Morrissey Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 I wasn't as impressed by season 1 as others were. It started out with this sinister angle, turned out to be your standard run of the mill cop vs. bad guy story. Much more excited for Season 2 of Fargo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I wasn't as impressed by season 1 as others were. It started out with this sinister angle, turned out to be your standard run of the mill cop vs. bad guy story. Much more excited for Season 2 of Fargo. The first season really had nothing to do with cop vs. bad guy. The context was detectives and gruesome killings and all, but the underlying story being told was really a commentary on the typical archetypes of men in society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsFanInDenver Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 While there is no one to fill Alexandra Daddario's cups, it is a pretty good ensemble. Such references should always be accompanied by pics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 The first season was based on a true story about a detective in the south busting a religious cult that was doing murder and rape. You can check it out on vice in YouTube. Don't know what this season is about but I like the casting of Vince Vaughn and Colin Farrell. They're very good actors when given good material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 The first season was based on a true story about a detective in the south busting a religious cult that was doing murder and rape. You can check it out on vice in YouTube. Don't know what this season is about but I like the casting of Vince Vaughn and Colin Farrell. They're very good actors when given good material. I have read two articles on the upcoming season. One author came from the angle that he did not like Season 1 as much as the general populace. The other author did like season 1. Of course, the one that liked it is not thrilled with the new season (through 3 episodes). while the one that did not actually like Season 1 likes season 2 through 3 episodes. It is a different themed show. One reason the guy that liked season 1 does not like season 2 asa it is not revolving around cop partners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Such references should always be accompanied by pics. Fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 I have read two articles on the upcoming season. One author came from the angle that he did not like Season 1 as much as the general populace. The other author did like season 1. Of course, the one that liked it is not thrilled with the new season (through 3 episodes). while the one that did not actually like Season 1 likes season 2 through 3 episodes. It is a different themed show. One reason the guy that liked season 1 does not like season 2 asa it is not revolving around cop partners. The first season was a little overrated. The first couple episodes were basically true blood without the vampires it didn't heat up until close to the end when they found out they didn't get the real killer the first time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 The first season was a little overrated. The first couple episodes were basically true blood without the vampires it didn't heat up until close to the end when they found out they didn't get the real killer the first time. Disagree. The first couple episodes where establishing a narrative structure for telling story beyond that of just the murder investigation. If you appreciate good story telling, you appreciate not just the climax of the story, but also the detail and mechanisms put in place to reach it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 I didn't know that the ending was getting any negative feedback. I thought it was was one of the best finales ever, would probably rank it second behind the finale of Season 4 for Breaking Bad, but we'll see how it holds up over time. People bitch too much. Oh, Hi. The ending disappointed me for the reason that they built up the Yellow King character the whole way and it ends up being Just Some Dude. The only other part of the show that I found to be a hindrance was that the writer seemed to have a difficult time maintaining consistency in the younger Cohle's philosophical tone. In some episodes, he's the near-death nihilist that walks the world looking for a reasonably honorable death; in others he's nowhere near as intense, as if McConaughey showed up on set and decided he didn't want to step on Harrelson's toes, particularly in the episodes where it's Marty's turn to be the ****-up. Minor quibbles, though. The Harrelson and McConaughey performances were amazing, the story was good for the most part, and I'd watch them play those roles for another 5 seasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 The new season is getting beat up a little bit in early reviews, but I'm assuming that has more to do with the lack of McConaughey and Harrelson. That said, building a gritty cop drama around Rachel McAdams could go wrong for so many reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted June 19, 2015 Author Share Posted June 19, 2015 The new season is getting beat up a little bit in early reviews, but I'm assuming that has more to do with the lack of McConaughey and Harrelson. That said, building a gritty cop drama around Rachel McAdams could go wrong for so many reasons. NOW