True Detective
Discussion
If they manage to turn this around at the final episode it'll be the greatest save in TV history.
Not holding my breath.
I massively enjoyed Jodie Foster playing an asshole, but loads of other stuff doesn't ring true, has much or any internal logic or a sense of urgency, let alone clarity.
Doesn't really feel like an actual story has deepened or developed in front of me.
And Navarro is solid but still not quite 'present' compared to the more seasoned actors.
Not holding my breath.
I massively enjoyed Jodie Foster playing an asshole, but loads of other stuff doesn't ring true, has much or any internal logic or a sense of urgency, let alone clarity.
Doesn't really feel like an actual story has deepened or developed in front of me.
And Navarro is solid but still not quite 'present' compared to the more seasoned actors.
I agree, it doesn't have the multi-layered feel of S1 and neither is it tightly written. Although I do think it's unfair to compare this to S1 as it isn't written by Nic Pizzolatto - in fact he had no involvement with it whatsoever. It should have been a stand-alone series perhaps but it's clear that HBO are cashing in on the True Detective brand.
This ultimately was a show written by a woman, led by women and had a strong native presence - giving a voice and a platform to a community hugely under-represented in Hollywood. For that, it should be commended but of course we live in the age of wokeness and anything that tries to drive change and sometimes so blatantly pushes men as secondary / background / unimportant characters is always going to have a backlash. Which it did. Christopher Eccelstone is criminally under used in the show IMO but at the same time so is Fiona Shaw who plays Rose Aguineau.
The acting is no doubt wooden at times by some of the less familiar actors - which is fine by me - although I think Keli Reis has done a great job as Navarro, given it's one of her first lead acting jobs since being a pro boxer. She definitely protrays Navarro with a strong presence but also being both vulnerable and caring - which makes her likeable. The story itself is ok so far, there is still a mystery element but did feel to me like there was a lot of filler for no reason, and some of the decision-making cheapened some of the the show for me. I liked the soundtrack; had seen Billie Elish before but hadn't really heard her music. The tone of the songs suits the show IMO. I also liked the slow pacing.
Issa Lopez who looking at her previous work hasn't had any real presence or footprint in Hollywood (almost all her work has been in Mexico) - so given that she was handed the reins to not only write but direct all the episodes was both a risk and a brave decision. In that respect I think she has done a very good job given her overall lack of experience.
I mentioned before another show called Sharp Objects - a very similar True Detective style mystery and largely led by women too. That was a far better experience IMO but I still overall like Night Country. Just don't compare it to S1 or Sharp Objects.
(Now hopefully the ending is decent so I don't have to retract some of the above).
This ultimately was a show written by a woman, led by women and had a strong native presence - giving a voice and a platform to a community hugely under-represented in Hollywood. For that, it should be commended but of course we live in the age of wokeness and anything that tries to drive change and sometimes so blatantly pushes men as secondary / background / unimportant characters is always going to have a backlash. Which it did. Christopher Eccelstone is criminally under used in the show IMO but at the same time so is Fiona Shaw who plays Rose Aguineau.
The acting is no doubt wooden at times by some of the less familiar actors - which is fine by me - although I think Keli Reis has done a great job as Navarro, given it's one of her first lead acting jobs since being a pro boxer. She definitely protrays Navarro with a strong presence but also being both vulnerable and caring - which makes her likeable. The story itself is ok so far, there is still a mystery element but did feel to me like there was a lot of filler for no reason, and some of the decision-making cheapened some of the the show for me. I liked the soundtrack; had seen Billie Elish before but hadn't really heard her music. The tone of the songs suits the show IMO. I also liked the slow pacing.
Issa Lopez who looking at her previous work hasn't had any real presence or footprint in Hollywood (almost all her work has been in Mexico) - so given that she was handed the reins to not only write but direct all the episodes was both a risk and a brave decision. In that respect I think she has done a very good job given her overall lack of experience.
I mentioned before another show called Sharp Objects - a very similar True Detective style mystery and largely led by women too. That was a far better experience IMO but I still overall like Night Country. Just don't compare it to S1 or Sharp Objects.
