• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

True Detective

SensEye

Active member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
485
MBTI Type
INTp
X-Files did manage to have some decent mythology arcs, and there were lots of great "stand alone" episodes, although that's another case where a decent show just kind of ran out of steam vs wrapping itself up productively.

This was different than BB, which didn't really do "stand-alones" but where everything was part of one big storyline.
I think this is part of a challenge many TV series face. They have a plan for a season or two, they execute really well and become a big hit, and then the writers/producers are stuck with the conundrum of having to stretch out the series indefinitely. It's only when then screw up (or just plain run out of ideas) and ratings fall that they get to write a "finale". I speculate this is why so many series seem to really struggle with their wrap ups.

That was part of the brilliance of BB IMO, the story arc seemed well though out from beginning to end, and the end came regardless of how high the ratings were at the time. There were no filler seasons designed primarily to stretch it out while the going was good.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I think this is part of a challenge many TV series face. They have a plan for a season or two, they execute really well and become a big hit, and then the writers/producers are stuck with the conundrum of having to stretch out the series indefinitely. It's only when then screw up (or just plain run out of ideas) and ratings fall that they get to write a "finale". I speculate this is why so many series seem to really struggle with their wrap ups.

Yeah, that makes sense to me, and it's not just confined to television -- for example, comic books are stuck with characters that, if popular, continue to live for decades (superman and batman are 75+ years old? X-Men is 50 or so?) and thus end up being recycled and rewritten so often that they are no longer the same characters.

I admire series that can kind of "call it earlier" and bring a graceful and sensible end to things, but the tie-in with money doesn't help, as the studios don't want to lose a cash cow.

That was part of the brilliance of BB IMO, the story arc seemed well though out from beginning to end, and the end came regardless of how high the ratings were at the time. There were no filler seasons designed primarily to stretch it out while the going was good.

I'm glad the studio was willing to support the artist, in this case. I know they scripted Season #2 pretty darn tightly (from Gilligan's comments), but they had a more organic approach in the last seasons. Gus, for example, was never supposed to be the "Big Bad" but the actor was just so darn good and his character a favorite that they went with him. (And as far as that goes, Jesse wasn't supposed to make it through Season #1.)

I felt like "Six Feet Under," while meandering a bit in the middle had a pretty clear idea of the end of the series -- who lived, who died, who was with who, I'm pretty sure that last 15 minutes was in their heads early on.

"Lost" was a little worse, I think they could have ditched a season's worth of episodes in there to make the series tighter, but things got strung out.

The "mini-series" format is actually pretty cool. It's worked really well for AHS and has jumpstarted the idea of a true "ensemble cast" who will tell different stories and portray different characters. it also allows an idea to just run its course before being closed out, and the writers/producers/actors don't get bored because they can change tone and setting and approach from season to season.

it might actually bring life into the TV format, since the studio is really only committing to one season. And they can add another if it works out. And the writers can still tell an entire story.

What I see sometimes is writers trying to "guess" how much time they have to tell their story, and either adding filler to pad it while not committing to too much, or suddenly rushing to wrap things up when they realize they're out of time.
 

SensEye

Active member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
485
MBTI Type
INTp
What I see sometimes is writers trying to "guess" how much time they have to tell their story, and either adding filler to pad it while not committing to too much, or suddenly rushing to wrap things up when they realize they're out of time.
It seems based on recent experience now that the short-series model (by that I mean 10-14 episode seasons) has been established, is that most series seem to be able to last 6-8 years if they are good.

Maybe writers will learn to have a good overall story line and wrap up planned for about that length, with some flexibility for the middle seasons based on what seems the most popular aspects/character in their shows.

Series like AHS and True Detective don't really have to worry about wrap ups, but I think the lack of continuity hurts them a bit too. I'm not sure viewers can ever really get into a series that basically re-boots every season.

The Wire used a hybrid approach of an ongoing plot line co-starring with a different theme each season (so some continuing characters, some ensemble cast for the season characters), and that series is one of my all time favorites too. It also had a very satisfying ending IMO.
 
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
2,770
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I was so into this show, I crapped my pants twice.
 

Ivy

Strongly Ambivalent
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
23,989
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6
Just couldn't wait 'til the end to deuce, or what?
 
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
2,770
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Just couldn't wait 'til the end to deuce, or what?

Yeah, and a combination of me getting really excited at the sheer existence of such an awe inspiring original piece of Television gold. I usually crap my pants when I get that excited.

By the time I started watching another most excellent series, Justified, I'd learned to wear adult diapers.
 
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
2,770
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I really enjoyed this show and thought it was very good. However, I'm kind of puzzled at all the OMG BEST SHOW EVERZ it's getting.

It's the best show ever. But so is The Wire, Justified, The Americans, and about a dozen others.

I don't know if this is what you're referring to, but I remember the first time I started watching The Wire (crapped my pants of course) but I was like "Holy crap, nothing like this has ever been done (true) and it's the best ever. I really thought that. But have learned that it's a common phenomenon that's basically comparable to the "honeymoon phase" of a particular show. A phenomenon I've learned to recognize.

It's still up there in my mind as a legendary show, and likewise, True Detective was something that had never been done before. For a detective show (god how many are there?), that kind of non-linear storytelling, the incredible character depth, brilliant and believable dialogue, AND the lack of CRAZY AND ZANY TWISTS, (and some other points I'm not remembering) all combine for a show that was really unique.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
At this rate, I need to buy stock in pants manufacturers.
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
Radical show. So much, in fact, that I would almost prefer if they left it a single season without the risk of botching the whole thing.

