Ferrum Aeternum Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 No I tried to clarify a bit. I think it's quite heavy handed at times. And cliché. Of course you've heard all those arguments before. We all have. It seems that an undue amount of the story is taking place not to characterize these two but to stage an unoriginal philosophical debate. That concerns me going forward. I'm more interested in the story and real human interaction. This is so.... phony. I think you're painting with a fairly broad brush when you say "we've all" heard those arguments before. Sure, a lot of people on Westeros.org have (those of us who've read Bakker and the ilk, especially) but I'd be hesitant to say the same about the average person tuning in on Sunday nights to watch this show. In the medium of dramatic television, Rust is a pretty unusual character, and his outlook on life is far from the norm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elder Sister Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 I think that the reason the show's creators are using philosophical arguments we've heard before is for no other reason than to teach us about the characters, not philosophy. We need to learn more about these two men and what makes them tick. When we know that, we'll know more about who is committing the murders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeu Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Rewatched the third episode last night. In retrospect, it's brilliant the way they distract your attention away from the lawnmower man. By the conventions of the genre he should seem very suspicious for a number of reasons. Firstly his story doesn't make a lot of sense. Secondly, the staging and dialogue in the scene itself seem weirdly off. Genre conventions in detective shows usually mean a one off interview is livened up in some way. The various Law and Order franchises have made a formula out of this, for example. The cops go and interview someone, and to make it so the interviewee isnt just a straight exposition machine, the script or the director or the actor will have a bit of business, or some personality trait, something to make them more than just a straight source of information. Think the old crab fisherman for example, or Dora Lang's mother. Both display bits of personality, personal history, quirky traits, whatever, during the interview. Now look at lawnmower man. He gives Cohle nothing. He's a landscaper that works for the parish. That's it. He gives them no personality, no hint to what he's like, and, most importantly, NO relevant information. Looking back, it's so obvious - there's no point to this scene except as a way to subtly introduce this guy into the story. But before it can leap out, the information on Reggie LeDeaux comes through, and suddenly were on the road, sirens blaring, racing towards the end of the episode, Cohle's long, disturbing monologue and that bizarre, eerie final shot. This is quite true. I didn't think twice about that scene when I was watching it but now that we have photographic evidence :P, the scene looks quite suspect in retrospect. It goes on for a while and serves no apparent purpose. I am convinced that we will see this guy again. Though, if the lawnmower man is indeed involved, I'm not sure how I feel about detectives stumbling on him like that. I thought the spaghetti monster incident happened in a place that is not exactly close to where they are now. (Though I'm not super sure about this). Regardless, unless I am missing something, the school is only remotely related to the case (a victim from many years back went to the school). I didn't catch why they went to visit the school in the first place. And even if they went there to see if someone would know the victim, it's quite a coincidence to run into the "bad guy" there. I guess the school may be some sort of a place where the "cult" meets, but even then, I doubt they would be hanging around there / mowing the lawn 24/7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anatúrinbor Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 I think you're painting with a fairly broad brush when you say "we've all" heard those arguments before. Sure, a lot of people on Westeros.org have (those of us who've read Bakker and the ilk, especially) but I'd be hesitant to say the same about the average person tuning in on Sunday nights to watch this show. In the medium of dramatic television, Rust is a pretty unusual character, and his outlook on life is far from the norm.I think there is truth here, but I still got the sense that the show thinks that this is some incredibly original stuff.And they're not only using philosophical arguments to advance the plot, they're letting a character go on and on about his philosophy at times when it seems uncalled for, especially when he's just sitting in front of a camera and lecturing us with the 'you're stupid if you think you're important' stuff. At this point it's annoying but won't ruin the show or anything. The same was true in the first few chapters of Neuropath though, but when the point was made clear and the argument kept getting repeated over and over it became infuriating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UVA Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 I think there is truth here, but I still got the sense that the show thinks that this is some incredibly original stuff.And they're not only using philosophical arguments to advance the plot, they're letting a character go on and on about his philosophy at times when it seems uncalled for, especially when he's just sitting in front of a camera and lecturing us with the 'you're stupid if you think you're important' stuff. I agree that the message is often heavy-handed but I wonder if that's part of the point. Cohl's a character driven to