True Detective [HBO] [ Spoilers ]

25-02-2019 10:56pm

sk8erboii wrote: »

Can you explain why its sh1t?

Cause I can give about a hundred reasons why its great.

Cause right now the only people that seem to hate it are low IQ reactionary types who wanted the big BANG BANG ending

proof of your own IQ lol!

story where feck all happened over 7 hours and suddenly it's all tied up in a few minutes in a tell-all from a witness (one-eyed guy) - sign of a totally sh1t story execution right there.

sk8erboii · 25-02-2019 10:58pm

glasso wrote: »

read back through my previous posts.

if it was a character study (which is just a cop-out as it failed as a story) it was poor and unconvincing and a non-sequential chronological disjointed mess is not a vehicle for executing a character study.

for a character study the relationship between the leads has to be engaging - this did not have that - aside from maybe the first two episodes where it was passable.

if you want a proper character study go watch "The remains of the day".

You haven't posted any criticism that isn't 'I didn't like it.'

How about you use real language to justify your opinions that just saying it 'failed' or its 'disjointed' or its 'not a vehicle' (all of which are just nebulous opinions that doesn't really mean anything without any backing)

To be honest, it feels more like a projection of the type of viewer someone is.

Something is too 'disjointed' mate maybe Marvel's Avengers would be easier for you to follow.

Ally Dick · 25-02-2019 11:19pm

Series was great....up till the final episode. It built up and up. Had the same gothic, spooky feel as the first season. But then it decided to insult the viewers and offer up simple reasons for everything. So disappointed. I was hoping for the spooky ending. At least season 1 had that.

25-02-2019 11:27pm

Ally Dick wrote: »

Series was great....up till the final episode. It built up and up. Had the same gothic, spooky feel as the first season. But then it decided to insult the viewers and offer up simple reasons for everything. So disappointed. I was hoping for the spooky ending. At least season 1 had that.

I felt season 1's biggest flaw was its final episode. It turned out to be some creepy guy in a dilapidated mansion, but up till then they alluded to a huge conspiracy that went all the way to the top. It was some bog standard horror villain in the end. Running around cascosa was a bit ridiculous. Even that tape that Rust found was forgotten about to a degree. The ending was that there is no closure to some stories.

I felt this season had far more closure and arguably finished better but had a weaker story to begin with.

pixelburp · 25-02-2019 11:28pm

Mod warning: keep things civil. Do NOT attack or attempt to belittle other posters. Feel free to discuss, but keep it friendly.

Mike Litoris · 25-02-2019 11:50pm

I think Pizzolatto just trolled the shlt out of everyone who loved Fukunaga's Season 1. Dark, moody but ultimately a meandering damp squib! Lol. It had some great moments and individual episodes...that Pizzolatto didn't direct but as a whole that was worse than season 2.

Anyways, I think the big winner of S3 is Stephen Dorff. I thought he was excellent in this despite the dodgy make up...80's West looking older than 90's West.

Hopefully some good roles comes his way from this.

25-02-2019 11:56pm

From Reddit

Hayes: you just wanna use me to write that book.

Amelia: you dont wanna tell me sh1t

Repeat for 8 hrs and 20 mins.

Character development bruhhhhhh

maybe it could spin off into a daytime soap?

26-02-2019 12:07am

Mike Litoris wrote: »

I think Pizzolatto just trolled the shlt out of everyone who loved Fukunaga's Season 1. Dark, moody but ultimately a meandering damp squib! Lol. It had some great moments and individual episodes...that Pizzolatto didn't direct but as a whole that was worse than season 2.

Anyways, I think the big winner of S3 is Stephen Dorff. I thought he was excellent in this despite the dodgy make up...80's West looking older than 90's West. Hopefully some good roles comes his way from this.

the insults to get into the bar fight with the bikers were actual good lines and a good scene.

I wonder if the fact that Stephen Dorff is so short is a reason that he doesn't get many good roles - must be part of it.

Gimme A Pound · 26-02-2019 12:08am

glasso wrote: »

Hays didn't quit in 80, he took a desk job in the police because he wouldn't sign the declaration from the higher-ups. In 90 he and West reunited to investigate the case - Hays hadn't worked as a detective since 80.