I don't usually like Matthew Mcconaughey, but he slipped into his role as Rust so well that I forgot it was him.

If they make a second season, they should focus on a new setting and different characters.

I like that Rust is idiosyncratic but not in the way that the script incessantly needs to prove how "special" he is in contrast with the rest of the cast. Shows like Sherlock make every effort possible to piggyback on that sort of trope but it typically comes off as somewhat of a fabrication. Maybe the difference is in the fact that Rust really does not give a shit.

The way they fused two timelines together into a comprehensive conclusion impressed me. It felt seamless.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I like that Rust is idiosyncratic but not in the way that the script incessantly needs to prove how "special" he is in contrast with the rest of the cast. Shows like Sherlock make every effort possible to piggyback on that sort of trope but it typically comes off as somewhat of a fabrication. Maybe the difference is in the fact that Rust really does not give a shit.

Yeah, that might be what made it seem real. He might "soften" a little as he gets older (or, more accurately, the rough edges sand down a little), but really, he remains unflustered and unapologetic even in the current timeline. In the old timeline, even when things fall apart, he never really tries to bargain, his stark acceptance of the universe includes the reality that he's probably going to be alone and misunderstood and that it's okay... the idea of shifting just to win acceptance never really is ever a consideration for him, despite his acute awareness of how some people do that. he's even past the initial kneejerk responses most iconoclasts can have if they feel pressure on them to change; he's consciously embraced it.

It wasn't just a "type of character" I was watching, he felt like a real person to me.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Season 2 update:


After the first season starring Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson debuted to praise from the critics and amassed an impressive following, fans are dying to know how the next season of the show is shaping up. Other than debunking those Jessica Chastain casting theories, we haven't had too much to go on when it comes to Season 2 clues, until now.

Writer/producer Nic Pizzolatto stopped by "To the Best of Our Knowledge" podcast from Wisconsin Public Radio to discuss what's next for his massively successful crime venture and he dropped some major hints for fans of the show to chew on before the Season 2 premiere. For those who aren't familiar with Pizzolatto's brainchild, the first season of "True Detective" took place in the Louisiana bayou and centered on cult-like killings of the young women and children who lived there. Pizzolato warns to expect even more bad guys when the show returns but they'll be committing their gruesome crimes in a very different setting.

“Right now, we’re working with three leads. It takes place in California. Not Los Angeles, but some of the lesser known venues of California and we’re going to try to capture a certain psychosphere ambience of the place, much like we did with season one," Pizzolatto said.

Season 2 will reportedly focus on the "secret occult history of the United States transportation system," featuring female leads solving the case this time around. While we'll certainly miss Marty and Rust, Pizzolato says the things he has in store for the show's upcoming season should get fans pretty excited. "The characters are all new, but I am deeply in love with all of them," he said. "We have the entire season broken out, and I have a couple of scripts, and we’ll probably start casting within the coming month."

'True Detective' Creator Spills Major Season 2 Secrets
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
2,770
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
The buzz on the street now is that McConaughey might pull in an Emmy this year too.

Will watch at least episode #6 tonight. Figured out how easy it was to stream down on my laptop and then HDMI it to the 55" TV. No longer have to watch it on the little screen!

It's kind of strange to me that actors so desperately want emmys and oscars, as one or all of these awards seem kind of rigged more as popularity contests rather than sheer talent. Maybe the emmys aren't as bad.

McConaughey has produced some bad movies, IMO, Surfer Dude, for one. But all in all, I've always been impressed with him. Starting with Dazed and Confused. Should have gotten an award for that.
 

Jinn

New member
Joined
May 8, 2014
Messages
46
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Awesome show. Season 2 :happy0065:
and female lead? Female duo will be better :D
I can't wait to see it.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
It's kind of strange to me that actors so desperately want emmys and oscars, as one or all of these awards seem kind of rigged more as popularity contests rather than sheer talent. Maybe the emmys aren't as bad.

I have mixed feelings about these kinds of awards. Talent does seem to factor in, but a lot of it is also about the advertising campaign and hitting the right people for their votes at the right time, etc.

Which means sometimes it seems like the winners did deserve the award... but there have been times when another nominee seems even more worthy to win but does not... and on occasion a winner will generate a WTF response and some worthy contenders don't even get into the nominee list.

McConaughey has produced some bad movies, IMO, Surfer Dude, for one. But all in all, I've always been impressed with him. Starting with Dazed and Confused. Should have gotten an award for that.

I was not a fan of McConaughey for a long time, he just didn't have any cajones... i felt like he was walking through roles generated for him by his attractiveness to some people.

Then I saw him in Killer Joe a few years back, and I couldn't even believe that was him. He was finally acting.

Awesome show. Season 2 :happy0065:
and female lead? Female duo will be better :D
I can't wait to see it.

I'm so curious about who will be cast. :)
But yeah, exciting!
 
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
2,770
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I was not a fan of McConaughey for a long time, he just didn't have any cajones... i felt like he was walking through roles generated for him by his attractiveness to some people.

Then I saw him in Killer Joe a few years back, and I couldn't even believe that was him. He was finally acting.

Ha, I guess in a way he's kind of like Sean Penn, starting out as Spicolli. But revisiting some of the silly movies after watching something like A Time to Kill, I have a greater appreciation for those roles.
 
Top