True Detective

:

Season 2
  • Network: HBO
  • Series Premiere Date: Jan 12, 2014
Season #: 4, 3, 2, 1
User Score
6.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 837 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 479 out of 837
  2. Mixed: 192 out of 837
  3. Negative: 166 out of 837
Watch Now

Where To Watch

Buy on
Stream On

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

view
per page
  1. jlplatten
    Jul 7, 2015
    4
    Season 1 was perfection. Season 2 is boring. After three episodes, I figured out why I don't care about this story. It's because the murder victim is a dirty old corrupt politician. I don't feel bad for him, so I don't even care if these detectives solve the crime. On top of that, we have really boring characters, and too many of them. The first season kept it simple. Two detectives tryingSeason 1 was perfection. Season 2 is boring. After three episodes, I figured out why I don't care about this story. It's because the murder victim is a dirty old corrupt politician. I don't feel bad for him, so I don't even care if these detectives solve the crime. On top of that, we have really boring characters, and too many of them. The first season kept it simple. Two detectives trying to find a murderer killing innocent girls. Yes, the detectives had demons of their own, but we could over look that and still cheer for them because the killer in the show was way more heinous. We wanted justice while also watching two amazing characters (and actors) clash in the process. The second season is way more complex. We have three detectives, each with their own group behind them trying to push their agendas. Too much. I would say the only interesting story in this show is the piece where the crime lord is trying to figure out who screwed him out of his multi-million dollar deal, causing him to abandon his white-collar criminal approach and return to his gangster roots to find some answers. The acting is mediocre, and the dialogue is flat. This season is probably a lost cause, and hopefully the showmakers will learn from their mistakes and go back to what works when it comes to story telling.… Expand
  2. Raven25
    Jun 21, 2015
    4
    Let me start out by saying I had high hopes for this after season 1. I really was a fan. But season 2 is a let down. Pure and simple. Nothing terrible, just not interesting or entertaining, and simply not worth the time and effort to follow.

    The story is not particularly cohesive, the acting is truly down a notch (or several). There don't really appear to be many themes, and the ones    Let me start out by saying I had high hopes for this after season 1. I really was a fan. But season 2 is a let down. Pure and simple. Nothing terrible, just not interesting or entertaining, and simply not worth the time and effort to follow.

    The story is not particularly cohesive, the acting is truly down a notch (or several). There don't really appear to be many themes, and the ones that exist aren't particularly interesting. I think that the series has turned away from being character driven to being plot driven. This is a mistake.

    A significant part of the series seems to have been a response to feminist criticism of what was a brilliant first season. I guess this is the difference between a TV series that unashamedly wants to create something brilliant and a TV series that is so scared of critics that it panders to them at the expense of engaging with anything interesting.

    All I can say to the writers is: challenge me with something, don't give me a bunch of people with problems circling each other. To the directors: bring back the eerie suspense of season 1 and the darkness that all characters go through, the appeal of season 1 was that both lead characters went through a very dark shared experience and their worldviews determined what they got out of it as well as what they shared with each other. Don't give me a bunch of alcoholics with anger problems and daddy issues.    … Expand
  3. yrogerg123
    Aug 17, 2015
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Reviewing the second season of True Detective is delicate because criticizing it is the trendy thing to do. But honestly, I think the criticism is fair and well-deserved. As far as I'm concerned the first season was nearly flawless, and that has to be the starting point of any review of the second. The dynamic between McConaughey and Harrelson was as interesting a relationship as I've seen on television, and the way their characters trended in different directions while interacting the whole time more or less carried the audience through what could have been considered flaws in the story. It set the standard for what the writers could do with good actors, and make no mistake, the cast of season 2 is very good. Any plot holes in season one weren't as noticeable because it was enjoyable to watch.

    The second season just didn't produce the enjoyment as the first. It's hard to state simply why, because it's a complicated and ambitious show, and fell short in a number of different ways. And honestly, it's not that the second season is terrible. It's just not nearly as good as the first season, and feels the way sequels often do. The first was remarkably good, but I don't think the writers knew exactly why it was so good, so instead of searching for the chemistry between the main characters, they decided that McConaughey's one liners made the first season great. But that was just a piece of the whole. And without the chemistry, and the story, the world in which it was set, and the richness of McConaughey's character, the things he said would have been awkward and out of place. I know that because many characters in season two speak the way McConaughey did, and when they do, it feels awkward and out of place.

