True Detective Season Two Review: A Bloated Treat

Have you ever had a really great piece of sushi ruined by, let’s say, a chef’s overactive imagination? You start with a piece of really good fish, but by the time they add the spicy mayo, the avocado, that bonus piece of eel, you’ve got something of a monster. Something weighed down and bloated that’s still tasty, but could have been better if the chef had stuck to the basics.

More from HBO

That’s kind of what the second season of True Detective is like.

The second season of True Detective was never concerned with the mystery of the crow man or even really Caspere’s death.

Beneath all of Nic Pizzolatto’s twisting, “isn’t this super noir and psychological?” dialogue, is a good season of dramatic television. But that doesn’t become evident until the halfway point, and by then many fans and critics wrote the season off as a failure. That didn’t stop them from watching, however, as True Detective’s ratings fell each week — but not enough to be considered outrageous or even out of the ordinary. But I guess that depends on who you ask.

The second season of True Detective was never concerned with the mystery of the crow man or even really Caspere’s death. Not really. Not seriously. Sometimes that worked to the show’s benefit, like in the scenes between Ray and his son, or the moment between Ray and Ani in the end. Or Ray and Frank in the bar. Notice how Ray keeps popping up here? That’s because he’s the only character to have enough character growth to be interesting, and he’s the one to get by far the most attention from Pizzolatto.

When you have something as crazy as a man in a crow mask use a shotgun on a main character, that gets people’s attention. And then, of course, it doesn’t go anywhere and people forget. Even the main characters move on from that particular mystery, though they do return to the masked man at very end. There’s no issue with True Detective being more about the detectives than the actual case, but Pizzolatto can’t seem to figure out the balance.

It’s frustrating because there is something special about season two, even with all of its issues.

It’s frustrating because there is something special about season two, even with all of its issues. It’s adherence to some dark code made it feel as if Rust’s idea of pessimism was being personified, even if some fans and critics found it to be oppressive and boring. To True Detective’s credit, it was willing to go further than I thought it would. Three main characters died in the end.

Frank’s death still stands as the highpoint of the season, and is one of the best scenes Pizzolatto ever wrote. On the other hand, Paul’s death felt like a waste of a character. Paul experienced no growth, made no new personal relationship, which acted as one big red flag. The show wouldn’t really be missing anything if he was cut entirely.

What True Detective season two lacks, more than anything else, is focus. It’s a bit of a sloppy mess, and is perhaps a testament to why Nic Pizzolatto needs a writing team, or at least a permanent cowriter. But maybe that would rob True Detective of what it really is: Nic Pizzolatto’s wild, wild ride. Even with all the problems of season two, it was still an enjoyable hour of television each week.

It’s still good, still enjoyable. It’s just too unfocused, and there’s too much fat to keep track of. But you can bet good money that I’ll be watching it again soon.

Next: Read Jacob's take on True Detective season two.

More from Show Snob

Home/HBO