he listens to reviews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsFanInDenver Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 The new season is getting beat up a little bit in early reviews, but I'm assuming that has more to do with the lack of McConaughey and Harrelson. That said, building a gritty cop drama around Rachel McAdams could go wrong for so many reasons. Even if its goes wrong you still have Rachel McAdams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 The new season is getting beat up a little bit in early reviews, but I'm assuming that has more to do with the lack of McConaughey and Harrelson. That said, building a gritty cop drama around Rachel McAdams could go wrong for so many reasons. I don't listen to the critics most of them are jealous wannabe screenwriters who just follow whatever everyone else says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 The new season is getting beat up a little bit in early reviews, but I'm assuming that has more to do with the lack of McConaughey and Harrelson. That said, building a gritty cop drama around Rachel McAdams could go wrong for so many reasons. I don't listen to the critics most of them are jealous wannabe screenwriters who just follow whatever everyone else says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 The ending disappointed me for the reason that they built up the Yellow King character the whole way and it ends up being Just Some Dude. I think a lot of people crawled up their own ass trying to figure out the mythos of the whole thing and felt betrayed when they realized it was just a whodunit written by a philosophy major. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 I think a lot of people crawled up their own ass trying to figure out the mythos of the whole thing and felt betrayed when they realized it was just a whodunit written by a philosophy major. Those would be the people that were hoping for an episode of CSI while ignoring the social commentary right under their noses. The reality is if the same social commentary were packed into a sci-fi vehicle it would have probably resonated more. People have been conditioned to pick up on metaphor in sci-fi over the decades, but when presented with something that looks and feels like a cop drama, they don't have the instinct to look for it the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 I think a lot of people crawled up their own ass trying to figure out the mythos of the whole thing and felt betrayed when they realized it was just a whodunit written by a philosophy major. Yes. Also, when you're stringing together clues and navigating innuendo, it feels cheap when all those clues add up to a creeper hiding in the woods that gets introduced at the last second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted June 20, 2015 Author Share Posted June 20, 2015 Yes. Also, when you're stringing together clues and navigating innuendo, it feels cheap when all those clues add up to a creeper hiding in the woods that gets introduced at the last second. He was in the 2nd or 3rd episode too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted June 20, 2015 Author Share Posted June 20, 2015 I think a lot of people crawled up their own ass trying to figure out the mythos of the whole thing and felt betrayed when they realized it was just a whodunit written by a philosophy major. This. That entire sequence through the caves was really well done. I also enjoyed them saving Glenn Fleshler's performance for the finale because he was a scary ****er and Fleshler was so good. So much of the story had to do with them getting the original arrests wrong because of political bullsh*t. Then the philosophical reasons for the need to reconcile in order to make things right. It was a different way of doing things and I loved that they didn't try to salt it down with some sort of forced surprise ending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted June 20, 2015 Share Posted June 20, 2015 This. That entire sequence through the caves was really well done. I also enjoyed them saving Glenn Fleshler's performance for the finale because he was a scary ****er and Fleshler was so good. So much of the story had to do with them getting the original arrests wrong because of political bullsh*t. Then the philosophical reasons for the need to reconcile in order to make things right. It was a different way of doing things and I loved that they didn't try to salt it down with some sort of forced surprise ending. Agreed all around. We actually just binge-watched it a couple weeks ago, so we'd inadvertently picked up the internet's collective disappointment with the finale before we even started, but we both liked it. I honestly don't know what people were expecting, though based on some of the theories being floated, I guess they were hoping that the Yellow King would turn out to be Hart's daughter, except she's from another dimension, and she manifests in this timestream as a big fat inbred creep, and, like, time really is a flat circle, man, and all of the events of the season just repeat over and over again in perpetuity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted June 20, 2015 Author Share Posted June 20, 2015 Agreed all around. We actually just binge-watched it a couple weeks ago, so we'd inadvertently picked up the internet's collective disappointment with the finale before