    One of the bigger flaws in my opinion is that the three detectives meet each other for the first time at the end of the first episode, by coincidence, based solely on a jurisdictional disagreement among departments. Each department wants a piece of this murder for different reasons, so these three people are thrown together without ever having met. The characters are all similar personalities: aloof and self-involved. None of them really let other people in and none of them particularly like to talk. They don't have much chemistry with each other and don't even appear to particularly like each other. Contrast this with McConaughey who, despite his aloofness, has a pathological need to speak his mind and be heard.

    This is all problematic because they don't actually build a relationship with each other that the audience can see. When it comes time for them to take huge risks because they supposedly care about each other, it doesn't seem like they would have any reason to. In the absence of explosive action, there is nothing of interest that these people do when they're together. They drive in cars and talk to witnesses, but the dialogue is always flat, always impersonal, and always monotone. It often feels like they share their thoughts in awkward one liners because it would be too weird to have TV characters that don't speak at all.

    But they don't come off as human, they come off as depressed automatons, and it makes for a show that is not all that enjoyable to watch. Even when Farrell and McAdams sleep together, it's after a truly awkward exchange where they each share their own personal trauma, and then afterwards they sit on the opposite end of the room, not talking, while the camera switches from one to the other over the course of hours. Maybe it's true to the characters but it's not good TV.

    My biggest problem with the show is the dialogue. They all try to talk the way McConaughey did in season one, but none of them are that interesting, or frankly, well-written, so instead they drop these depressing one liners in lieu of dialogue. McConaughey was a character with a truly unique worldview. He didn't see the world the way others did, and it made him a great detective but a miserable human being. But the three detectives in this season? They're just depressed people who experienced serious trauma, awish they could escape but know they can't. That could be interesting, but they all try to talk the way McConaughey did even though it makes no sense for them to be talking that way. They don't see more deeply, they're just depressed. They're vulnerable in a way he wasn't, but not pathological in their need to solve the murder, or even to understand the universe. McConaughey was searching for truth, but he knew who he was. These people just want to escape their own lives. I think the writers asked "what would happen if three McConaughey's crashed into each other?" but instead found out what would happen if three people who shouldn't be anything like him decided to act just like him for no discernible reason. The result is awkward, disjointed and underwhelming.

    The most disappointing thing is how much acting talent there was to work with, but how little there was to show for it in the end product.    … Expand
  4. moonjo
    Aug 6, 2015
    4
    Too many protagonists - not enough time for them to develop, harder for viewers to be interested in them.
    Weak plot - it's just weak. Never once have I felt intrigued about the 'big reveal'. In first 3 episodes, I was curious about the masked man. But he just disappeared and I really don't care anymore.
    Season 1 - season 1 was a masterpiece. And it has raised the bar way too high. This    Too many protagonists - not enough time for them to develop, harder for viewers to be interested in them.
    Weak plot - it's just weak. Never once have I felt intrigued about the 'big reveal'. In first 3 episodes, I was curious about the masked man. But he just disappeared and I really don't care anymore.
    Season 1 - season 1 was a masterpiece. And it has raised the bar way too high. This happens a lot for all the sequels. I remember watching the Pacific and being disappointed because Band of Brothers was so epic.
    Bottom line - if you haven't started watching season 2, don't bother until you really don't have anything better to do.    … Expand
  5. TheApplegnome
    Sep 17, 2015
    5
    The second continuation failed to deliver almost everything that the first one became famous for. It’s not as unique, inventive or artistic. But it's still stylish, and of course beautifully shot. But it’s not even close to the first entry.

    One of the greatest aspects with the first season was the incredible characters. I was so obsessed and attached to them. The story was also a major    The second continuation failed to deliver almost everything that the first one became famous for. It’s not as unique, inventive or artistic. But it's still stylish, and of course beautifully shot. But it’s not even close to the first entry.