He actually quit the police after the Hoyt threat in 90 and the conversation with his wife about needing to leave the whole case behind so they move on from that. Cue to him working as campus security and she was a lecturer / professor.

you're right about the fight West got into being in 90 - he went out to get into some aggro after he shot the Hoyt security guy/ ex-cop.

Ah yes, thought they meant quitting being a detective.

I don't remember him being college security and her being a lecturer though.

26-02-2019 12:11am

Otto Kind Lawyer wrote: »

Ah yes, thought they meant quitting being a detective.

I don't remember him being college security and her being a lecturer though.

he had a badge saying "campus security" printed on it

then he meets her and she was teaching a class of young adults (not kids)

https://tvline.com/2019/02/25/true-detective-season-3-finale-ending-explained-questions/

We did get our first glimpse of a post-1990 Amelia at the beginning of the finale, reading poetry to her students as a professor at the University of Arkansas while Hays worked as the campus’ chief of security.

Gimme A Pound · 26-02-2019 12:18am

Aw jeez, head melt! I thought that was '80 when she was teaching the schoolchildren (I did think the school looked different all right) and he was working the Purcell case and they were dating. There was a really sweet, honeymoon period smile between them. Didn't even notice the security badge, or that the students weren't young kids. He had a bit of a 'fro again - I was relying too much on haircuts. :pac:

Mike Litoris · 26-02-2019 12:20am

glasso wrote: »

I wonder if the fact that Stephen Dorff is so short is a reason that he doesn't get many good roles - must be part of it.

There must be something in it. He looked tiny in the above scene.

I'm sure I've seen a few movies he's acted in but I cant remember any. Whether thats down to the role or his acting I dont know but I really enjoyed his turn in this.

lawred2 · 26-02-2019 12:22am

Just finished. Loved it.

Effects · 26-02-2019 12:22am

Final episode 5/10
Overall 6/10

Degag · 26-02-2019 12:23am

Deleted User wrote: »

The one-eyed guy at the end was in the car. He wanted to confess everything but didn't have the balls to go in and tell him.

Ah ok, thought that was referring to a different time period.

26-02-2019 12:25am

Mike Litoris wrote: »

There must be something in it. He looked tiny in the above scene.

I'm sure I've seen a few movies he's acted in but I cant remember any. Whether thats down to the role or his acting I dont know but I really enjoyed his turn in this.

he's quoted as 5 feet, 7 and 1/4 inches

really grasping there with the 1/4 inch bit !

Gimme A Pound · 26-02-2019 12:31am

Effects wrote: »

Final episode 5/10
Overall 6/10

About the same here. Great acting, good writing, that haunting southern gothic meets Midwest Americana vibe (like in Winter's Bone, Sharp Objects, Ozark, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri) but too much filler and repetition and pointless meandering - and loose ends.

All in all, a watered down season one. I'd say to anyone who asks, that it's not bad.

26-02-2019 12:43am

Otto Kind Lawyer wrote: »

About the same here. Great acting, good writing, that haunting southern gothic meets Midwest Americana vibe (like in Winter's Bone, Sharp Objects, Ozark, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri) but too much filler and repetition and pointless meandering - and loose ends.

All in all, a watered down season one. I'd say to anyone who asks, that it's not bad.

What were the loose ends?

alchemist33 · 26-02-2019 12:43am

It felt like it ended after episode 7, when everything was pretty much explained, and I just watched 75 minutes of epilogue.

Effects · 26-02-2019 12:50am

alchemist33 wrote: »

It felt like it ended after episode 7, when everything was pretty much explained, and I just watched 75 minutes of epilogue.

Yeah, that's how I felt. I kept skipping forward to just make it go faster.

Ally Dick · 26-02-2019 12:51am

Deleted User wrote: »

What were the loose ends?