we even started, but we both liked it. I honestly don't know what people were expecting, though based on some of the theories being floated, I guess they were hoping that the Yellow King would turn out to be Hart's daughter, except she's from another dimension, and she manifests in this timestream as a big fat inbred creep, and, like, time really is a flat circle, man, and all of the events of the season just repeat over and over again in perpetuity. There's this breed of movie/show watcher that constantly needs to know what's happening and guess what's happening next. My wife is one and it used to drive me crazy until she learned to keep the guessing to herself. Like Ape said that gets multiplied times a billion with crime dramas and I don't see why that has to be the writer's problem. The show set the expectation from the first second that it was a character study more than a murder mystery, so if a viewer shifted from that along the way that's on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted June 20, 2015 Share Posted June 20, 2015 There's this breed of movie/show watcher that constantly needs to know what's happening and guess what's happening next. My wife is one and it used to drive me crazy until she learned to keep the guessing to herself. Like Ape said that gets multiplied times a billion with crime dramas and I don't see why that has to be the writer's problem. The show set the expectation from the first second that it was a character study more than a murder mystery, so if a viewer shifted from that along the way that's on them. Yes. Thank you. If I wanted to know how it all predictably resolves in 90 minutes, then I'd watch a movie. I view the serial format, especially budgets that can afford both good writing and acting talent, as an investment of my interest. I want character development. I want a strong plot, with several sub-plots. I want things to be open-ended, until it's appropriate to close the loops. I want to see boobies. I want to see the story and/or characters used as metaphor, like any good novel would do. I want a universe constructed in my mind, that I can add to or fill-in-the-blanks for, and don't necessarily need the writers and show to explicitly spoon-feed me every detail like I'm an idiot. I want my imagination and creative spirit stoked. I want a ******* sandwich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizard King Posted June 20, 2015 Share Posted June 20, 2015 Sounds like season two is a star studded let down. Also, I don't think season one was great. It was good. It felt like it tried at times to get philosophically deeper than it could, got lost in the black hole, didn't know how to get out and then decided to just move on. It started strong and then I got the impression that instead of taking the necessary time for a thorough rewriting, the writer said meh, and just closed the season out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted June 20, 2015 Share Posted June 20, 2015 Sounds like season two is a star studded let down. Also, I don't think season one was great. It was good. It felt like it tried at times to get philosophically deeper than it could, got lost in the black hole, didn't know how to get out and then decided to just move on. It started strong and then I got the impression that instead of taking the necessary time for a thorough rewriting, the writer said meh, and just closed the season out. Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted June 20, 2015 Share Posted June 20, 2015 A million shows start with a Grand Idea that proves too large a burden for the creative force behind it. True art is delivering on that idea. TD season one was fine, but it's messy and, in places, unfulfilling from a purely narrative standpoint. Story is God, and no matter what you thought of the parts, the whole was flawed. Which is fine, btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted June 20, 2015 Author Share Posted June 20, 2015 Yes. Thank you. If I wanted to know how it all predictably resolves in 90 minutes, then I'd watch a movie. I view the serial format, especially budgets that can afford both good writing and acting talent, as an investment of my interest. I want character development. I want a strong plot, with several sub-plots. I want things to be open-ended, until it's appropriate to close the loops. I want to see boobies. I want to see the story and/or characters used as metaphor, like any good novel would do. I want a universe constructed in my mind, that I can add to or fill-in-the-blanks for, and don't necessarily need the writers and show to explicitly spoon-feed me every detail like I'm an idiot. I want my imagination and creative spirit stoked. I want a ******* sandwich. And portraying backcountry hicks as idiots always gets a thumbs up from me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolot Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 I hope I'm wrong but I'm getting ready for a letdown, Vaughn isn't one of my favorite actors ( except Swingers which is an all time classic ) and Farrell is meh….The acting was so good in season one that it covered up some of the story issues pointed out above imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted June 22, 2015 Author Share Posted June 22, 2015 Liked the premier a lot. Great portrayal of LA. There are a lot of little nuances they're setting up for examining how fragmented a city LA is. Kitsch and McAdams' characters seem kinda meh, but whatever, they didn't oversaturate the episode with it so who cares. Farrell's guy is something else and he's great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolot Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Liked the premier a lot. Great portrayal of LA. There are a lot of little nuances they're setting up for examining how fragmented a city LA is. Kitsch and McAdams' characters seem kinda meh, but whatever, they didn't oversaturate the episode with it so who cares. Farrell's guy is something else and he's great. i agree Rutgers, really liked the premier also, Farrell stole every scene he was in . I was really impressed with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 i agree Rutgers, really liked the premier also, Farrell stole every scene he was in . I was really impressed with him. Farrell is a capable actor, he just started producing sh*t when Hollywood got on its knees for him. I liked the first episode, the most promising aspect so far isn't the acting, but the fact that the writers picked up right where they left off... creating a show for an audience that wants a grand puzzle, with complexity layered into it, rather than the weekly spoon-feeding of information and events. I came away from the episode wanting to know more, and feeling a bit perplexed by all the sh*t they folded in. Hopefully that manage the details well. I'm putting zero stock in the reviews I'm hearing about (but refuse to read), because the reviewers are often evaluating this stuff for the type of audience that wants that spoon-fed crap. Gotta say too, I think McAdams is intriguing. If she can pull off shaping her character's behavior as being built around the disgust she has in her father, without going any deeper into their relationship than what they seeded tonight, then I think she deserves some respect. Will be interesting to see if she pulls it off, or if she just becomes a collection of lame, angry chick cop clichés. I think that is what was so beautiful about how Woody and Matt developed their characters, they tapped into the background, and it became implicit in who they were what they'd been through, so playing every defining moment of their past out wasn't essential to building their characters. I hope this season taps into that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrissey Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 The acting, the cinematography, the soundtrack on this show is great. Season one and episode one of season two have been beautiful to look at. Those aerial shots tonight were fantastic. I just don't dig Pizzolatto's storytelling. It's often incoherent. With so much going on you need a week to evaluate what you just watched. And some weeks you never figure it out because Pizzolatto forgets to tell the story. Maybe he's sacrificing that story for the beauty and the performances I mentioned above. Also can you throw in one joke? Show is dying for a bit levity. Can someone crack a smile at least? The real world isn't that depressing and serious. This show is dying for a Saul Goodman or Tyrion Lannister. With that said, I may be one of the few who finds municipal corruption more interesting than satanic cults. I may like season two more than some who loved season one, which I wasn't too high on. Oh and those two new half hour shows on HBO are terrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 This is getting bad reviews how? The first episode was excellent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Liked the premier a lot. Great portrayal of LA. There are a lot of little nuances they're setting up for examining how fragmented a city LA is. Kitsch and McAdams' characters seem kinda meh, but whatever, they didn't oversaturate the episode with it so who cares. Farrell's guy is something else and he's great. Farrell is great as the drunken but well intentioned dad. Vaughn did a great job. I actually think McAdams is compelling playing against type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 A million shows start with a Grand Idea that proves too large a burden for the creative force behind it. True art is delivering on that idea. TD season one was fine, but it's messy and, in places, unfulfilling from a purely narrative standpoint. Story is God, and no matter what you thought of the parts, the whole was flawed. Which is fine, btw. This is kind of how I felt about it. I was disappointed in the ending, but not because I insisted on it being some inside thing that I guessed at. It was more that the show seemed different and based on all the psychological sh*t these guys were going through then had a big boom is he dead or isn't he slam bang finale. It was still good, but when I look back on it, I found the slow parts much more compelling than the actual finish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snell41 Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 I episode 1 so far was pretty darn good, and I honestly can't stand Farrell and Vaughn, but they seem like they got their parts down solid. The only thing I felt was a little cheesy was the dude's face flapping in the wind on the motorcycle. I get you're trying to convey he's going fast, but that just felt a little contrived. A very small nitpick though, outside of that the show was great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.