True Detective X - Bring Ginger Into Your Heart (Season One spoilers, Season Two speculation / casting)

[Jaxom 1974]

I'm very concerned about Season 2. There's zero chance this cast can match McConaughey/Harrelson.

If the creator's primary goal is to simply match the first season, then they've already lost...

[Lord of Oop North]

HBO has a pretty damned good track record in the casting department, so I'm not worried.

[Maithanet]

I'm more concerned about Carey Fukunaga not returning as director.

Agreed. HBO's record on casting is exceptional, but Fukunaga was a huge part of the success of the show. We'll see, but I think he'll be missed.

[Veltigar]

That's my hunch too. I actually think CF and VV can rock this show. Wherever Farrell's suffering reputation came from, I really don't think it was truly that he can't act. He was just in Alexander, and it takes people a while to forget that. And I actually think Vaughn could be a terrifying villain if he wants to be.

But Fukunaga was a star in season 1. I swear I don't even always notice direction that much, and in season 1 it was impossible not to notice, and in a good way.

To be frank, CF has been in more stinkers than Alexander. His roles in Daredevil, Miami Vice, S.W.A.T., Hart's war, Phone Game, the Recruit, Pride & Glory, Ask the Dust, American Outlaws and Total Recall were (really) bad as well. His new movie Miss Julie seems to be hated to. His acting in Minority Report, Tigerland and Seven Psychopaths wasn't bad, but he wasn't really memorable either.

It's been to long since I have seen Terrence Malicks The New World to judge him in that, but since Malick does not have a great reputation as an actors director, that's probably not going to be the one where CF blows us all away. In fact, In Bruges is the only role of his that I can think of where he is really good. And even in that movie, I'd say that Brendan Gleeson, Ralph Fiennes and Jordan Prentice were a lot more memorable.

Which such a trackrecord, I just can't feel very hopeful about him. I concede that VV might surprise us, since he just has not had the same amount of opportunities to showcase his dramatic acting skills, but CF has been given plenty of chances. Still waiting for a mindblowing performance from him.

[Bronn Stone]

Just finished watching this for the first time. Agree with the consensus that the ending kinda fizzled. Loved the performances by both principals. No chance they could or should get an Emmy since Cranston's was as much an award for the entire arc of the character.

But Ginger sucked. That stupid triple-ponytailed beard belonged over in a theater breaking Bilbo Baggins' plates.

I think Vince Vaughn generally sucks but could potentially be turned into something brilliantly evil by design, rather than his traditional evil by insipidness roles. Colin Farrell is meh but a single meh could be a good balance to scene-chewing from VV.

[Mark Antony]

oh no you didn't

[Fez]

To be frank, CF has been in more stinkers than Alexander. His roles in Daredevil, Miami Vice, S.W.A.T., Hart's war, Phone Game, the Recruit, Pride & Glory, Ask the Dust, American Outlaws and Total Recall were (really) bad as well. His new movie Miss Julie seems to be hated to. His acting in Minority Report, Tigerland and Seven Psychopaths wasn't bad, but he wasn't really memorable either.

It's been to long since I have seen Terrence Malicks The New World to judge him in that, but since Malick does not have a great reputation as an actors director, that's probably not going to be the one where CF blows us all away. In fact, In Bruges is the only role of his that I can think of where he is really good. And even in that movie, I'd say that Brendan Gleeson, Ralph Fiennes and Jordan Prentice were a lot more memorable.

Which such a trackrecord, I just can't feel very hopeful about him. I concede that VV might surprise us, since he just has not had the same amount of opportunities to showcase his dramatic acting skills, but CF has been given plenty of chances. Still waiting for a mindblowing performance from him.

He's certainly made some pretty bad choices of what to be in over the years (although some of the movies you list, like Pride & Glory, I thought were fine), but that's more about his taste in roles rather than his acting ability. With a few exceptions (which are usually blockbusters that don't require acting), I've always thought he's actual acting has been pretty solid over the years, even in the duds. Its usually some variation on 'drunken depressed Irish poet' but most other movie actors don't have much range either, and when its in a role that fits, its really good. And since 'drunken depressed Irish poet' is pretty much exactly what MM was in the first season (minus the Irish part), he should fit right in.

[Jack Bauer 24]

If the creator's primary goal is to simply match the first season, then they've already lost...

If I think there's no chance they match Season 1, then they're certainly not exceeding it. I'm usually an optimistic person, so this isn't me being cynical. If CF and VV prove me wrong then great. I'd be more than happy.