What happened to the wife? Did she die or just leave him? What was the purpose of that big massacre and the Red Indian gardener? Lots of loose ends, I must say

26-02-2019 12:52am

Otto Kind Lawyer wrote: »

About the same here. Great acting, good writing, that haunting southern gothic meets Midwest Americana vibe (like in Winter's Bone, Sharp Objects, Ozark, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri) but too much filler and repetition and pointless meandering - and loose ends.

the acting was decent but the two detectives didn't have much dimension to them - that's why they didn't work together very well together as being interesting imo - and they didn't change much at all really across the timelines - Hays's stubbornness being his fairly one-dimensional trait and West being a drinker / straight-forward type of guy and there was no change here really- they reconciled at the end but they didn't really change/ develop.

if they were more complex and displayed actual character development it would have worked a lot better.

And the relationship aspect of Hays and Amelia was horrendously repetitive over 7 episodes - only throwing in a bit in the final episode that they accepted that they had to move away from the case - all done very fleetingly.

errlloyd · 26-02-2019 12:53am

Ally Dick wrote: »

What happened to the wife? Did she die or just leave him? What was the purpose of that big massacre and the Red Indian gardener? Lots of loose ends, I must say

Nic confirmed on Instagram that she died suddenly in her sleep in 2013. There was no interesting twist there, she just died. I am guessing her death and the subsequent loneliness is what drives Wayne to start thinking about the case again in 2015.

26-02-2019 12:57am

errlloyd wrote: »

Nic confirmed on Instagram that she died suddenly in her sleep in 2013. There was no interesting twist there, she just died. I am guessing her death and the subsequent loneliness is what drives Wayne to start thinking about the case again in 2015.

on social media after the show has ended - bit crap really - if you've chosen to leave it out of the show why bother.

alchemist33 · 26-02-2019 12:58am

errlloyd wrote: »

Nic confirmed on Instagram that she died suddenly in her sleep in 2013. There was no interesting twist there, she just died. I am guessing her death and the subsequent loneliness is what drives Wayne to start thinking about the case again in 2015.

If it didn't happen in the show, it didn't happen.

brevity · 26-02-2019 1:00am

I liked it. It’s not without its faults but I thought it was good.

Would watch a fourth series.

26-02-2019 1:03am

Could do with a different writer at this stage maybe if it's going to continue.

Pizzolatto could still call himself the showrunner or whatever.

Gimme A Pound · 26-02-2019 1:07am

Deleted User wrote: »

What were the loose ends?

What was the story with Hays's daughter disconnecting?

And just my opinion but I thought West's story could have been explored more. There was a disproprtionate amount of focus on Hays, whereas there was equal exploration of the two characters in season one.

The "showdown" between Hoyt and Hays with the veiled threats on the phone and the two cars... amounted to virtually nothing. Kind of a waste of a great acting talent like Michael Rooker.

It's obvious what happened to Tom Purcell but I think it could have been explored more. How the heck did he manage to get into the Hoyt home at all, let alone the hidden part with the pink room.

What happened to Dan O'Brien? Can we take it that Tom killed him?

We can take it that Amelia died but there was no mention of how - she wasn't very old.

26-02-2019 1:08am

Otto Kind Lawyer wrote: »

We can take it that Amelia died but there was no mention of how - she wasn't very old.

she died in her sleep on instagram.

errlloyd · 26-02-2019 1:11am

alchemist33 wrote: »

If it didn't happen in the show, it didn't happen.

He said it was deleted from his original 90 minute episode and he hopes it'll be on the DVD. Dunno what else to say, he wrote the show

Gimme A Pound · 26-02-2019 1:13am

Ally Dick wrote: »

What was the purpose of that big massacre and the Red Indian gardener?

Woodard, the guy who went around collecting stuff in a cart? He was a suspect because he'd always been viewed as a weird loner who (unjustly) couldn't be trusted around children. He was a mess anyway after Vietnam and losing touch with his family, and it seemed like being a suspect and the locals ganging up on him with physical violence, was enough to make him go "Fuk it, may as well check out and bring a few of the lynch mob with me" as he knew the mud would stick.

Ally Dick · 26-02-2019 1:47am

Otto Kind Lawyer wrote: »

Woodard, the guy who went around collecting stuff in a cart? He was a suspect because he'd always been viewed as a weird loner who (unjustly) couldn't be trusted around children. He was a mess anyway after Vietnam and losing touch with his family, and it seemed like being a suspect and the locals ganging up on him with physical violence, was enough to make him go "Fuk it, may as well check out and bring a few of the lynch mob with me" as he knew the mud would stick.

