection of cliches.
Kadayi
Banned
Conan plays to whatever is popular as narrative. The actual viewing figures weren't that bad, but that doesn't play to what makes for a skit his writers dream't up in the morning whilst they choked down coffee, bear claws and mediocrity.
^ Seconded.
I quite liked listening to Idle thumbs podcast about the series tbh.
https://www.idlethumbs.net/truedetective
Albeit that rightly identified problems with the show, they were able to get beyond those aspects and appreciate the positives.
Uggh. Gotta like how the hosts argument principally seems to be one where in 'the consensus says it's bad'. It's that not they can assert to its qualities themselves, it's that others (presumably critics) have said so, therefore it must be the case. She says all the actors are bad (the height of articulation btw), and yet I'm hard pressed to recall anyone damning Rachel McAdams or Colin Farrells performances. Yet now apparently they're bad performances as well? Go home Slate, you're drunk.
Cornballer
Member
Adalian for NY Mag looking at the viewership numbers, HBO's rep, and what the plan might be for TD S3:
- NY Mag: True Detective Season Two: Assessing the Damage to HBO's Once-Promising Franchise
- NY Mag: True Detective Season Two: Assessing the Damage to HBO's Once-Promising Franchise
More via the link.
PsychoSoldier
Banned
At the very least they need to ensure that he gets more of an editorial team around him willing to say that some things don't work.
I don't think the main through line of the story seemed that bad, but there was so much extraneous stuff weighing it down.
I don't think the main through line of the story seemed that bad, but there was so much extraneous stuff weighing it down.
Good read. Anthology series are hard because it's like a whole new show every year, and the show has to convince you ever year to be interested in the new characters. Your old favorites are gone.
TheChewyWaffles
Member
The problem was season 1 had these two gentlemen
Who had infectious, real and attention sucking chemistry. People complained that the villains were lacking or that several other characters weren't really notable but these two. DAMN. They made you overlook all the flaws.
Season 2 had 4 great actors that had ZERO chemistry with each other. It was practically like they were on different shows honestly. Go back to basics, give us a strong pair of leads. True chemistry.
Those two wouldn't have salvaged season 2. The script sucked ass.
Hahaha, no, she wasn't.
Viewers dropped pretty significantly episode to episode.
"Other Lives," the episode-five reset, slightly improved upon the fourth, and the final improved upon the seventh, but the finale was still behind the first two episodes of the season.
Overall, that's not a particularly good sign.
Fancy Clown
Member
Well I finished it. 5 out of 10 at best haha. Could not believe how bad some of the stuff this season was. At least it was occassionally was so bad it was funny, but unfortunately it was mostly boring bad because conversations went on twice as long as they needed to thanks pizza-mans jerk-off dialogue style where people repeat what the others just said in the form of a question and things take 30 words to say what could have been said in 5. Vince Vaughn was bad too. I wanted to give him a chance but he was bad the whole way through.
Honestly, they should just kill this show.
Why?
The show could continue with Pizzolatto if they decide to. It's still a decent draw for HBO, only behind Game of Thrones it looks like.
The Driver
Member
Wut. Do you know how much work it is to write a 2 hour movie, let alone an 8 episode story arc by yourself? That's easily 2-3 movies worth of material to produce. The average movie can take several months to a year to complete.
Not to mention he probably took less time to actually write and finish S1. 5-6 years was just how long from conception to it getting produced that he had to sit and stew on it.
Season 1 was also awesome and this one not so much, so maybe there is something to taking your time with this.
Anyway, a few days removed from the finale, it's grown on me. It's still not really good in my eyes but things that irritated me like the bad guys getting off too easily, the half assed attempt at hope, or the avoidable stupidity of Frank, Velcoro, and Woodrough's deaths don't bother me as much. I think if Pizza had a little more time he could have kept the same beats, but put more thought into their execution and it would have gone down a lot better. The only thing I really would have wanted changed was Ani being mostly sidelined during the finale.
Gozer the Gozerian
Member
Wait wtf does that even mean? A writer/project's talent or worth is defined by the number of well-written characters? Even if that work is specifically focused on a small number of characters?
It's surprising to you that character development and characterization are important to a work of fiction? Are you new to media?
True Detective wouldn't have been any worse had Pizzolatto developed Maggie more than just her being the cliché fed-up wife of one of the main characters. Then he just used her as a vaginal device to expedite the Marty-Rust fallout.
Wonderful character work there...
