Here's the verdict: dunno.
This in itself can be read as a failing. After the first five minutes of season one's first episode I knew I was watching something special. After an hour of season two I knew I was watching am okay cop show that revelled a little too much in being 'dark' and 'gritty' but still showed flashes of brilliance.
Read more: Why you need to watch True Detective season two
So it's good. But there's nothing here that smacks you in the face and demands your attention the way Matthew McConaughey's gripping and revelatory performance as the rambling quasi-philosopher and ex-cop Rusty Cohle did.
Sure, Colin Farrell and his moustache both do a great job at being down in the dumps, Vince Vaughn is convincing in serious mode, Rachel McAdams gives good frown and Taylor Kitsch is, ya know, there.
They're all good, functional, no complaints. But these roles aren't anything we haven't seen before and the performances reflect that.
Sure, following up a character like Cohle is a heavy ask. An impossible one, maybe. But that's what was asked of the show. It failed.
But, cleverly - necessarily? - what Pizzolatto's done instead is double down on source; you've got the crook trying to go straight, the drunk dirty cop, the woman living in a man's world. These are the archetypical components of pulp fiction and they're all here, present and accounted for.
The fact we've left the thoroughly unique, thick and swampy atmosphere of Louisana in favour of the far more explored sleazy glitz of California shows you just how far the show is retreating to the genre's origins. This in itself is not a bad thing and it works to both establish this new world and completely sever ties to the last.
As set-up for a new series, which is essentially what we're dealing with here, last night's episode was decent enough. The cinematography laid down by frequent Fast & Furious director Justin Lin lived up to the high aesthetic reputation laid down by departed series director Cary Fukunaga.
This aspect alone screams quality and elevates the series above standard television procedurals as Lin creates a lowdown dirty world framed by palm trees and sunshine. Slow, drawling shots of the city's branching freeways promise freedom while the limited colour palette bogs you in the mire. It feels, heavy, man. Californa dreamin' indeed.
The story seems promising, if determinedly grim, with its twisty set-up heavily involving all four major characters, giving them varying objectives and setting them off on high stakes paths that ensures they all bump heads sooner rather than later.
Perhaps if season one hadn't been such a phenomenon, such a thoroughly unique piece of television, such an unrivalled entertainment, then maybe I'd be lobbing this same praise season two's way. Such is the albatross of unmitigated success.
Read more: Show gives Vince a true chance to shine
As it stands season two, after one episode at least, is merely very good. It's way ahead of your standard TV cop show but far below where I think we all wanted it to be.
So forget the dead guy. The real mystery of True Detective's second season is whether it has what it takes to be as much of a triumph as its first.
* True Detective, Soho, Mondays, 5.30pm and 8.30pm.
* What did you think of True Detective's second-season debut? Post your comments below ...