Thanks for the explanation, but really feel in relation to the rest of the plot, this was ridiculous

Nerdlingr · 26-02-2019 2:13am

So disappointed with the last episode. Man that was some sh*t. As previous posters have said everything was tied up nicely in a bow. Obviously the big 'reveal' is that Hays solves the case, is standing next to the girl he's been chasing for 35 years yet doesn't even know it. The book being knocked off the table, he reads the one page it opens on etc etc ...f*cking yawn. Cringe plot device to push the story forward. Really really amateur writing there. Man, it started off so well and I was really interested to see what they could do with the "untrustworthy narrator" angle...but they did f*ck all with it. I recommended this to a friend to watch but after watching the finale tonight I'll be telling her not to bother. Also, I'm in the minority but I still think season 2 is the best of the lot. Season 1 had the same problem as 3.... Let down by a horrible last episode.

Gimme A Pound · 26-02-2019 2:23am

errlloyd wrote: »

He said it was deleted from his original 90 minute episode

I think it's a pity and bizarre that even the final cut, which is still so full of pointless filler, omitted something as significant as Mrs Hays's death. And an explanation for the daughter's estrangement.

Very strange execution of what could have been a great story.

Gimme A Pound · 26-02-2019 2:56am

Mike Litoris wrote: »

There must be something in it. He looked tiny in the above scene.

Kinda cruel what his surname sounds like.

alchemist33 · 26-02-2019 8:14am

errlloyd wrote: »

He said it was deleted from his original 90 minute episode and he hopes it'll be on the DVD. Dunno what else to say, he wrote the show

Sorry, not having a go at you, but at the writer for dropping it in later

Effects · 26-02-2019 8:56am

Ally Dick wrote: »

What was the purpose of that big massacre and the Red Indian gardener?

I think you mean Native American.

Tipsy McSwagger · 26-02-2019 9:06am

Struggling to finish this. Watched Ep 6 yesterday and it such a boring, poor show. The writing is awful. That’s twice now the father of the kids was able to wander around the police station, walk up to a door and hear the cops talk about an important development in the case, ‘did you hear, the mother’s brother Dan knows something and he wants money, give me an hour in a room with him’. This is writing for Soap operas.

Jamiekelly · 26-02-2019 9:54am

In post #2316, before the fifth episode aired, I made a guess as to where the story was going and I was actually very close, on most things, especially regarding

the Hoyt family being involved and the "aunt" trying to kidnap Julie and killing Will in the process.

All I know is that if I, of all people, can guess what the plot twists are going to be halfway through the series then the plot wasn't actually that complicated to begin with. Which honestly makes me think that they wrote it in non-chronological order for that reason and added the dimentia angle to make sense of it. Needless to say the ending was actually very disappointing because of it. Also they never found out that

the father was killed and didn't commit suicide. So there was a massive writing plothole that was very tragic. The father spent all those years not knowing what really happened, sorted his life out, then gets killed by someone clearly connected to Hoyt and they never bother to address it. The writers just used it as an episode cliffhanger that went no where and the killer and Hoyt go free.

Making the happy-ish ending a little stupid.

The only positive I can see from the whole series is Dorff getting the credit he deserves as an actor. He'll definitely get more roles because of this show and he clearly deserves more recognition.

IAMAMORON · 26-02-2019 10:36am

Ally Dick wrote: »

Thanks for the explanation, but really feel in relation to the rest of the plot, this was ridiculous

It was a typical Red Herring. Every murder mystery has one. You are given a blatantly obvious suspect who turns out to be innocent. It obfuscates the truth to make the mystery more compelling.

Frank O. Pinion · 26-02-2019 10:56am

reece289 wrote: »

It's was a fabulous series IMO. You need to stop expecting from these things and learn to be led somewhat. It's what art does. You're watching someone else's vision.

No.

I mean, thank god there was an eye witness to everything that happened. That was a close one. Case almost went unsolved.

