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. NavyBean
    Jul 7, 2015
    3
    Characters are not likable and there are too many of them. Rachel McAdams trying to act tough is laughable. Pizzolatto read too many of his reviews for season 1 and it's all coming undone. Pretentious and slow with characters we've seen before saying things that are neither profound nor interesting. Zzzz.
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. TravisFinn
    Aug 11, 2015
    0
    I remember seeing the first episode of the season and laughing my ass off at how embarrassingly bad the writing, story and casting seemed already. But I decided to give it time because Season 1 was a masterpiece of southern gothic and noir themes mixing into a great crime drama.

    What a waste of time though. Nic Pizzolatto originally wanted to create Season 1 as a novel but luckily    I remember seeing the first episode of the season and laughing my ass off at how embarrassingly bad the writing, story and casting seemed already. But I decided to give it time because Season 1 was a masterpiece of southern gothic and noir themes mixing into a great crime drama.

    What a waste of time though.

    Nic Pizzolatto originally wanted to create Season 1 as a novel but luckily got the chance to transform it into a TV series because what he wrote was better than some penny novel you might pick up at an airport shop if you're bored. The producers and him knew that story was special. Along the way however, the idea of making it an anthology show also gave it reason to become a TV series instead of a film.

    Needless to say he was pretty arrogant thinking he could strike gold twice. Season 2 feels like the most rushed piece of petty crime crap you can find on public cable. It's like a goddamn Law & Order special with a bigger budget.

    The cast in this season is irredeemable; not only can they not function and work off each other in meaningful and interesting ways, but alone, they almost fail as characters themselves. Colin Farrell, Rachael Adams and Taylor Kitsch play **** up cops and Vince Vaugn plays the dumbest looking and weakest punk-ass gangster I've ever seen. His presence as a 'power-player' in this series is a joke. The character development in this story is so sloppy and unfavorably depressive. What ultimately kills it however as I just said, they do not work off each other. Each is the same as the last, corrupt to the tooth and too sad-sack for anyone to give a **** about them.

    The story is confusing, muddled, and ultimately unsatisfactory. We know off-the-bat that the city is run by corrupt police and officials. So who did the crime? Take a goddamn guess anyone who seriously thought this was going anywhere. No secret societies, no hint of maybe-supernaturals going on, and no references to anything we can research on and discuss. The story is cut and dry, you get whats explained if you follow the mumble-jumble spouted by each character when something needs explaining.

    No mystery.

    For anyone who might disagree for my references to season 1 because it somehow shouldn't have any bearing on why I was hyped for a second season, well you're just stupid. And that argument is stupid.

    The fact of the matter is that I set high precedents for this show because it was so good. That should be expected by everyone. Unfortunately, it is all too clear Mr. Pizzolatto isn't as great as a writer as I thought he is.

    Nothing intrigued me in this show. The days of searching Carcosa on the web and hunting down details of literary and iconic references blind to McConaughey and Harrelson are gone. Instead, a standard police drama was made, and oh boy, its as dry and unpleasant as an old unmarinated steak cooked on an unwahsed grill.

    If THIS is what a true detective does and is what to be expected from now on, than I guess Mr. Pizzolatto should save his manuscript for a season 3 and stick it on the dusty shelf located in the very back of the book store, never to be read or picked for **** HBO of all channels ever again.

    Maybe thats too harsh I guess. I think The CW could take it in perhaps, maybe even TNT if he's lucky.    … Expand
  5. M3R1D1U5
    Jun 21, 2015
    9
    Slow, but full of power, True Detective 2 maintains the tension and drama within the first season, with the omnipresence of a supernatural factor moving around every corner. Just give it some time, and prepare yourself to enter a new level of entertainment.