    One of the greatest aspects with the first season was the incredible characters. I was so obsessed and attached to them. The story was also a major aspect; so beautiful, deep and full of metamorphic storylines. This second season is much less ‘True Detective’, it’s more like a classic, clichéish tv-show that doesn't stand out in any way. It still got its style but it’s much less entertaining. It’s in fact a major letdown due to much boring dialogs and an overall less interesting plot. But it’s still a bit artistic, even though I might not enjoy it as much as season one. It’s still very well written and there’s nothing really bad about it, it’s just too slow sometimes. It’s still very flawless, just as the first season, but it’s too slow for me.

    Slow and very boring, but still critically great.

    Personal rating: 5.5/10
    Critical rating: 7/10    … Expand
  6. gerald-n-piggie
    Aug 6, 2015
    5
    I loved Season 1 and promised myself to judge Season 2 alone without making unfair comparisons. That being said, Season 2 is just missing the mark for me.

    Pros - the episodes have been getting better through the season. Cons - Too many characters and overly complex storyline within a 8 week format. If this exact storyline was stretched over a couple of seasons it would give you more    I loved Season 1 and promised myself to judge Season 2 alone without making unfair comparisons. That being said, Season 2 is just missing the mark for me.

    Pros - the episodes have been getting better through the season.

    Cons - Too many characters and overly complex storyline within a 8 week format. If this exact storyline was stretched over a couple of seasons it would give you more time to develop the characters and for the audience to follow along. I don't feel any strong emotional connection to the characters or the crime.

    Also, I 1000% understand that this is fiction and supposed to a type of film noir/pulp saga, but I can't get over how completely improbable the plot is. I just flat out don't believe most of it. I keep thinking - at the first whiff of THIS level of corruption the Feds would be brought in - they leave something this large and important to 4 policemen originally.

    People are being murdered and everyone keeps quiet. Most corruption in the US government is about money sometimes sex. The minute people start ending up dead (Caspere, the security guard, Tasha), the average politician is going to peace out. I'm also laughing at ridiculous scenes such as Vince Vaughn's mobster character just walking right into the Mayor's office to discuss their illegal dealings right there in the open, or the scene at the orgy where the bad guys loudly explain what they're doing illegally tapping the documents and leaving them on the table in the open. Again, I know this is fiction, and if stylistically it was set to be more like a graphic or pulp novel (think the movie Sin City), then I wouldn't bat an eye, but that's not the overall style so it seems off.    … Expand
  7. BlackFox81
    Aug 9, 2015
    6
    This season felt overwhelming too many main characters and story lines intersected, not sure why the chp guy turned out to closet homo and I'm not sure was his issues in Iraq when he was military or was he working with a pmc black mountain. Dunno I liked Vince vaughen But I just can't see him as a gangster. Sooo overall this season is okay not great like season 1 but alright.
  8. MiamiLopez
    Aug 10, 2015
    6
    Acting was decent by the main characters.
    The story was not clear and hard to follow.
    There was not true conclusion. The story has a beginning middle and no end. Story should have started in 1992 riots with the actual murders of two business owners. The conclusion should have played itself out to show viewers someone going to jail or dead. It was a BIG letdown after season 1 which    Acting was decent by the main characters.
    The story was not clear and hard to follow.
    There was not true conclusion. The story has a beginning middle and no end.
    Story should have started in 1992 riots with the actual murders of two business owners.
    The conclusion should have played itself out to show viewers someone going to jail or dead.
    It was a BIG letdown after season 1 which was a complete story line that traveled well through a bona-fide conclusion. Can someone say the Sopranos meets Jeopardy? I am still wondering who Stan was.    … Expand
  9. Mantis
    Aug 20, 2015
    5
    I would skip this season. It's interesting enough but may be confusing or downright I don't give a f*ck. Spend your time on other series instead! I loved season 1 but this is disappointing.
  10. Danil
    Sep 1, 2015
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It all starts within the first few minutes of the first episode. Velcoro is given a photo of a presumed rapist. It doesn't occur to him that when a dark haired latino man rapes a dark haired woman it is fairly unlikely the rape child is going to be ginger. True detective my ass.

