It’s following one of the most fiercely original and revelatory seasons of television ever. So why isn’t season two of True Detective firing? Karl Puschmann evaluates the evidence.
1. There's only one main character
Technically, yes, there are four. But there's no discernible difference between any of them, bar the fact that one rocks a droopy 'stache. They all act the same, talk the same and behave the same. For all intents and purposes, they are the same person.
2. The characters all act the same and behave the same
Everyone is just relentlessly, monotonously, grim and serious. All of the time. It's almost laughable. In three episodes not one has so much as cracked a smile. Not Colin Farrell while hanging with his kid, not Rachel McAdams when watching porn, not Taylor Kitsch when redlining his motorcycle and not Vince Vaughn while enjoying the very adult attentions of his wife. These are all 'sun through the clouds' moments that would bring a smile to your face no matter how down in the dumps you were.
It's easy to forget that True Detective used to be quite funny. Scattered amongst all the metaphysical ramblings and grizzly sacrificial murders were some great quips and comedic moments. Who can forget Woody Harrelson's magnificently absurd threat, "I just don't want you, ever, mowing my lawn". In season two the actors are given some great one liners ("The f*** do I want with a bunch of flies?") but every time, without fail, they deliver them with all the comedic timing of a brick. A very serious, very grim, brick. I don't think they realise the script contains the odd gag.
4. Better living through chemistry
The onscreen chemistry between Matthew McConnaughey and Woody Harrelson in season one was undeniable. Their relationship and interactions were utterly believable. It felt real. Now everyone just frowns as hard as they can at each other and talks in a gruff, slightly depressed tone. The lack of that intangible thing called chemistry between any of the actors is hurting.
5. Louisana dreaming on such a winter's day
The thick, swampy atmosphere of Louisana in season one was just so damned creepy. This presence of location was always there, unsettling and uneasy. It really was the third main character. California is trying, those swooping highway shots and slow urban passes are working to establish a sense of place. But it's not defining in that same way.
6. The Phantom Menace effect
Driving the whole thing is the murder of a councilman who was involved in the sale of some commercial real estate that is being redeveloped and will be in line to receive major development funds from the city if the sale goes ahead and ... zzzzzzzzzz. Sorry, I drifted off there. Let's hope all the upcoming weirdo sex stuff spices things up.
7. BOOOOOOOORING!
The biggest crime is that most of the time it's boring. There's 48 minutes of tedium before you get to a final 10 minutes of class. Characters go off on long, tedious monologues, there's big stretches where nothing happens and even when stuff is happening it's hard to feel involved. I put this down to the one dimensional characters. I don't expect fireworks in every scene but I do expect to be entertained.
8. Storytelling so cheap it could be on an infomercial
After episode two's eye-popping cliff-hanger I was hooked. The show had bored me into submission and I was just about to throw in the towel, when BOOM! A shotgun blast to the chest and a main character dying on the floor. Now, this was more like it. I was all in. As long as they didn't cheap out on the proposition by pulling some cheap stunt like having Colin Farrell wearing a bullet proof vest or having the shotgun firing blanks or something as equally ridiculous like that. So when both of those things happened at the start of episode three I very nearly rage quit there and then. What next, Rachel McAdams wakes up and the whole thing was just a dream? After that BS, I wouldn't be surprised.
* What do you think of True Detective's second season? Post your comments below.