To recap:

There wasn't even a murder at all.
The only crime that actually occurred is what was predicted from the second episode, as it's the exact same plot as Gone Baby Gone.
Every intriguing thread turned out to be a red herring ("That man pretending to be my father", the corruption of their supervisor, snake farm, the dolls, satanism, connection to Season 1, Hoyt paterfamilias).
The case is solved not by detective work, but by a guy with guns pointed at him just explaining everything. Then they just walk away.
Julie has been living an idyllic lifestyle for the past few years, so this entire eight hour hunt for her has basically been pointless.
Multiple extremely long scenes in a bar talking about feelings.
No snake farm.

This entire season was a waste of time.

26-02-2019 11:28am

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

No.

I mean, thank god there was an eye witness to everything that happened. That was a close one. Case almost went unsolved.

To recap:
There wasn't even a murder at all.

The only crime that actually occurred is what was predicted from the second episode, as it's the exact same plot as Gone Baby Gone.

Every intriguing thread turned out to be a red herring ("That man pretending to be my father", the corruption of their supervisor, snake farm, the dolls, satanism, connection to Season 1, Hoyt paterfamilias).

The case is solved not by detective work, but by a guy with guns pointed at him just explaining everything. Then they just walk away.

Julie has been living an idyllic lifestyle for the past few years, so this entire eight hour hunt for her has basically been pointless.

Multiple extremely long scenes in a bar talking about feelings.

No snake farm.

This entire season was a waste of time.

You could argue that maybe that what was the writer was going for - to take the piss out of the normal expectations people have of a police mystery.

But even then it was boring and repetitive, the characters as their relationships were one-dimensional, didn't change really and the whole thing poorly executed.

26-02-2019 11:46am

Jamiekelly wrote: »

In post #2316, before the fifth episode aired, I made a guess as to where the story was going and I was actually very close, on most things, especially regarding
the Hoyt family being involved and the "aunt" trying to kidnap Julie and killing Will in the process.

All I know is that if I, of all people, can guess what the plot twists are going to be halfway through the series then the plot wasn't actually that complicated to begin with. Which honestly makes me think that they wrote it in non-chronological order for that reason and added the dimentia angle to make sense of it. Needless to say the ending was actually very disappointing because of it. Also they never found out that
the father was killed and didn't commit suicide. So there was a massive writing plothole that was very tragic. The father spent all those years not knowing what really happened, sorted his life out, then gets killed by someone clearly connected to Hoyt and they never bother to address it. The writers just used it as an episode cliffhanger that went no where and the killer and Hoyt go free.
Making the happy-ish ending a little stupid.

The only positive I can see from the whole series is Dorff getting the credit he deserves as an actor. He'll definitely get more roles because of this show and he clearly deserves more recognition.

I'm surprised you need to be told this given how spot on your prediction was. The father was definitely murdered. Last we saw of him was getting jumped in the pink room.

Gimme A Pound · 26-02-2019 12:23pm

I thought it was so sad when West said "What about us?" in 1980 when Hays boxed up his things to move to the typing pool instead of signing that document and remaining West's partner.

West was such a lonely guy, which was strange for a man who seemed like the type who was good craic, down to earth, friendly, seemingly well adjusted. I wasn't the only one who thought he might be in the closet and harbouring feelings for Tom Purcell (who was on the show rumoured to be in the closet). I thought they might even have had a clandestine relationship. But then again maybe West just wanted a friend - and clung to Hays's and Purcell's presence in his life as the closest he could get to friendship.

Awful shame this guy's story wasn't explored more instead of Wayne and Amelia Hays arguing the same things over and over.

Zero-Cool · 26-02-2019 1:26pm

I liked the ending, the girl is living a happy normal life, Purple got to spend a few peaceful moments with her (even if he didn't know), and it just brought a sense of closure to it for me. Poor Hayes having to deal with that shyte but he ended up surrounded by family and his best friend. Not the best season of TV by a long shot but it was a grand watch.

Did I miss what happened the dads suicide, did the security guy mention it at all before the guys killed him or did it end with every one thinking it was actually suicide?