Developing her character wouldn't have detracted from the show or the time spent focusing on Martin and Rustin. She had enough screen time. Pizzolatto just chose not to do anything with it: she took care of the kids, was lonely because Marty was gone, got frustrated because Marty was gone or drunk, yelled at Marty because he was late or drunk. Then she fucked Rust.
Detectives Gilbough and Papania also had plenty of screen time. People had a hard time keeping them separate because they were pretty much just Black Detective #1 and Black Detective #2.
Lisa's character was just (fantastic) boobs and a vagina. Laurie, too, was just a device.
The first season was great, but to try to act as though there weren't faults is ridiculous.
The Driver
Member
Yeah I was just about to edit my post. He started writing in 2010 and it aired in 2014.
While I agree, I don't know if it would have made the show better if he lessened the focus from Marty and Rust. Those two where so good together that I think it would have significantly diluted the show if they made it more of an ensemble thing. I need to go and rewatch it again but S1 feels focused and pure to me. Two men, one case.
Season 2 had 4 leads but they were kinda wasted tbh, especially McAdams and Kitsch. Did Ani's gambling or porn thing go anywhere? Her sexual harassment case? What about Woodrough and the actress BJ? Woodrough's mom issues? Blackwater? What about him owning up to his sexuality? I guess dying to hide it was his stance on the whole thing.
Frank and Velcoro are also guilty of this but not as bad as the other two which is a shame because I thought Ani/Paul were almost as interesting (though I'm biased because I like both of them despite their cliche characters).
Nevermind the focus and importance on side characters this season sucked at setting up. It's sort of hilarious that Tony Chessani is basically the mastermind when the dude has one scene he speaks in the whole show, or that birdman shows up a total of 2 times (3 if you count the movie set) and these dudes basically are responsible for the rail line/murder plots.
Edit* oh yeah I agree if we aren't messing with the time spent on characters, Pizza could have made better use of the time he did spend on the other characters outside of Marty and Rust in S1.
dead souls
Member
Four years of work and all you get is the mediocre at best scripts of season one of TD?
That proves it's not the amount of time, Pizzolatto just doesn't have the goods.
That proves it's not the amount of time, Pizzolatto just doesn't have the goods.
Catching up on this, just finished 7 and going to start the finale. I think the last few eps have been much stronger, it's almost like a reverse season 1. Wish I had seen the thread's live reaction to the end of ep 7, even if it was predictable
NotTheGuyYouKill
Member
So TD Season 3... wonder what'll be the set up.
Or the cast
Admiral Woofington
Member
A failed detective writer novel and the cop who is the funniest guy at the office must team up to find a serial murderer cannibal that leaves Amiibos at the scene of the crime, each representing a different theme.
Hammibol
Grinchy
Banned
It'll start with a public bombing. A gritty, alcoholic detective will be put on the case. There won't be much information to go off of, but they will suspect terrorism. They'll spend a few episodes in the middle east. A bunch of crazy shit will happen. But then the main character will come back home to the states with no progress made on the case.
In the last episode we'll find out that the bombing was conducted by a random librarian that the main character accidentally bumped into on the street in episode 1. The main character will say, "Hey buddy, watch it!" when they bump into each other. In the last episode we'll get a flashback of that event and we'll see the librarian smirk and say under his breath, "Oh no, true detective. YOU watch."
We'll be expected to remember this tiny and random encounter and we'll be expected to have noticed the librarian's name tag because the show will only refer to him by name. Then the main character will for some reason be heavily trained in nun chuck combat and he'll kill someone with nun chucks and no one will ever question him about it.
Admiral Woofington
Member
Somebody didn't enjoy the lawnmower guy haha
Reddit internet detectives. They will all be pieces of shit.
They get the scent that a woman did something like criticise video games or talk about feminism, so they go and dig dirt up on her or fabricate claims while wearing their fedoras.
On the other side of the law, a bunch of shitty detectives are assigned the case. They're brought in when these women want to report the internet harassment. But the detectives have absolutely no fucking clue how the internet works. These actual police detectives also have equally shitty lives. Twist, one of the real detective's kids is one of the internet detectives.
Unfortunately I don't know if Pizzolatto could pull it off. So let's just shelve it.
AHA-Lambda
Member
I've only just watched the first episode, holy hell that was dull.
Is it really just not worth bothering with this season?
Is it really just not worth bothering with this season?
Well, I mean, you can watch the recaps at hbo and watch episode 3,4,7 and 8