(Now hopefully the ending is decent so I don't have to retract some of the above).
type-r said:
This ultimately was a show written by a woman, led by women and had a strong native presence - giving a voice and a platform to a community hugely under-represented in Hollywood. For that, it should be commended but of course we live in the age of wokeness and anything that tries to drive change and sometimes so blatantly pushes men as secondary / background / unimportant characters is always going to have a backlash. Which it did.
No doubt it did rile some incels and frothers just because, but it's simply not a well enough told story. It wouldn't be any better if the entire cast was middle aged white men wearing steak jumpsuits.
The main duo and some of the other dynamics are very compelling but they're stuck in a tale that won't stop creaking, lumbering and meandering. It's irritating knowing what could've been if better use had been made of them.
And if it hadn't been glued into True Detective it could've continued and improved but I presume once this is over, it's over.
Anyway, maybe the conclusion will rearrange our minds.
UTH said:
Legend83 said:
UTH said:
Hmmmm, maybe I need to try S1 after this Night Country one....
I'm enjoying Night Country for what it is, but S1 of TD is IMO one of the best series ever.Just seen the finale. I'd give the series a 6/10.
I'll give some wider thoughts after it officially airs tonight.
ETA: After some thought and listening and reading to some commentary on Ep 6, have revised down my overall score, a lot of which in retrospect I agree with.
I'll give some wider thoughts after it officially airs tonight.
ETA: After some thought and listening and reading to some commentary on Ep 6, have revised down my overall score, a lot of which in retrospect I agree with.
Edited by type-r on Monday 19th February 08:55
ky.It wrapped things up in a slightly more comprehensive way than I was expecting, but it's almost as if everything leading up to it was just passing the time until the conclusion as I couldn't detect a particularly strong relationship to the ending.
I certainly hope Jodie Foster does a lot more acting in future than she has in recent years.
I certainly hope Jodie Foster does a lot more acting in future than she has in recent years.
Agreed about passing time until conclusion - it's like they could have cut ep 2, 3, 4 & 5 out and 1 and 6 would have been sufficient to tell the story.
Jodie Foster I think really stood out from very amatuerish acting - that scene in the finale where she tells Navarro to mind her own business when talking about her son was superb.
Spoiler below:
This for me was more a nod towards girl empowerment and native empowerment which is good - however it could have been great if it was actually a more tightly written story and avoiding some "really, WTF" moments like when Peter when pulled the trigger. It was done in such a matter-of-fact way and swept away like nothing had happened. Business as usual. Weakened the overall product immensely IMO. And the killing of Annie also didn't sit well for me - firstly these were intellectuals, not mass murderers. However after some thought, are we just relying on the narrative of Raymond Clark - the same chap who was hearing things, walking around naked according to teh delivery guy and lied about his involvement in her death. So was it them that really killed her or was it actually him? No sign of anyone kicking her in his account that was clearly mentioned in the autopsy report and neither was suffocation mentioned in the autopsy. Was Raymond in fact lying or was he having a mental breakdown?
Jodie Foster I think really stood out from very amatuerish acting - that scene in the finale where she tells Navarro to mind her own business when talking about her son was superb.
Spoiler below:
This for me was more a nod towards girl empowerment and native empowerment which is good - however it could have been great if it was actually a more tightly written story and avoiding some "really, WTF" moments like when Peter when pulled the trigger. It was done in such a matter-of-fact way and swept away like nothing had happened. Business as usual. Weakened the overall product immensely IMO. And the killing of Annie also didn't sit well for me - firstly these were intellectuals, not mass murderers. However after some thought, are we just relying on the narrative of Raymond Clark - the same chap who was hearing things, walking around naked according to teh delivery guy and lied about his involvement in her death. So was it them that really killed her or was it actually him? No sign of anyone kicking her in his account that was clearly mentioned in the autopsy report and neither was suffocation mentioned in the autopsy. Was Raymond in fact lying or was he having a mental breakdown?
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff