Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dAVe80

True Detective *May Contain Spoilers*

Recommended Posts

Depending on where you live World War 2 started some time between 1937 (China/Japan) 1939 (Europe) and 1941 (USA) and raged until the summer of 1945.  I'm willing to bet that fewer bullets wire fired during the entire conflict than were fired in the final scene of True Detective. It was cool, but it was incredibly silly. I'm not sure that's what I want from this show.  I think I missed something in the shootout, but did one of the police somehow manage to blow up the entire top floor of a warehouse by firing a pistol at it?  :huh:

 

Season 1 was lightning in a bottle and I think a lot of people are only sticking with Season 2 because S1 was so good. There isn't much to keep me coming back except for a hope it picks up at some point. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah he did and then Farrell had to explain why it exploded

I think a lot of my criticisms for S1 are still prevalent in S2, it's incredibly talky and hard to follow, but then you add in the increased number of story arcs, at least 3 of which I really don't care about, the reduced quality in acting but then the main thing which is that they've lost the identity, the interview scenes and how it was all a flashback set it apart, the season is just another cop show

Edited by villa4europe
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah he did and then Farrell had to explain why it exploded

I think a lot of my criticisms for S1 are still prevalent in S2, it's incredibly talky and hard to follow, but then you add in the increased number of story arcs, at least 3 of which I really don't care about, the reduced quality in acting but then the main thing which is that they've lost the identity, the interview scenes and how it was all a flashback set it apart, the season is just another cop show

 

There is quite a bit of stuff I think we lose out on just by being in the UK. Things in the show are alluded to and referenced that an American audience is far more likely to 'get' just because it's set where they live and therefore cultural references are a lot more likely to hit.  I'd assume that the whole yellow king/king in yellow stuff from S1 made more sense to people who grew up with that stuff.  

 

The fictional city of Vinci in True Detective is supposedly just a way of doing the story of corruption  in Vernon, California without being sued. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I buy in to that, I think I spent 20 minutes trying to explain to my missus how american police works and how you can have 3 different forces working on 1 case, and I'm sure I made half of that up, from what I can gather you have Farrell for Vinci city police, McAdams for the county sheriff and then kitsch for the highway police, you'll then have state police, internal affairs, FBI, us marshals... It's got a bit of depth to it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's alright.

I assumed it was a cook house before they got there or at least some Cartel base of nefarious operations, as it was quite obviously a set up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not been that bad, but if I disregard ever watching season one I would have probably given up by now. Farrell's acting is superb though. All others are meh, Vaughn for me has been on par with McAdams and Kitsch - not bad, nothing special. Thought the mayor's been really good, should add more scenes with him. 

 

Other than that, the story seems all over the place imo. Don't really care too much about the mystery part, not much in terms of main characters interaction or development. Hopefully it picks up in the last episodes, contrary to season 1, which was amazing the first 6 episodes and (almost) straight out of CSI bad the last 2. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finished season 1 yesterday. Was a bit slow but worth watching. Wouldn't put it up there with the wire though. Although a lot darker I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kitch has been poor to many man with trouble close ups .....Vaughns wife ..the English actress I just can't stand anything she's in ...flight,Sherlock Holmes ...Farrell is as per very very good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you thought season 1 was just "worth watching" then I wouldn't bother.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm enjoying it too, the first season was just as talky and slow-paced. There's a few bits here and there where I think the dialogue or acting is hammy (usually McAdam's scenes, I don't rate her) but I'm still intrigued as to where this is going. I think it needs to pick up the pace a little now we're almost at the halfway point in the season. Maybe the plot isn't as sexy as season one either since crooked business deals aren't quite as dark or exotic as the weird ass cult stuff in the dirty south.

 

I still look forward to watching it every week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Mr Stephenson.

 

I'm really enjoying Season 2. Vince has come into his own, Farrell is excellent as ever.

 

As Ginks says, Season 1 was pretty slow paced. If fast pace is wanted, go watch a film instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Vaughn in unwatchable. The opening scene when he was talking about having a baby with his wife was laughable. I think there are secondary school plays that are more convincing and less stilted.

 

I liked him in Swingers. Then he chose to go down the rom-com route and fair enough he's made himself rich.

But the casting director who thought he could pull this off will probably find it hard to get a gig again.

 

This season really is hard work and I'm only still here because of how incredible S1 was. Like another poster said, very Heat like final scene but did you really give a shit about any of it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vince Vaughn's only problem is that he's Vince Vaughn.

 

He's been perfectly fine in this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vince Vaughn's only problem is that he's Vince Vaughn.

 

He's been perfectly fine in this.

couldn't agree more Ben. For me, once I'd got over it was VV in episode 1, I think he's done pretty well. I think he's performed better than rachel Macadams, and VV's wife is not high on acting ability IMO.

 

But Vince himself has been good, for me anyway.

 

Like McConaughey had his McConaissance, Vince has been ....... Vaughn again :o  ;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's been pulling his "Today we spell redemption R-O-N" face a bit too much for me. Just can't convince as being genuinely threatening. Lines like "Never do anything out of hunger, not even eating" don't help either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been very disappointed with some of the dialogue this season, I must say. Some really cheesy stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a stinker in the first episode that's stuck with me. Vaughn was talking about an exposé in the local paper about Vinci corruption and he said something along the lines of "ooh, it's an eight-parter". Terrible

Edited by Milfner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...
Â