    Everyone seems to be upset with acting. But the acting is actually fine, just a bit unconventional.

    The problem is with all the discrepancies and holes in the story, that they seemed to try to cover by overwhelming viewers with **** of irrelevant information and names.    … Expand
  11. MightyThor
    Oct 21, 2015
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Judged on its own season 2 of True Detective isn't that awful. It did keep my attention and I watched the whole thing in three days. It had exciting moments. But there are a couple gigantic flaws with it.

    First Vince Vaughn's acting sucks. He is the exact same character as he is in every movie, old school, wedding crashers, swingers. The way he delivers his dialogue could be right out of one of those movies, I just can't take him seriously. Like that inside is solid gold speech to Stan's kid, it sounded like he'd go you're a winner Mikey! at any moment, exact same delivery, just doesn't sound genuine. Same thing when he was conceding the club to Osip at the end, how Osip fell for that I have no idea cus it wasn't even close to genuine.

    Secondly the plot was stupid. It tried too hard when really it was just a boring government corruption plot with a tiny twist of the two orphan's thrown in.

    The end was entirely predictable, and really just one of those bummer endings for bummer ending's sake. I thought a more clever ending where everyone ends up ok would have been harder to do but worth it. It felt like a cop out. And way too sterotypical, bad cop falls in love with his partner in the end, yeah saw that coming too.

    The characters themselves were interesting but they were horrible detectives. I mean they sucked at seeing the obvious. This shouldn't have taken this many episodes to figure out the conspiracy.

    Things I did like, Rachel Mcadam's and Colin Ferral's acting was superb even if they were hamstrung by their limited dialogue at times. Mcadam's character was too one dimensional as well, but her acting made the character feel genuine. Taylor Kitsch was also amazing in his role.

    It's not an awful show but just pales in comparison to the original and really tries way too hard to be something it wasn't. This is basically an 8 episode version of a Michel Mann action flick like heat or something, not a psychological thriller like the first season. An example, when Ani is at the sex party the music goes all classical on us for the flashbacks. It was confusing, didn't fit any other parts of the show. I think they just threw it in to be artsy and edgy and it did not work at all.    … Expand
  12. NotoriousFraud
    Oct 8, 2015
    5
    It's always hard to live up to expectations, especially after the lightning in a bottle which was the first season. But what really bugs me is that there is little to no cohesiveness in this seasons plot, don't get me wrong there are some really terrific performances here even though there is twice the amount of desired main characters there should be, but it's also at the service of weakIt's always hard to live up to expectations, especially after the lightning in a bottle which was the first season. But what really bugs me is that there is little to no cohesiveness in this seasons plot, don't get me wrong there are some really terrific performances here even though there is twice the amount of desired main characters there should be, but it's also at the service of weak as hell writing thanks to a rushed script. Listen, i'm not one to be quick to says it's hands down the worst premium television season this year, but that won't exactly make up for slack pacing and the 'what the hell was that ?' brain fart of a season finale. The final verdict, well Mr. Pizzolatto, 'That little detail, maybe, way down the line, breaks the case.'… Expand
  13. urnotmymother
    Aug 19, 2015
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Whilst the visuals were quite nice and consistent throughout the entire season, and Vince Vaughn managed to really step up his game from his usual Hollywood trash, season 2 was quite the disappointment. Apart from the depressing humming of a solo guitarist at the bar, most of that sinister country vibe that I felt so strongly in season 1 was entirely missing in season 2's urban setting. The true detectives were this time a pathetic trio of losers wallowing in self pity. Sure i guess they looked real cool most of the time with their constant nihilism, but to me they were just watered down copies of McCounaghey's character which worked so well in season 1. Rachel McAdam played an unconvincing role of being what she perceived a strong detective with commitment issues and a real i don't give a **** about anything, boyish attitude (while still maintaining an expensive and complex girly brown to blonde ombre haircut which probably cost her money and many girly trips to the salon). Colin Farrell was quite convincing in his role as detective Ray, who's life was spinning out of control. Although I find it difficult to believe that he and Rachel McAdam's character would fall madly in love in the last two episodes (why the hell did that happen, how the hell did that happen?) Taylor Kitsch played PTSD closet homosexual detective number 3, but man, he was dead before i could see his character develop, or maybe he was just a boring guy? That was it, there was no depth in their characters, no striking insight in what they said. I feel like they were bad cops in general, turning detective work into a boohoo support group. Not exactly the kind of people you would want to liven your birthday party, but even in a cop drama, they were difficult to like and watch.… Expand
  14. Arcon
    Aug 10, 2015
    5
    Meh, just meh. Story is extremely overcomplicated and told via hard to hear and understand dialogue(rewinding to try and understand what was just said) about characters you have already forgotten about or never knew their names.

