True Detective Season 3 (SPOILERS)

[Zorral]

7 hours ago, Fez said:

I'm not sure about having three timelines, I think two may have been better; though then the comparisons with Season 1 may have gotten too strong. The 1980 timeline has been far and away the most compelling for me and having it be broken up by two other timelines has been a bit too disruptive. Obviously I don't know how this'll all turnout, but so I think I'd have preferred if it was just 1980 and 2015 and at around midseason there's a jump forward so that it's 1990 and 2015. 

I've been on the lookout for references and connections to Season 1, and not just thematically. I've caught a few direct ones, I think, like the mention of spiral scandal, and I suspect I've missed a bunch of others. I'm curious if that's just easter eggs or if this is very directly going to tie together.

Gads, yes.  It's that huge narrative writing error, to insert af flashback within a flashback.  Here are three nested inside each other, and that's truly screwing the pooch narrative-wise.  It also screws with characterization, not to mention the reader - watcher's capacity to know who what when and where (ya, that's the old school journalism format, but it still holds).  It's like those baroque - rococo cathedrals of endless ornamentation on top of ornamentation upon more decorative curlicues and spirals and twists and turns and spiky points too, and then drenched in gold foil.  It's too much extravagance, and not in a positive or even really creative manner.

 

[Kalbear]

It does kind of rob things a bit too. Finding out Julie's alive in 1990 means immediately that 1980 is, well, much less interesting. They also have to do bullshit narrative things like "I don't want to talk about what happened to <Trash Man>, you know about that" so they don't tell us what actually went on, when no one would talk like that. 

I dunno. There are parts that are creepy cool, and I love Ali in it, but I didn't love the first two eps. I found the 3 timeline thing to be annoying, not particularly cool and often distracting. Even with the first season there were only ever 2 timelines, and we moved ahead to the second one only after finishing the 'oldest' one. The second one feels unnecessary and uninteresting at least right now. The third might be interesting if they explore the vagaries of recollection, but they just haven't done anything special with it yet, and Hays' dementia doesn't appear to have anything to do with the case. 

[Martini Sigil]

I personally thought that the first 2 episodes crushed it.... the ominous tension that hung in the air every moment... Mahershala Ali is a monster...  there's 6 episodes left, but I'm already all in... I had a feeling that this was personal for HBO...  having a dud is one thing (vinyl) ... but S1 was soooo good, they weren't going to let a sub-par S2 stand.... this is probably a matter of pride as much as anything else...

[dbunting]

21 hours ago, Nictarion said:

They definitely threw in “watch the leather” for McConaughey, right?

Stront start overall. Ali was great, and the tone and atmosphere feels much more like S1 without being too similar. 

The first episode kind of reminded me of the West Memphis 3 case. Missing kids on bikes, 3 teenage suspects that were outcasts and into metal, satanic stuff, etc.  

 

Had the exact same feeling when I was watching it. Waiting for my wife to watch it because she is all about the West Memphis 3 stuff so she will pick it up fast.

So far so good, feels a lot better than the S2 abomination. Did everyone get the feel that the commissioner guy(?) gave the map and doll info to the media to help keep someone from getting caught, or do they just want us to think that?

It kind of felt like some tie ins to S1 with the kids, and dolls and "larger group" involved.

The one thing I am not liking after just suffering through Westworld S2 is another show with multiple timelines.   

[Ramsay B.]

I thought it was a really solid start. Obviously a lot of similarities to the first season, as even the dark and dramatic background music sounds almost exactly the same(S1 ep5 when they show Marty’s kids grow up). I do agree that the 3 timelines could be an issue but it doesn’t bother me yet. 

Stephen Dorff in this looks just like Dennis Quaid to me.

[Theda Baratheon]

Is it any good then? I've had ZERO interest in it. 

I hated season 2. 

But then I remember how much I freakin LOVED season 1 - I even had a poster of it on my wall when I was in college lol. 

[Nictarion]

22 minutes ago, Theda Baratheon said:

Is it any good then? I've had ZERO interest in it. 

I hated season 2. 

But then I remember how much I freakin LOVED season 1 - I even had a poster of it on my wall when I was in college lol. 

Yes. Already miles better than season 2. 

[unJon]

14 hours ago, Kalbear said:

It does kind of rob things a bit too. Finding out Julie's alive in 1990 means immediately that 1980 is, well, much less interesting. They also have to do bullshit narrative things like "I don't want to talk about what happened to <Trash Man>, you know about that" so they don't tell us what actually went on, when no one would talk like that.

I dunno. There are parts that are creepy cool, and I love Ali in it, but I didn't love the first two eps. I found the 3 timeline thing to be annoying, not particularly cool and often distracting. Even with the first season there were only ever 2 timelines, and we moved ahead to the second one only after finishing the 'oldest' one. The second one feels unnecessary and uninteresting at least right now. The third might be interesting if they explore the vagaries of recollection, but they just haven't done anything special with it yet, and Hays' dementia doesn't appear to have anything to do with the case. 

My thought on bolded was that Ali lies about something he found in Trash Man’s house [eta: lies in 1980], which is why he avoided the topic. He sort of had a panic attack then in the 2015 timeline and stopped the interview for the day. 

On the dementia, it’s clear they are going to play with it to mess with us somehow. It’s frustrating because it makes Ali an unreliable narrator. I’ll reserve judgment until the end of the show to see if the inevitable twist/reveal around the dementia will he well done or not. 