    A band apart is the photography, cinematography and cast. It may not be a Matthew McCounaghey tri-force, but its still soon to judge.
  6. albacromby
    Jun 25, 2015
    10
    Come on! You know it's going to get good! We have Crazy dad, Crazy sister and Tiger Woods. Nothing simple can come out of this. I'm excited to see how the players fit and how they become True Detectives.
  7. AContext
    Aug 9, 2015
    2
    I stayed until the end; through all 10 mumbling, convoluted, glacier-paced, dark, Twin Peaks stealing, too convenient episodes. Can I get these 10-and-a-half hours of my life back? Sadly, no. This was an intentionally confusing piece of pulp fiction, but without the wink and a nod that says, "Hey, we're really just playin' around here." This was supposed to be serious drama. It wasn't. II stayed until the end; through all 10 mumbling, convoluted, glacier-paced, dark, Twin Peaks stealing, too convenient episodes. Can I get these 10-and-a-half hours of my life back? Sadly, no. This was an intentionally confusing piece of pulp fiction, but without the wink and a nod that says, "Hey, we're really just playin' around here." This was supposed to be serious drama. It wasn't. I almost gave it up after episode 8, the party piece where - in a 40-room mansion - Taylor Kitsch manages to end up outside the very room where the bad guys are discussing their dirty deeds. And the cop arrives just in time to hear the bad guys talk about exactly what's taking place, what the critical information is and who's involved. Puh-leeze, Did Pizzolatto realize in episode 8 that he had too much story yet to tell and only two episodes left in which to accomplish that feat? I was expecting so much more after the McConaughey/Harrelson tour de force....but noooooo!!… Expand
  8. ryanbrad10
    Aug 11, 2015
    3
    What a massive shame. The first season was certainly one of the best shows in dramatic TV history. In season 2, the plot was convoluted, a complete mess; there were too many characters, and most of them were pretty hammy and terribly acted. Scenes with Vince Vaughn and Kelly Reilly were just so cringeworthy, an am-dram interpretation of Bacall and Bogart. However, Colin Farrell redeemedWhat a massive shame. The first season was certainly one of the best shows in dramatic TV history. In season 2, the plot was convoluted, a complete mess; there were too many characters, and most of them were pretty hammy and terribly acted. Scenes with Vince Vaughn and Kelly Reilly were just so cringeworthy, an am-dram interpretation of Bacall and Bogart. However, Colin Farrell redeemed himself with some credible moments.… Expand
  9. 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
  10. 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
  11. 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
  12. Striper
    Jul 28, 2015
    1
    Season 2 so bad that it's hard to define. The plot is jumbled and hard to follow and the acting is pretty bad. Leave it to Hollywood to throw the glamorous but trouble female into the mix.
    It's so bad that I now watch Ray Donovan and record TD for watching when I need help getting to sleep.
  13. EL-Kaza
    Jul 28, 2015
    1
    Of course, it should not be compared with season 1, since they opt to have a totally different style, and we accept and are glad for hat. However, the story is not coherent. It feels like we are going around and did not pass the overture. The dialogue has a lot of dead meat, banal, and not engaging. The acting, except for Ray, is not convincing and cliche. They try to be intellectual andOf course, it should not be compared with season 1, since they opt to have a totally different style, and we accept and are glad for hat. However, the story is not coherent. It feels like we are going around and did not pass the overture. The dialogue has a lot of dead meat, banal, and not engaging. The acting, except for Ray, is not convincing and cliche. They try to be intellectual and engaged but sorry it did not work.… Expand
  14. maxor92
    Aug 6, 2015
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. After hearing that they would use a new cast for the second season, I was sceptical that the second season would live up to the first. Cast seemed and seems decent enough (except for Vince Vaughn), but after 6 episode the plot is not interesting and one doesn't even know what this season is supposed to be about. The characters are all f***** up in some way. I can't wait to write a review anymore.

    Plot: Boring, not catching, all over the place and not interesting. Especially since this show airs every week, every time I tune in to watch the show I really need to think about what happened in the previous episode. Ultimately not a lot happens each episodes in terms of the overall storyline. There are a few scenes that are supposed to add a "shock" value, but they do seem out of place. I enjoy shocking scenes if it elevates the stakes, but these just seem to be randomly placed in an episode to at least deliver some kind of entertainment.

    Characters: Colin Farrell's character is pretty cliche, Rachel McAdam's character is not very convincing, Taylor Kitsch's character actually has a lot of potential (he is pretty badass), but you can't figure out what the character is about. These characters are all ok, but Vince Vaughn's character... From the moment I saw that he was cast in this TV show, I was worried. Vince Vaughn can only act in one way and has a very monotone voice, that ultimately only fits into comedy. Cutting it short - he isn't a very good bad guy. His scenes are painful to watch.    … Expand
  15. 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
  16. 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.
  17. 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
  18. 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.
  19. 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
  20. 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
  21. 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
  22. 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
  23. 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.
  24. Marrr
    Aug 10, 2015
    3
    I thought the acting was fine. The atmosphere was creepy and the corruption was palpable. I even liked the stylish cinematography and the noir-ish dialog. What I did not like is the fact that the plot is nigh incomprehensible. Did you memorize all the names of the characters briefly mentioned but not necessarily shown within an episode? Did you memorize their motivations or whether theirI thought the acting was fine. The atmosphere was creepy and the corruption was palpable. I even liked the stylish cinematography and the noir-ish dialog. What I did not like is the fact that the plot is nigh incomprehensible. Did you memorize all the names of the characters briefly mentioned but not necessarily shown within an episode? Did you memorize their motivations or whether their actions took place 20 years ago or in the present. I hope you did, because if you didn't you won't know what the hell anyone is talking about the next time the show decides to spring an unsuspecting "detective" scene on you from amongst a slew of aimless subplots about the main characters. There are a few good set pieces in the season, most notably, an awesome bloody shootout at the end of one of the episodes, but good god was the finale disappointing. There's not enough here to spend a full seasons time watching.… Expand
  25. Metacritit
    Aug 10, 2015
    0
    The whole season is easy to describe: The visuals are nice and the plot is there, it just doesn't make sense at first, but it promises to make up for it.. just later, you know... be patient, ok? We're mid season? Don't worry about it, the plot will make sense later... and then oh, you're at the last episode, suddenly the plot grabs a gun and shoots itself in the face in front of you.The whole season is easy to describe: The visuals are nice and the plot is there, it just doesn't make sense at first, but it promises to make up for it.. just later, you know... be patient, ok? We're mid season? Don't worry about it, the plot will make sense later... and then oh, you're at the last episode, suddenly the plot grabs a gun and shoots itself in the face in front of you.

