• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

True Detective (spoilers)

G.I.Joe

Well-known member
Pretty late to the party, but I just finished watching it recently and you're just going to have to bear with me.

Thoughts?

The story telling was excellent, although some parts were dissatisfying. Marty's daughter enacting the rape scene for one. Why show that if you're not going to tie it into the plot eventually?

And who the hell has 5 Ken dolls lying around?
 

Shri

Well-known member
Yeah I thought the rape scene was pretty significant at the time. '5' was alluded to so much, was almost certain there'd be 5 horseman in the clan etc. but just never happened.
 

Shri

Well-known member
I thought it was kind of funny that they put all this symbology all the way through and then just stuck a middle finger up at the conspiracy theorists
 

nightprowler10

Global Moderator
As I said on CS, I think ultimately the reality of the community was that the cult had powerful leaders (including potentially Harrelson's character's FIL) and were much more ingrained in the fabric of that society than people had thought. The girl's reenactment scene, along with many other hints being dropped weren't meant to be leading to an ending, but subtly hinting towards the inevitability of more murders to come long after the show's storyline ended.

I thought it was kind of funny that they put all this symbology all the way through and then just stuck a middle finger up at the conspiracy theorists
You don't say.
 

Teja.

Global Moderator
I think the point was Errol (read: Earl) was just the pawn who was caught, none of the major players in the snuff video are found guilty and life goes on with the Tuttles and the rich, influential men who do sacrificial **** as was stated by Charlie Lange in prison like it often happens in real life.

All the theories re: the strong hints about Maggie's family might actually still be true - we're just not allowed the closure and I think that's fine. I worked myself up to a fever speculating and expecting the finale to revolve around Maggie, Maggie's dad, Audrey etc. and was slightly disappointed initially that it did not go down that way after all the hints but on re-watching and with time, I'm happy with how it ended. TD just too good for closure that big in 60 minutes, would appear very forced.

What a show though, by far the best current show I'm following. Just ****s on GoT, Mad Men etc.
 

G.I.Joe

Well-known member
It's interesting that the writer went on record saying that HP Lovecraft's works do not exist in the show's universe. I was not familiar with Lovecraft's works previously, but having brushed up a bit after watching the show, it seems odd to me to take away the suggestion that these (well, Errol at the very least) weren't just sick bastards who had read his books and were way too influenced by them. Or at the very least used the concepts from the books as an excuse to engage in those acts.

Also makes me wonder about the writer's intentions when he shows us the portal opening up right at the climax. It is probably meant to be yet another one of Rusty's hallucinations, but it seems awfully convenient that it is the exact same thing that would be expected were we to assume that Carcosa is real and exists.
 

G.I.Joe

Well-known member
Apparently Brad Pitt is is talks to play the lead in season 2. Rumours are that he wants to go solo, which sounds like a dumb idea to me because what made the show special was the interaction between the two leads.
 

Ruckus

Well-known member
I quite like Brad Pitt but I feel like it he would struggle to keep a show going on his own. He doesn't have the acting finesse of Mcconaughey. Really depends which direction they go with it though I guess. If they make it more of a 'se7en'-like thriller it could work pretty well for him, but if they try and keep it as a similar slow-burn, existential kind of thing I can only see it ending up as a watered down version of the previous season. You can't really best what they just did in the first season, so I hope they try and take it somewhere quite different and unexpected.
 

Uppercut

Well-known member
Just finished this. Pretty good all-round, but I wasn't a fan of the finale. They spent the first seven episodes weaving together a fairly complex plot, then the entire final episode was just the two lead cops hunting down a maniac.
 

insa80

Member
The killer, Errol Childress, was a Psycho nutcase who killed children and played out cult sacrifice. It is implied as a child he was abused by his Grandfather Sam Tuttle, and other members of the family, in weird cult sacrifices.
 

Riggins

Well-known member
The killer, Errol Childress, was a Psycho nutcase who killed children and played out cult sacrifice. It is implied as a child he was abused by his Grandfather Sam Tuttle, and other members of the family, in weird cult sacrifices.
solid analysis, bro.
 
Top