[Fez]

Nic Pizzolatto has already given interviews saying that there's no unreliable narrator and that he really dislikes that kinds of stories. He could be trying to mislead, but I'm inclined to believe him; he gave similar interviews during Season 1, about how the story wasn't centrally about the supernatural, but a lot of people ignored him due to how fun the speculation was.

Of course, this being the case, then I'm sorta struggling to see the point of the 2015 timeline so far, or why Ali's character has dementia.

[Martell Spy]

Another season one reference. A book is seen, 'the Forests of Leng.' This a lovecraftian reference. Also the book has TSR on it and looks a lot like 1st edition D&D book, but no such book was ever printed by TSR.

[Astromech]

6 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

Another season one reference. A book is seen, 'the Forests of Leng.' This a lovecraftian reference. Also the book has TSR on it and looks a lot like 1st edition D&D book, but no such book was ever printed by TSR.

Interesting article and take on the literary allusions in the premiere. https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/01/true-detective-forests-of-leng-poems-meaning-season-3-premeire The fact that the Forests(or plateaus) of Leng only exist in dreams made it a clever title or allusion to insert into Hays' assumedly foggy recollection of the investigation of the Purcell case since he has dementia or Alzheimer's.

I've only watched the first episode so far, but am hooked. It seems to recapture the tone of the first season, which I missed in s2. A bit southern gothic and rural noir with a strong hint of the occult and supernatural.  I'm also much more interested in the case whereas I wasn't so much in s2.  I share the concern of other border's regarding the three timelines, but also am hopeful it could add and not detract from the narrative, even if it may be a bit frustrating at times.

Mahershala Ali was great as usual, but the rest of the cast was good.  A bit distracting that he looks younger in the 1990 timeline than in the 1980 one, but that's my problem, I suppose.

[dooog]

Finally got through both episodes, took few a few runs at it as I never found myself engrossed.  It's an...okay start and Ali is very good. Going by some reviews & comments I get the feeling that people just really want to love it and have it recapture the S1 magic but although decent, there's nothing particularly special about it yet. Hopefully it picks up a bit.

[Cas Stark]

46 minutes ago, dooog said:

Finally got through both episodes, took few a few runs at it as I never found myself engrossed.  It's an...okay start and Ali is very good. Going by some reviews & comments I get the feeling that people just really want to love it and have it recapture the S1 magic but although decent, there's nothing particularly special about it yet. Hopefully it picks up a bit.

I felt about the same, it was good, but didn't really grab me.

[Astromech]

Scoot McNairy is doing a fine job as Tom Purcell. I've been impressed with him so far.

Also love that Pizzolato is again throwing in references to or drawing inspiration from real-life crimes. The Memphis 3 being an obvious with the three teenage boys in episode one.

I have to admit to entertaining the thought that Elisa Montgomery is actually Julie Purcell returned for answers. Far-fetched I know. Admit I prefer that Julie may be alive as opposed to dead like her brother. Adds to some extra tension and mystery to the case as well as explaining its lasting effect on Hays and others involved. Perhaps another link to the pedophile ring in s1?

 

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

I turned it off midway through the first episode because I had other things I needed to do and it didn't grab me at all. I'll probably wait a few weeks and then try and binge three or four episodes to see if I can get engrossed. 

[red snow]

I'm on my fourth attempt to watch the second episode. It's not really grabbing me so far. Seems to be trying too hard to emulate season 1 after the mis-step of season 2 being too much of a change.

And i really hope it's a red herring that the interviewer is the missing girl from the 90s (or her kid as it's hard to judge how old the interviewer is supposed to be) as that's a bit too obvious especially if they keep it as a mystery beyond episode 4. 

The detectives so far are lacking the spark of the mcCog/woody characters irrespective of how well they are being acted but i suspect they',ll improve particularly as there seems to be narrative gaps/misinterpreting occurring from Hays due to his dementia. They've already hinted that some of his memories might be rehearsed so it will be fun if some of the things we see are due to that.

[Ramsay B.]

21 hours ago, Astromech said:

I have to admit to entertaining the thought that Elisa Montgomery is actually Julie Purcell returned for answers. Far-fetched I know. Admit I prefer that Julie may be alive as opposed to dead like her brother. Adds to some extra tension and mystery to the case as well as explaining its lasting effect on Hays and others involved. Perhaps another link to the pedophile ring in s1?

That would mean Elisa would be in her low to mid 40’s. She looks much younger than that(the actress is 31). They could obviously be related somehow though. 

[Kalbear]

Plus they specifically mention him knowing what happened with julie Purcell. So he would know what she looks like, and even if he forgets due to dementia others around him would know. 

It's a detective story, not a soap opera. 

[red snow]

21 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Plus they specifically mention him knowing what happened with julie Purcell. So he would know what she looks like, and even if he forgets due to dementia others around him would know. 

It's a detective story, not a soap opera. 

I really hope your last statement hold true.

8 hours ago, Ramsay B. said:

That would mean Elisa would be in her low to mid 40’s. She looks much younger than that(the actress is 31). They could obviously be related somehow though. 

That's what i thought regarding age but if she was abducted/groomed she could have become a mother at an age where her daughter could be the tv reporter. Hays could be thinking "she reminds me of someone" without ever having met the reporter before.

[Astromech]

I'm wondering if his wife's book will be a key to solving or uncovering the mystery of this season's crime. Some detail to jog his memory?