search for meaning out of pain, his everyday discourse is profound in nature because that's a big part of his identity, he can't interact in any other way. I also think that the audience, much like Hart on-screen, is supposed to side-eye Cohl during some of his soliloquies. I mean, Cohl's comment in Ep 3 about keeping the other bad men from the door was so over-the-top, I-read-Beyond-Good-and-Evil-stoned, there had to be some irony elicited there, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Monkey Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 I think there is truth here, but I still got the sense that the show thinks that this is some incredibly original stuff.And they're not only using philosophical arguments to advance the plot, they're letting a character go on and on about his philosophy at times when it seems uncalled for, especially when he's just sitting in front of a camera and lecturing us with the 'you're stupid if you think you're important' stuff. At this point it's annoying but won't ruin the show or anything. The same was true in the first few chapters of Neuropath though, but when the point was made clear and the argument kept getting repeated over and over it became infuriating.I don't know. It seems pretty consistent with Cohle's character that he would repeat the same nihilistic ideas over and over again, seeing as how he is obsessed by it, as Hart pointed out last episode. Then again, it could just be the writer's way of bragging about how he took Philosophy 101 in college. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red snow Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 also Hart was awfully forceful and agitated with that car horn, perhaps he did not want Rust going into that school a wild theory I read, Hart's crazy daughter is all grown up and recreating the murders present day This is what I was thinking. She's either a perp or an upcoming victim in the present I'd say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jobmartell Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 Rewatched the third episode last night. In retrospect, it's brilliant the way they distract your attention away from the lawnmower man. By the conventions of the genre he should seem very suspicious for a number of reasons. Firstly his story doesn't make a lot of sense. Secondly, the staging and dialogue in the scene itself seem weirdly off. Genre conventions in detective shows usually mean a one off interview is livened up in some way. The various Law and Order franchises have made a formula out of this, for example. The cops go and interview someone, and to make it so the interviewee isnt just a straight exposition machine, the script or the director or the actor will have a bit of business, or some personality trait, something to make them more than just a straight source of information. Think the old crab fisherman for example, or Dora Lang's mother. Both display bits of personality, personal history, quirky traits, whatever, during the interview. Now look at lawnmower man. He gives Cohle nothing. He's a landscaper that works for the parish. That's it. He gives them no personality, no hint to what he's like, and, most importantly, NO relevant information. Looking back, it's so obvious - there's no point to this scene except as a way to subtly introduce this guy into the story. But before it can leap out, the information on Reggie LeDeaux comes through, and suddenly were on the road, sirens blaring, racing towards the end of the episode, Cohle's long, disturbing monologue and that bizarre, eerie final shot. Rust says it never took more than two minutes to tell if a suspect was guilty or not. He talks to lawnmower man for almost exactly one minute. Also, for the majority of the scene, lawnmower man's face is angled in such a way that we cant really see his right cheek (left to the viewer). It's only at the end, when Hart starts honking the horn, that lawnmower man turns his head and you catch a glimpse of the burn scars on his right cheek, underneath his beard. He's blonde, he has facial scars, and if he wasn't sitting on a ride-on lawnmower, what's the bet he's pretty tall too.Wow. Amazing stuff here. Sherlock like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolvesWillRise Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 Not sure if it's been mentioned but I'm pretty sure any guy they caught in the 90's was just pawn of the true leader of the cult or crazy zealots......and in my opinion it's the Governor's brother!!!!! He ties into the church and the school on top that his name keeps popping up as well as his own brother trying to take our boys off the case!!! Just a thought could be way off!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howdyphillip Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 I think there is truth here, but I still got the sense that the show thinks that this is some incredibly original stuff.And they're not only using philosophical arguments to advance the plot, they're letting a character go on and on about his philosophy at times when it seems uncalled for, especially when he's just sitting in front of a camera and lecturing us with the 'you're stupid if you think you're important' stuff. At this point it's annoying but won't ruin the show or anything. The same was true in the first few chapters of Neuropath though, but when the point was made clear and the argument kept getting repeated over and over it became infuriating.I think that you are missing the entire point about the character... What makes him have such a great dichotomy is the way he espouses his philosophy. He is very close to evangelical in spreading his Nihilistic viewpoints. Considering his viewpoints, his expression of them are almost diametrically opposed to what they actually are. In simpler terms, if we are nothing, why does it matter that this information is shared? In this respect, I find Cohle a seriously conflicted character. One who is unique in the television genre, and maybe in film as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKitttenGuard Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 I think that you are missing the entire point about the character... What makes him have such a great dichotomy is the way he espouses his philosophy. He is very close to evangelical in spreading his Nihilistic viewpoints. Considering his viewpoints, his expression of them are almost diametrically opposed to what they actually are. In simpler terms, if we are nothing, why does it matter that this information is shared? In this respect, I find Cohle a seriously conflicted character. One who is unique in the television genre, and maybe in film as well. I do not find Cohle as Evangical in his Nihilism. He does not go spouting his Nihilism to Maggie. He did not do it on his date. Did not see anyone at the Tent revival looking to show outside of Hart was hearing him spout his view. He does a convert's conviction on his Nihilism if that is a better way to phrase it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anatúrinbor Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 In simpler terms, if we are nothing, why does it matter that this information is shared? Actually, there is nothing original or unique about this question, since it (or something similar) must come up in any serious discussion of that philosophy. Now admittedly I don't know of any comparable TV characters to Rust since I don't watch that much TV to begin with. I also think you're wrong in saying that the whole point of the character is to show this contradiction/confliction (correct me if that's not what you meant)... I think the philosophy itself is the focus here (among other things.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howdyphillip Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 I do not find Cohle as Evangical in his Nihilism.He does not go spouting his Nihilism to Maggie.He did not do it on his date.Did not see anyone at the Tent revival looking to show outside of Hart was hearing him spout his view.He does a convert's conviction on his Nihilism if that is a better way to phrase it.We have witnessed him having intimate conversations with three people.. Hart, and the two detectives that are interviewing him in modern times. In these conversations, he is actively persuasive in sharing his views. That aspect of sharing his faith (or lack their of) is what I am calling evangelical in nature. One does not have to discuss philosophies with every person that they meet in order to be considered evangelical. . Actually, there is nothing original or unique about this question, since it (or something similar) must come up in any serious discussion of that philosophy. Now admittedly I don't know of any comparable TV characters to Rust since I don't watch that much TV to begin with. I also think you're wrong in saying that the whole point of the character is to show this contradiction/confliction (correct me if that's not what you meant)... I think the philosophy itself is the focus here (among other things.) You may be correct that the dichotomy that i am referring to may not be the main focus of the character, but I don't think that nuance was completely unintentional to the writing. Yes, the discussion of nihilism will always be to question the point, but the fact remains that people who hold that worldview generally don't try and promote it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anatúrinbor Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 Question, I only got the chance to see the three episodes once and missed a few parts unfortunately. Did they actually show the drawing that Marty's daughter made? And what was it exactly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKitttenGuard Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 HowdyPhillips,He is not sharing intimate conversation with the two detectives. The conversations are related to a investigation and without that they will not be talking to him. Many of his talks with Hart are while on the job and the case.Also yes an evangical is someone who wants to actively share their belief and will do so whenever the oppritunty arises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Antony Posted January 31, 2014 Author Share Posted January 31, 2014 Also yes an evangical is someone who wants to actively share their belief and will do so whenever the oppritunty arises. So definitely not Rust :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nictarion Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 Nvm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKitttenGuard Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Antony Posted January 31, 2014 Author Share Posted January 31, 2014 I brought up Maggie and his date as two examples where is not espousing his philsophy.He does not seek out to espouse at anyone at the tent revival.I will state again he does have a convert's conviction but we have seen his espousing outside his work relation and in dealing with a investigation.That is why he is not evangical.I wasn't being sarcastic, I agree.. When Marty first tries to talk to him about that shit he says "So what do you believe" "I believe we shouldn't talk about this type of shit at work" or something like that lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKitttenGuard Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 I wasn't being sarcastic, I agree.. When Marty first tries to talk to him about that shit he says "So what do you believe" "I believe we shouldn't talk about this type of shit at work" or something like that lolSorry for reading it wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.