26-02-2019 1:27pm

It actually occurred to me that this would have actually worked as a feature length movie as opposed to an 8 hour season.

if all the repetition and filler were cut out it could have been decent and worked as a single viewing.

errlloyd · 26-02-2019 1:38pm

Otto Kind Lawyer wrote: »

I thought it was so sad when West said "What about us?" in 1980 when Hays boxed up his things to move to the typing pool instead of signing that document and remaining West's partner.

Someone on reddit pointed out that Hayes said "We'll grab a beer or go to a game"

25 years later in 2015 old West says "We never grabbed a beer, we never went to a game"

My brief plot synopsis and why I liked it.

There are some things I find unsatisfying about the ending, mostly around Tom. Wayne never finds out Tom was murdered, he seems to forget he ever cared about the typed note. As viewers we get the satisfaction of knowing that Tom was indirectly avenged by the way they killed Harris, and that Tom would probably be satisfied with the way his daughter grows up in the end. But Wayne and West never get that.

I also think the whole series was a missed opportunity to explore West. Dorff knocked it out of the park, whereas as Ali sort of became kind of samey after a while? We see snapshots of West and suspect there might be more to his life, but ultimately he doesn't develop.

The lack of conspiracy is sort of satisfying in some ways. I think the series is about how power can cause things to spiral. Hoyt was genuine in wanting the best for his children, and while adopting someone else's daughter to be your daughter's play thing is pretty ****ed up, there is an innocence to how it all started. From that point onwards you have an unfortunate event that leads to a succession of coverups. The shootout with Woodward was a defense against a hate crime that served as opportunism for Wallis to pin it on him. The DA who was seeking an election had a nice easy out to blame someone unpopular and get a conviction. There doesn't need to be a conspiracy for him to want that case to go away, there are plenty of incentives without a conspiracy.

Lucy attempts to extort Hoyt for more money and Wallis is sent to kill her. Dan O Brien sees that extorting Hoyt is dangerous so he tries to sell the information to the detectives - we assume that Wallis eventually catches up with him too. Tom gets what he needs from Dan but ends up too close and Wallis has to kill him too. All Hoyt is really doing at this stage is protecting his family.

When Hoyt and Ali are talking on the cliff top and Hoyt says that if Ali stops looking for her, he will. He was genuine. He figured she was in a better place now and he didn't want to look for her. If she remained unfound his family would be fine - she would be fine etc. If she became found all the wounds would reopen. And I guess Hoyt was correct. Ali stopped looking, the case was dropped and effectively everyone (who was living) lived happily ever after. Except Junius he appears to live in guilt for the rest of his life.

errlloyd · 26-02-2019 1:56pm

glasso wrote: »

It actually occurred to me that this would have actually worked as a feature length movie as opposed to an 8 hour season.

if all the repetition and filler were cut out it could have been decent and worked as a single viewing.

Edit: My post sort of spoilers another movie. There is a very similar feature length film already. It's not identical, but if you enjoyed TD you could watch it. I'll stick it in spoiler tags.

Gone Baby Gone

26-02-2019 2:50pm

errlloyd wrote: »

Edit: My post sort of spoilers another movie. There is a very similar feature length film already. It's not identical, but if you enjoyed TD you could watch it. I'll stick it in spoiler tags.
Gone Baby Gone

Thanks. Have seen that yes.
Pretty well reviewed at the time.
Didn't care for this season and that movie is a good example of how these characters and story could have worked better in a movie format.

There wasn't enough done here with the characters to warrant 8 hours plus.

sk8erboii · 26-02-2019 4:09pm

Season 3 is not made for the masses. Its an artistic vision that is not shared for everyone. That is why precisely i love it. S3 for me is a solid 10/10 along with season 1.

Its telling when the masses complain of a piece of media being ‘boring’ and not comprehending the cleverness and art behind the work.

Im glad the vast majority wont like this season, especially the ending

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/entertainment/television/tv-reviews/true-detective-season-3-finale-review-this-was-the-best-true-detective-yet-and-the-first-to-merit-a-complete-rewatch-37855549.html

True Detective [HBO] [** Spoilers **]

Comments

True Detective [HBO] [ Spoilers ]