    Just not worth the trouble watching.
  15. HabaneroTube
    Aug 3, 2015
    5
    I actually fell asleep in the the season premiere. I really tried to stay awake. Rachel McAdams and Vince Vaughn are mediocre actors that look like "ok, this is my serious face now, can you see it"? It's quite annoying.

    The presence of fine acting in season 1 weighs against the performances in season 2. It's an unbeatable premise and the formulaic approach to achieve the same dramatic    I actually fell asleep in the the season premiere. I really tried to stay awake. Rachel McAdams and Vince Vaughn are mediocre actors that look like "ok, this is my serious face now, can you see it"? It's quite annoying.

    The presence of fine acting in season 1 weighs against the performances in season 2. It's an unbeatable premise and the formulaic approach to achieve the same dramatic chemistry is fruitless since the new cast is still discovering themselves to partake in haute drama and it shows...and it's very painful at times.

    I'll be watching reruns of season 1.    … Expand
  16. GreyAllan
    Jul 8, 2015
    4
    This season starts off pretty confusing with all those different characters that apparently need the same screen time. Why not leave some story lines to the imagination and let the viewer solve the puzzle. This is still true detective right?
  17. imthenoob
    Jul 22, 2015
    4
    The story is no where near as captivating, The characters, aside from Ray Velcoro, are pathetic and weak. The show suffers from terrible miscasting as well, Taylor Kitsch just doesn't fit and Rachel McAdams sticks out like a sore thumb. What ruins season 2 is that they failed to set anything up in the first episode, There's no big mystery, No big crime. It's all heavy focus on theThe story is no where near as captivating, The characters, aside from Ray Velcoro, are pathetic and weak. The show suffers from terrible miscasting as well, Taylor Kitsch just doesn't fit and Rachel McAdams sticks out like a sore thumb. What ruins season 2 is that they failed to set anything up in the first episode, There's no big mystery, No big crime. It's all heavy focus on the character's back stories with no real help for the main plot.

    Now I am not saying it's a god awful show. Colin Farrell is a saving grace as Velcoro and the only reason the show is worth watching. Vince Vaughn also does a surprisingly pretty good job in his role too. If the writing material was a bit better, I am sure one of these guys would secure an emmy nomination for their role.    … Expand
  18. sshpv
    Jun 30, 2015
    6
    It's good, but not great. Season 2 has it's strong sides, such as cast and directing, but the plot is just middling, never bringing a fresh idea or plot twist. We've already seen it all.
  19. MattBrady99
    Aug 25, 2015
    5
    Season 2 isn't as good as the first season which is a real damn shame saying that. Season 2 wasn't bad and I tried to watch season 2 as it's own season but I still didn't get into it.

    Colin Farrell, Rachael McAdams, Taylor Kitsch, and surprisingly Vince Vaughn were all great in this season. But season 2 felt like it was trying too hard to be miserable on purpose and everything was way    Season 2 isn't as good as the first season which is a real damn shame saying that. Season 2 wasn't bad and I tried to watch season 2 as it's own season but I still didn't get into it.

    Colin Farrell, Rachael McAdams, Taylor Kitsch, and surprisingly Vince Vaughn were all great in this season. But season 2 felt like it was trying too hard to be miserable on purpose and everything was way too serious for it's own good. It didn't help that a good looking cast like this trying to act like the world is weighing on their shoulders and walking around acting depressed. As the show went on I got a little bit uninterested on what was going on, because everything that the second season is trying to do is try to work on something that's not going to work or going nowhere.