    You're sitting there with pieces of its brains all over your shirt and thinking what the hell just happened.

    The second part of the last episode, which was supposed to be the climax and the denouement of the whole story - is something so utterly stupid and unrealistic, so uncharacteristic of the characters it was written for, it felt like Pizzolatto imagined the ending with his morals in mind and then attempted to fit a cube into a round hole. He wrote the ending, he wrote the characters, and the two were incompatible, so suddenly all characters who were smart started acting like idiots, just so Pizzolatto could get them where he wanted them to end up.

    He didn't write an ending for THESE characters, he just wrote AN ending. The sudden "exfoliation" of the plot when Pizzolatto made his characters act unlike themselves, made me suddenly lose all emotional attachment to the series. By the time the credits hit the screen, I was thinking about how the quality of the plot was making me feel and not the plot itself. I was surprised, I never though writing could turn so bad so quickly.    … Expand
  26. Plissken23
    Aug 11, 2015
    1
    Season 1: True Detective, Season 2 : True Disaster.

    8 Episodes which some of them lenght between 1h and 1 hour 20 mins, The whole season is just blah blah blah, long dialogues that lead nowhere, 4 characters that never got well developed in 8 EPISODES, the shooting scenes are just rushed, it seems that the writer just wanted to mess up the show, (lets just write a bunch of random crap    Season 1: True Detective, Season 2 : True Disaster.

    8 Episodes which some of them lenght between 1h and 1 hour 20 mins, The whole season is just blah blah blah, long dialogues that lead nowhere, 4 characters that never got well developed in 8 EPISODES, the shooting scenes are just rushed, it seems that the writer just wanted to mess up the show, (lets just write a bunch of random crap and lets let the episode roll like that, with all due respect for people that defend this season, i would suggest you to watch the first one again without messing any detail, and later watch this one again and compare!!! Season 1 was a true detective show, this crap isn't even about "Detectives" isn't about a "Case" this is just a crap that could be like Training Day... some people give this 10? i give 1! and i'm being generous!!!..    … Expand
  27. 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
  28. Denis_IRL
    Aug 26, 2015
    3
    Way too difficult to follow and a script that just became parody. Who talks like that?? Too many times we were asking the question Who are they talking about? or even What are they talking about? The actors did not match the amazing performances of Season 1.
  29. SirBill
    Feb 3, 2016
    0
    If you enjoyed True Detective Season One, you should cherish that memory and stay away from season two. It has a slow start, seems like it might be going somewhere in the middle but then never does.... the behaviors of the writers seemed to think that they could emulate character growth by the characters behaving inconsistently, the ending is awful leaving many loose ends, unrealisticIf you enjoyed True Detective Season One, you should cherish that memory and stay away from season two. It has a slow start, seems like it might be going somewhere in the middle but then never does.... the behaviors of the writers seemed to think that they could emulate character growth by the characters behaving inconsistently, the ending is awful leaving many loose ends, unrealistic actions and generally all around unsatisfying. Not to mention they make you think there may be some supernatural elements as in S1, but those never come to fruition. This is a waste of good TV time that you could literally fill with ANY other TC show to better effect. In the end I was left wishing I had never watched it.… Expand
  30. asmanraj
    Oct 3, 2015
    0
    After the brilliance of season one, the deadly dullness of season two is just depressing. I sat through all eight episodes and thought doing so was a chore. This season had no redeeming qualities. This is easily the worst show of 2015 that I've seen so far. After this tragedy of a season, I hope there's no season three. A Metascore of 61 is way too generous. I hope this season doesn't getAfter the brilliance of season one, the deadly dullness of season two is just depressing. I sat through all eight episodes and thought doing so was a chore. This season had no redeeming qualities. This is easily the worst show of 2015 that I've seen so far. After this tragedy of a season, I hope there's no season three. A Metascore of 61 is way too generous. I hope this season doesn't get any award nominations, especially when there are brilliant shows that get snubbed every year. When I heard that Vince Vaughn was cast in a dramatic role, I was immediately skeptical, and I was right to be. As Rolling Stone wrote, this season is "True Defective". Avoid.… 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 »