[Cable Television] Matthew McConaughey & Woody Harrelson's 'True Detective'

Yea if they were going against each other I'd agree as well. Cranston was excellent as always but MM really took it to another level with Cohle. And Ziggy to be fair mini-series or movie division has had some heavyweights the past few years (Pacino, Douglas, Damon, Costner, Harrelson) so it's not like MM winning mini-series is like the minor leagues compared to winning best actor in a drama.

 

Haha .. can't believe no one commented on this.

 

I think it's an episode-by-episode thing. So they submit 1 episode. I feel like it'd be close, but McConaughey gets to display his characters evolution in every episode with all the flashbacks, Cranston's transformation took years.

 

Very true...and Cranston proved that he is one of the most gifted actors ever (I mean the fact that Hal and Walter are played by the same guy?)...I just feel like Cranston has rightfully won a few times for the same character and IMO MM would be robbed, even by a performance as great as Cranston's Walter White in the final half-season, if he didn't win.

 

Didn't notice it until you quoted the post. I'm still laughing...

 

you say pee-pee game in every thread

 

It must be cultural. I really tried to get into Breaking Bad but it just didn't register with me. I found it a bit too predictable for my tastes. I understand the story line but it just didn't seem all that plausible to me. I consider The Wire to be far, far superior.

 

That scene had me reaching for my bible (after I blew chunks). I thought that was his mother.

 

I love TD and MM did a great job but Cranston man...comeon. I think he's just on another level.

For a show that went on for 5 seasons he took Waleters character to a new phase every time until it left us with someone that barely resembed the goofy HS teacher washing cars at the beginning.

Its much harder to show the evolution of a character over a a couple of seasons as an actor. You are left trying to get into this character as you rehearse and practice for days on end, practically convincing yourself you are him. Then you have to make subtle changes through out the course of the show and completely change, becoming one with that new character as well.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/wMEq1mGpP5A" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>)

 

Yea, an 8 episode transformation is much easier than one that took 5 seasons.

 

I don't know about that, my point was you submit 1 episode in a series and they judge your acting based on that 1 episode. 1 episode of TD shows MM acting in 2-3 different stages of his character. An episode of BB shows only the current state Cranston is in. They're not head-up so it doesn't matter, but if they were, it seems like MM has a built in advantage due to the shows structure.

 

McConaughey has been excellent but head to head I'd put Cranston a slight notch above with Walter White. Seems like both should win.

 

They're not in the same category- True Detective is up for mini-series while BB is up for Drama- so, MM will be up for Best Actor, Mini-Series at the Emmys

 

Did a better job than Cranston...in Ozymandias??? No. That won't be topped for years to come.

 

Maybe it's me, but I finally watched True Detective after hearing all the hype. I waited until the end so I could watch it consecutively and avoided all spoilers.

But, I just wasn't feeling it. The story to me was very mediocre and unfleshed. They introduced a lot of mythology about Mardi Gras, the Tuttle ministries, and the Yellow King yet none of it went deeper. The motive for these killings was never explained, and the conspiracy stayed behind the curtain throughout the whole series. Many plot points were introduced that went unresolved, as if it were just filler and red herrings.

What I did enjoy was the acting by the leads. McConaughey and Harrelson deserve all the praise for that because they did a great job. The direction and cinematography were top notch as well, to be expected from an HBO series.

The character study on Hart and Cohle were framed well by the present-day interviews of them retelling the 1995 murder case. Harrelson played his part well as the detective whose personal life couldn't handle the stress of the job, and McConaughey was dead-on with his profile.

I guess I enjoyed it from a film and artistical standpoint, but as a story, it felt flat to me. I wasn't seeing all these layers of mystery and clues that everyone else saw, which, when you read back through the thread after finishing the series, is actually full of lulz for peoples' theories and how they try to make sense out of the smallest things. It's even better when the writer comes out and say he didn't intend for it to be so dissected, but that's also hindsight. It's good you guys enjoyed the ride, but I don't see it as one of the best shows on TV ever.

Side note: the comparisons to Lost in regards to the fanbase and lore are pretty spot-on. Tried watching it last year. Got sucked into the characters but quit after 2 years after realizing they made up mysteries without explaining them. Similar to True Detective in that I liked the characters but hated the story.

 

Neat Mini series but the last episode killed the pass that made it cool to begin with. Why wouldn't they just make 10 episodes instead of forcing it all into 8? Oh well, still thought it was cool.

 

Sorry that you ruined a great experience by waiting and binge watching. You missed an awesome ride. IMO, the most enjoyable part was having to wait a week in order to get the next installment. Your mind racing with theories making you feel like a true detective yourself.

The buildup of cohle's character to the heist scene in episode 4 alone was worth the price of admission.

 

Pretty much this. True Detective is not at all a show that should be binge-watched. It doesn't ruin it, but you miss out on a lot of the experience that the show is trying to give you.

 

While I think the show was the best thing I've seen on TV in years, I'll agree with you on the loose ends left undeveloped / untied.

The show's writer owns the rights to the show's characters and hinted he might just pick up the story in novel form sometime down the road. In which case I'll be on amazon downloading my digital copy faster than you can say "oh, yeah!"

So, if he does write said book, I'll be glad to get it, but I'll feel much the same as when I watched Peter Jackson's "LOTR Special Edition". As if the creative force saved some of the very good stuff for a later time so he could cash in a bit.

At the same time, I'm okay with unresolved this-and-that, because unfortunately that's real life. I would have hated a Harry Potter ending where they spend the last 15% tying up all the mystery points: "It was Snape in the library with a candlestick. He was Peter Pettigrew's secret boy toy. Pettigrew was Voldemort's second cousin on his mother's side..."

The series should have been 10 episodes.

 

To me, the show was always about the characters and the interplay, then it was about the murder mystery. It is about THEIR journey, where they started and what they have become. And to that end, I was pretty satisfied with the ending and with the series as a whole.