    Overall True Detective: Season 2 was pretty disappointing, but I do know that some people have enjoyed and liked this season and that's fine, but my opinion on this season isn't going to charge anytime soon.    … Expand
  20. fbtimesofficial
    Aug 13, 2015
    6
    The genius of True Detective's second season is that it's overwritten, not as compelling as its predecessor, and at times a little too arrogant for its own good - and yet the characters are more fully developed, the cinematography is some type of miracle, and the setting - a California that's apparently all there but mysteriously slightly off - perfectly highlights this season's attitudeThe genius of True Detective's second season is that it's overwritten, not as compelling as its predecessor, and at times a little too arrogant for its own good - and yet the characters are more fully developed, the cinematography is some type of miracle, and the setting - a California that's apparently all there but mysteriously slightly off - perfectly highlights this season's attitude towards the series as a whole.… Expand
  21. ahndrew
    Aug 9, 2015
    5
    **** horse **** The entire season was great don't get me wrong. The first seven episodes lead up to a very important ending that puts you on the edge of your seat. And then the edge of that seat becomes the most disappointing gentle ride you can possibly imagine. No twist, no surprise, just everyone dying except the one character that you don't care about. Woody and Mathew, come on guys,**** horse **** The entire season was great don't get me wrong. The first seven episodes lead up to a very important ending that puts you on the edge of your seat. And then the edge of that seat becomes the most disappointing gentle ride you can possibly imagine. No twist, no surprise, just everyone dying except the one character that you don't care about. Woody and Mathew, come on guys, you can do better.… Expand
  22. PJD
    Jul 20, 2015
    4
    It feels inferior to season 1 on all fronts. The plot, the subplots, the acting and even the theme song are inferior to the first season.

    You know you really aren't feeling it when episode four goes into episode five and you are confused as to who is who and what is going on. I chalk this up to not caring what happens to any of these characters. Vaughn's troubled villain is fine but    It feels inferior to season 1 on all fronts. The plot, the subplots, the acting and even the theme song are inferior to the first season.

    You know you really aren't feeling it when episode four goes into episode five and you are confused as to who is who and what is going on. I chalk this up to not caring what happens to any of these characters.

    Vaughn's troubled villain is fine but McAdam's tough detective doesn't work with her shaky voice in a lot of scenes. She's just not a tough type of person and it shows here.

    Farrell's bad cop with a conscious feels the same. Probably because in every scene he shares with another actor he is eclipsed. Nothing about his character stands out.

    Kitsch plays a good cop in a closet but it feels like one of those plot lines the story didn't need.

    All in all this is a pretty mundane followup to the first season. I would argue that True Detective season 2 is not even on par with the crime dramas from the 80s. Even soap operas have it beat.    … Expand
  23. ThemBakerBoys
    Jul 17, 2015
    6
    I am hesitant to review a show before seeing the ending but I think I have seen enough to lodge a complaint or two. There is something about the pace of season 2 that makes it feel like we are still on the salad course and waiting for the steak to arrive. I'm all for a little teasing and anticipation but precious episodes are ticking by. Where season 1 felt like each episode could beI am hesitant to review a show before seeing the ending but I think I have seen enough to lodge a complaint or two. There is something about the pace of season 2 that makes it feel like we are still on the salad course and waiting for the steak to arrive. I'm all for a little teasing and anticipation but precious episodes are ticking by. Where season 1 felt like each episode could be watched and rewatched, savored and enjoyed on it's own merits, season 2 has yet to make that impact. I liked season one so much that my wife bought the series on blu ray so I could share it with non HBO friends of ours. As it stands I will continue to watch and enjoy Season two but I don't see any reason to own the series. However, we have not seen the end of the series and there may be a conclusion coming that elevates the entire story line and makes us want to revisit from Ep. 1. I sure hope so.… Expand
  24. Prosmooth
    Jul 14, 2015
    4
    Really bad compared to the first season. Got the cop who should have probably been a hooker. The self hating queer cop. The psychotic alcoholic cop. The most boring villain since the last time Vince Vaughn played a villain. Add in bad dialogue, and David Morse walking around looking like Jesus Christ Superstar--and you have season 2 of True Detective. It is pretty to look at--I give it 4Really bad compared to the first season. Got the cop who should have probably been a hooker. The self hating queer cop. The psychotic alcoholic cop. The most boring villain since the last time Vince Vaughn played a villain. Add in bad dialogue, and David Morse walking around looking like Jesus Christ Superstar--and you have season 2 of True Detective. It is pretty to look at--I give it 4 for its cinematic qualities. Oh, and it has mean Mexicans in it. Almost forgot.… Expand
  25. shadow47
    Jun 22, 2015
    5
    This season of True Detective is bad by its own merits. We needn't compare it to the stellar season 1 to reach that conclusion. The dialog is fragmented and full of nonsensical one-liners that are passed on as profound, the main characters all seem slightly different variations of each other, and the acting is too stiff and monotonous. I mean, I have always wanted to ask this of someone inThis season of True Detective is bad by its own merits. We needn't compare it to the stellar season 1 to reach that conclusion. The dialog is fragmented and full of nonsensical one-liners that are passed on as profound, the main characters all seem slightly different variations of each other, and the acting is too stiff and monotonous. I mean, I have always wanted to ask this of someone in the business: Does Taylor Kitsch have some powerful uncle in Hollywood? Because he has been bad in every film and TV show that I've seen him. And yet he still gets major roles everywhere. Anyway.

