- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: True Detective Season 1 finale and half of season 2 killed any interest...
Posted on 2/20/24 at 2:10 pm to Pierre
Posted on 2/20/24 at 2:10 pm to Pierre
Season 4 had a lot of promise early on. Which is probably why I hate it so much after having watched the whole thing. It has one of the dumbest conclusions of any show in recent memory.
Setting was dope, mystery was dark and terrifying, and Jodie Foster did about as good a job as humanly possible at playing Danvers. Especially when you consider how little character development was considered in the writing of Danvers.
That ties into the big problem though, it’s extremely poorly written. By the end of the finale I just kept thinking “what was the point of anything we saw in the previous 5 episodes?”
ETA: to answer your question though, you can just go ahead and stop if you expect anything to the quality of season 1. S2 is indeed a hot mess, S3 got good reviews but I didn’t finish.
S1 finale gets pooped on, but I still really enjoyed our little priest’s showdown in carcosa. I realize the tuttles are still active and essentially just the worst perpetrator was brought to justice; but isn’t that how it would go in real life? When does the true power actually go down in these situations and not just a fall guy? I mean shite epstein could be the spaghetti monster in real life
Idk, I just enjoyed the realistic ending to a show called true detective
Setting was dope, mystery was dark and terrifying, and Jodie Foster did about as good a job as humanly possible at playing Danvers. Especially when you consider how little character development was considered in the writing of Danvers.
That ties into the big problem though, it’s extremely poorly written. By the end of the finale I just kept thinking “what was the point of anything we saw in the previous 5 episodes?”
ETA: to answer your question though, you can just go ahead and stop if you expect anything to the quality of season 1. S2 is indeed a hot mess, S3 got good reviews but I didn’t finish.
S1 finale gets pooped on, but I still really enjoyed our little priest’s showdown in carcosa. I realize the tuttles are still active and essentially just the worst perpetrator was brought to justice; but isn’t that how it would go in real life? When does the true power actually go down in these situations and not just a fall guy? I mean shite epstein could be the spaghetti monster in real life
Idk, I just enjoyed the realistic ending to a show called true detective
This post was edited on 2/20/24 at 2:22 pm
Posted on 2/20/24 at 3:37 pm to SCLSUMuddogs
quote:
Season 4 had a lot of promise early on. Which is probably why I hate it so much after having watched the whole thing. It has one of the dumbest conclusions of any show in recent memory. Setting was dope, mystery was dark and terrifying, and Jodie Foster did about as good a job as humanly possible at playing Danvers. Especially when you consider how little character development was considered in the writing of Danvers.
I’m 2 episodes in and love it. This is very disappointing.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News