[JonArryn]

I think Westworld will be HBO's next big hit and their first season might be better than True Detective's first, if they hit as high with it I think they might. I don't think this season of TD will be able to reach the first one. Now we kind of know how the story is written like. While in True Detective's first season one of the things that I found most interesting was how I thought there was something else to the case, something hidden that was gonna get pealed back with the characters, episode after episode. From the buildup that was the first episode I was thinking we might get some awesome twist, or something at least. When you find out that True Detective is pretty much a classic detective story with more fleshed out characters it lost some of its charm with me. And the ending did dissappoint.

I was expecting something more that I thought we were lured into thinking, but never really got. That's the best way I can put it I think.

edit: it's still a solid show though. I'd rank it behind Hannibal's season 2 for the best things I've seen this year.

[Nictarion]

I seem to be in the minority on this board, but I wasn't dissapoited in the ending of TD. Like at all.

I wonder if not getting caught up in all the more out there theories helped with keeping my expectations in check. I think probably so.

[Mark Antony]

I really enjoyed the ending

[Bronn Stone]

I really enjoyed the ending

My problem with the ending was that

We get the 'fake' ending to the case in the 1995 wrapup, but then the reveal that there is still a main suspect out there. But even that suspect is not really the 'end' as there are still many cultist/revelers out there unpunished.

Not every piece of fiction should end in a tied up bow, but when the point of the tale is that the heroes cannot rest until they get them all, then they don't get them all but somehow rest, to me it seems a letdown.

[Fez]

My problem with the ending was that

We get the 'fake' ending to the case in the 1995 wrapup, but then the reveal that there is still a main suspect out there. But even that suspect is not really the 'end' as there are still many cultist/revelers out there unpunished.

Not every piece of fiction should end in a tied up bow, but when the point of the tale is that the heroes cannot rest until they get them all, then they don't get them all but somehow rest, to me it seems a letdown.

I still think there were sort of two cults. There was the original, doing its thing in secret for decades, probably killing people (as seen by that video that Marty freaks out at), and the breakaway group, which was doing the deer-antler killing. Marty and Rust never got to the original group, but that wasn't their case; their case was the '95 killing and its related killings, and they got everyone responsible for those. The other group is still out there, but there's always evil out there, and the end is saying they can take pride and rest after winning one specific battle for good. Because there's always good out there too, and its not a great idea to be the one who stares into the abyss.

At least, that's how I took it.

[Shryke]

My problem with the ending was that

We get the 'fake' ending to the case in the 1995 wrapup, but then the reveal that there is still a main suspect out there. But even that suspect is not really the 'end' as there are still many cultist/revelers out there unpunished.

Not every piece of fiction should end in a tied up bow, but when the point of the tale is that the heroes cannot rest until they get them all, then they don't get them all but somehow rest, to me it seems a letdown.

Huh?

The whole point of their ending is that they did get their man. But that getting their man doesn't mean they've solved every problem. They did their part. That's literally the line in the show.

[Bronn Stone]

To me, it was all one problem. I was unsatisfied. And much, much more importantly, I do not believe that Rust could be satisfied with that arbitrary distinction. Hart, sure. But not Rust. What bothered me was that the only explanation for why Rust was satisfied was that the writers said so. It was not in line with every other element of his character shown.

[Shryke]

To me, it was all one problem. I was unsatisfied. And much, much more importantly, I do not believe that Rust could be satisfied with that arbitrary distinction. Hart, sure. But not Rust. What bothered me was that the only explanation for why Rust was satisfied was that the writers said so. It was not in line with every other element of his character shown.

Of course it wasn't. The point of the ending is he has an epiphany. He changes. He believes differently then he did before.

This is the point of his whole ending speech. He realises he doesn't have to give in to despair. That it's enough to make the world a little bit better, as much as you are able. That this is hopeful. That even if the sky is still mostly black, the stars are just a bit brighter then they were before and that means in the end, the light is winning over the dark.

[JonArryn]

To me, it was all one problem. I was unsatisfied. And much, much more importantly, I do not believe that Rust could be satisfied with that arbitrary distinction. Hart, sure. But not Rust. What bothered me was that the only explanation for why Rust was satisfied was that the writers said so. It was not in line with every other element of his character shown.

Agreed with you. But it's actually only one writer of the show, not writers. Felt like a cop out ending if you consider his character the previous episodes so I agree with you.

[Mark Antony]

Why are we spoiler taggin

[Hello World]

I liked the ending a lot. The best part was the fact that it didn’t have any twist-ending shenanigans.

[Bronn Stone]

The Entertainment Forum rule is that if a topic has spoilers in it, it must have the word spoiler in the thread title. Mostly ignored in the post-fl00b world, but we persnickety Rust-types care about such things.

If Shryke is right about the intent of the authors re Rust, I want to barf enough to fill three zillion toilets.