    However the central mystery of this season ends up unwinding, very well or very bad, it will not mitigate from its many mediocrities and shortcomings that were clearly evident in episode 1.

    P.S. Some people will give this season unjustifiably high ratings to "offset" what they believe to be malicious scoring by "non-fans". But if you look at my review of season 1, you'll see that I gave it a deserved 10/10.

    P.P.S. I did enjoy the music, including the opening theme. That is why it gets a 5 instead of a 3 from me.    … Expand
  26. TheQuietGamer
    Jul 5, 2015
    4
    Let's be honest, we all knew this was never going to live up to the first season. So I'm not even going to talk about how it stacks up to last season. I'm strictly going to review this season based on it's own merits. Unfortunately it doesn't have many. It stumbles in just about every key area.

    The first place is in the case itself. So far it's just not interesting. There is a    Let's be honest, we all knew this was never going to live up to the first season. So I'm not even going to talk about how it stacks up to last season. I'm strictly going to review this season based on it's own merits. Unfortunately it doesn't have many. It stumbles in just about every key area.

    The first place is in the case itself. So far it's just not interesting. There is a compelling sense of weirdness to it, but overall tries way too hard to come off as dark and mysterious. It's constantly hinting at a bunch of bigger things going on, but fails to let viewers in on them. I get that the case has to have some mystery to it in order to get going, but this season moves so slow that after three episodes I somehow know even less about the case than I originally did. I'm not even entirely sure I still know what it's about. Also, why is Vince Vaughn's character even here? He's not a detective and his story seems only barely related to the case at hand so far. He's mostly off doing his own thing that's even less interesting then what the rest of the cast is doing.

    Speaking of the cast let's talk about how poor they are. Taylor Kitsch? Really? Why are they still trying to make this guy a thing? His work here is just as lifeless, forced, and boring as everything else he has done. It looks like they are trying to do some interesting things with his character by having him struggle with his sexuality, but his acting is so poor that it's hard to care. Ditch him Hollywood. He's done you nothing but harm so far. Rachel McAdams is a good actress, so long as it's the right type of role. She simply does not belong in a gritty and dark drama like this one, at least in my opinion. The evidence is in her work here. The character she plays has the potential to be interesting, but McAdams doesn't know how to bring her to life. The same thing extends to Vaughn, except that his character doesn't feel interesting. His inclusion just feels useless and Vaughn is better used for comedies. At least that is what his work here says. As for Colin Farrell, he's actually fantastic. He gives a top-notch performance and brings his violent and weird character to life. He's the highlight of the show.

    With the exception of Farrell the cast and characters suffer from having interesting backstories that aren't fleshed out or really touched upon much at all yet, miscast actors, and bad dialog. That's another big problem with the show; dialog. The show tries way too hard to come off as dark and mature. We get it. The character are damaged. Why do we have to listen to them spit out clichéd and cheesy one-liners that fail to come off as deep of thought-provoking like the writers intended for them to be? The conversations characters have just end up going nowhere. The only character with anything interesting to say is Farrell. They have really done great things with him on this show.

    The second season of "True Detective" is a disappointment, and not just because it doesn't live up to the first season. With the exception of Farrell and some weird moments involving dudes in masks the show's second season just isn't worth watching. It shows promise, but it just isn't being realized right now. Maybe the show will get better as it progresses. If it does I'll update this review. As of right now though it's just not worth your time in my opinion. There are better and more intelligent things on TV right now.    … Expand
  27. Knighthawk81
    Jun 22, 2015
    6
    I loved the first season of "True Detective," the aesthetic appeal, the slow burn of the narrative, and the powerful performances. But I didn't love its first episode. The same might end up being true of the second season. The premiere was OK, but it wasn't incredibly compelling. This could certainly develop, and I like the actors here, but the premiere felt like a let down.
  28. Amiria
    Aug 4, 2015
    5
    the most problem with this season is CASTING i don't know who's pick this actors and actress but honestly there's no way to colin farrell plays with vince vaughn and also VINCE not good for that character everytime i see vince in true detective i remind his role at starsky & hutch and i laugh :D
  29. Karamos2000
    Jul 28, 2015
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Okay. Its not anything like the first season. Story is convoluted and muddled (I'm fine with that). Sub story regarding the "son"is poor. Aside from Vince Vaughn, acting thin (Colin Farrell is bad) The problem, the new director hasn't been able to weave all of this together. When Ray was shot with us (the audience) caught off guard, that was a plot changer. Next episode everything a okay. The shootout, every cop hit except the main character. Suspense was needed here. Its kinda like a David Lynch film without suspense or intrigue. Nor do you develop empathy for the characters.… Expand
  30. andreasng
    Jun 24, 2015
    6
    Season one was one of the most modern and compelling crime series of this decade. It kept itself short and good, if something was a bit off it was the ending, but that is up for discussion. S1 was good, very good. It was slow, soecific, focused and most of all very very compelling. The characters was charming in every way.

    S2 has gone downhill. It is fast, storytelling-wise, it tells    Season one was one of the most modern and compelling crime series of this decade. It kept itself short and good, if something was a bit off it was the ending, but that is up for discussion. S1 was good, very good. It was slow, soecific, focused and most of all very very compelling. The characters was charming in every way.

    S2 has gone downhill. It is fast, storytelling-wise, it tells the audience "stuff" - and it tells the audience alot of it. "Stuff" can be interesting, "stuff" can be the difference between a plausible world and an implausible world. The characters seems less different than the characters in the last season. But most interesting of all, the first episode end with a desire to tell me more, but leaves me with a desire to not really follow the series no more. That is a tough thing to say, and I will watch the future episodes, but the fact that it doesn't give me some sort of cliff to hang on to is not good. 7 episodes to make up for it, if it ends "better" than S1 then I'll be happy as well.

    First impression, not super good. Sadly.    … Expand
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

4
#4 Most Discussed TV Season of 2015
56
#56 Most Shared TV Season of 2015

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
61

Generally favorable reviews - based on 41 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 41
  2. Mixed: 21 out of 41
  3. Negative: 0 out of 41
  1. Wall Street Journal
    Reviewed by: John Anderson
    Jun 23, 2015
    50
    True Deetective is both underwritten and over-plotted.
    Read full review
  2. The Lincoln Journal Star
    Reviewed by: Jeff Korbelik
    Jun 22, 2015
    75
    It’s difficult to like or root for any of the four, making this one difficult watch. Still, creator and writer Nic Pizzolatto has a knack for storytelling and character development. Especially intriguing is Farrell.
    Read full review
  3. Kansas City Star
    Reviewed by: Sara Smith
    Jun 22, 2015
    60
    Although it was wise not to try to repeat the double interrogation format of the first season, there are clever nods to those closed-room confessionals, and the show eventually eases into rewarding drive-and-talks between Farrell and McAdams.... What keeps this Detective from being quite as compelling as the first is the lack of early focus.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »