New Season of True Detective on HBO

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a good starter episode and we will keep watching. It doesn't have the immediate creepiness and eerie vibe that the first season of the show had that was so intense.

We found it immediately creepy and eerie! The very first three scenes are creepy with strong supernatural overtones. It goes on to have creepy/eerie events.

Alas, due to the graphic sex scene, we won’t be watching with our 17 year olds.

That scene wasn’t graphic, there was no nudity. I wouldn’t want to watch that with my teen either, I would just fast forward it. But calling it graphic no. The scene where the state trooper is describing what she saw when she served in the military and the other woman had half her head blown off, that was graphic.

The sex scene was gratuitous. It added nothing to the story and wasn’t sexy in the slightest. I wish they’d stop adding these to shows just because they can. It cheapens everything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a good starter episode and we will keep watching. It doesn't have the immediate creepiness and eerie vibe that the first season of the show had that was so intense.

We found it immediately creepy and eerie! The very first three scenes are creepy with strong supernatural overtones. It goes on to have creepy/eerie events.

Alas, due to the graphic sex scene, we won’t be watching with our 17 year olds.

That scene wasn’t graphic, there was no nudity. I wouldn’t want to watch that with my teen either, I would just fast forward it. But calling it graphic no. The scene where the state trooper is describing what she saw when she served in the military and the other woman had half her head blown off, that was graphic.

The sex scene was gratuitous. It added nothing to the story and wasn’t sexy in the slightest. I wish they’d stop adding these to shows just because they can. It cheapens everything.

Agreed. I didn’t understand the point of why that scene was included.

[Anonymous]

Hmm. I thought it showed that she craves control, exerting it there even inappropriately.

[Anonymous]

That scene wasn’t graphic, there was no nudity. I wouldn’t want to watch that with my teen either, I would just fast forward it. But calling it graphic no. The scene where the state trooper is describing what she saw when she served in the military and the other woman had half her head blown off, that was graphic.

The sex scene was gratuitous. It added nothing to the story and wasn’t sexy in the slightest. I wish they’d stop adding these to shows just because they can. It cheapens everything.

Agreed. I didn’t understand the point of why that scene was included.

Are people talking about the scene when the wife (baby mama?) reaches into the young cop's pants? If so, I definitely saw a point there -- they're interrupted by a call from "the chief" (Jodie Foster's character) and he immediately takes it. He's enjoying an intimate moment but is willing to kill it without even really thinking about it because she called.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

That scene wasn’t graphic, there was no nudity. I wouldn’t want to watch that with my teen either, I would just fast forward it. But calling it graphic no. The scene where the state trooper is describing what she saw when she served in the military and the other woman had half her head blown off, that was graphic.

The sex scene was gratuitous. It added nothing to the story and wasn’t sexy in the slightest. I wish they’d stop adding these to shows just because they can. It cheapens everything.

Agreed. I didn’t understand the point of why that scene was included.

Are people talking about the scene when the wife (baby mama?) reaches into the young cop's pants? If so, I definitely saw a point there -- they're interrupted by a call from "the chief" (Jodie Foster's character) and he immediately takes it. He's enjoying an intimate moment but is willing to kill it without even really thinking about it because she called.

No, the part with the cop and her FWB and after she steals his SpongeBob toothbrush.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a good starter episode and we will keep watching. It doesn't have the immediate creepiness and eerie vibe that the first season of the show had that was so intense.

We found it immediately creepy and eerie! The very first three scenes are creepy with strong supernatural overtones. It goes on to have creepy/eerie events.

Alas, due to the graphic sex scene, we won’t be watching with our 17 year olds.

17! They’ve already seen it or done it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It had to watch it twice (second time with cc because the first time I couldn’t understand anything anyone said, and neither could DH, was so frustrating).

Jodie Foster is the chief. John Hawks is Frank Prior who is a deputy. Finn Bennett is Peter Prior who works underneath both of them and he’s Frank’s adult son. They’re all with the local police department.

Kali Reis is Evangeline Navarro and she’s a state trooper. She USED to be in the local police department and was working with Frank on the murder case of the native woman Anna. The case went unsolved and closed or shelved or however you want to call it. Then sometime later Jodie Foster arrived and was made the chief of police and Navarro asked the new chief (Jodie) to reopen Anna’s case and Jodie said no (not clear why, also not clear why Frank had Anna’s files at his house and lied about them). This refusal started a riff between Navarro and Jodie Foster eventually leading to Jodie asking for Navarro to be transferred to the state troopers.

Np here-thank you for posting this! And are we thinking Jodie foster and Frank Prior were married or in a relationship before and have since had an acrimonious split? Because that’s what I came away with.

If Jodie and Frank had been married, I would have thought the son who is also a police detective would have been her son. Instead he calls her chief and they don't seem to have any kind of parent/child relationship.

But there is some sort of accident and other young child named Holden that I am sure they will discuss later. The girl who lives with Jodie (I assume it's a stepdaughter or niece) mentioned why they don't talk about "that night" or "what happened; Jodie has 2 flashbacks, 1) when she's approaching the drunk driver's crash car and 2) when she's in bed a child's hand reaches over to shake her and whispers "she's awake" [same thing the scientist said at the beginning], Jodie wakes up and says "Holden?" and then picks up the polar bear stuffed animal on the floor. I wonder if the girls father and this kid Holden died in a drunk driver accident or some other kind of accident (speculating).

Wasn’t there a hand on her shoulder when she heard “she’s awake”? Also, the stuffed Olaf bear had it’s left eye ripped, same as the polar bear the trooper “saw” in the street.

[Anonymous]

No, I am not a fan of supernatural (I think it spoiled Twin Peaks and is never a good idea) and of all the social agenda settings.
I just want to watch something about regular people.
Not members of some specific group that is en vogue today.

[Anonymous]

I thought it was just ok, but am willing to give the next episode a chance and see where it goes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It had to watch it twice (second time with cc because the first time I couldn’t understand anything anyone said, and neither could DH, was so frustrating).

Jodie Foster is the chief. John Hawks is Frank Prior who is a deputy. Finn Bennett is Peter Prior who works underneath both of them and he’s Frank’s adult son. They’re all with the local police department.

Kali Reis is Evangeline Navarro and she’s a state trooper. She USED to be in the local police department and was working with Frank on the murder case of the native woman Anna. The case went unsolved and closed or shelved or however you want to call it. Then sometime later Jodie Foster arrived and was made the chief of police and Navarro asked the new chief (Jodie) to reopen Anna’s case and Jodie said no (not clear why, also not clear why Frank had Anna’s files at his house and lied about them). This refusal started a riff between Navarro and Jodie Foster eventually leading to Jodie asking for Navarro to be transferred to the state troopers.

Np here-thank you for posting this! And are we thinking Jodie foster and Frank Prior were married or in a relationship before and have since had an acrimonious split? Because that’s what I came away with.

If Jodie and Frank had been married, I would have thought the son who is also a police detective would have been her son. Instead he calls her chief and they don't seem to have any kind of parent/child relationship.

But there is some sort of accident and other young child named Holden that I am sure they will discuss later. The girl who lives with Jodie (I assume it's a stepdaughter or niece) mentioned why they don't talk about "that night" or "what happened; Jodie has 2 flashbacks, 1) when she's approaching the drunk driver's crash car and 2) when she's in bed a child's hand reaches over to shake her and whispers "she's awake" [same thing the scientist said at the beginning], Jodie wakes up and says "Holden?" and then picks up the polar bear stuffed animal on the floor. I wonder if the girls father and this kid Holden died in a drunk driver accident or some other kind of accident (speculating).

Wasn’t there a hand on her shoulder when she heard “she’s awake”? Also, the stuffed Olaf bear had it’s left eye ripped, same as the polar bear the trooper “saw” in the street.

Yes. There was a child’s whisper “she’s awake” which is the same thing the scientist in the pink coat said at the beginning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a good starter episode and we will keep watching. It doesn't have the immediate creepiness and eerie vibe that the first season of the show had that was so intense.

We found it immediately creepy and eerie! The very first three scenes are creepy with strong supernatural overtones. It goes on to have creepy/eerie events.

Alas, due to the graphic sex scene, we won’t be watching with our 17 year olds.

That scene wasn’t graphic, there was no nudity. I wouldn’t want to watch that with my teen either, I would just fast forward it. But calling it graphic no. The scene where the state trooper is describing what she saw when she served in the military and the other woman had half her head blown off, that was graphic.

The sex scene was gratuitous. It added nothing to the story and wasn’t sexy in the slightest. I wish they’d stop adding these to shows just because they can. It cheapens everything.

Agreed. DH and I were just talking about this last night. So much of what we watch would be just as entertaining without gratuitous sex scenes that add nothing to the story. We just started watching Death and Other Details (Hulu). It's a murder mystery that takes place on a ship, ep 1 within the first 20 mins there it is. But why? The show doesn't need it, it's totally unnecessary. But I get now why it's rated TV MA.

[Anonymous]

I thought the sex scene was a character building scene-you learn something about her physicality and need for control, as a PP said, and it shows a bit of her sense of humor.

At the beginning, when one of the lab guys is making a silly video about building a sandwich, I saw that as a way to get a glimpse of his character. I didn’t see it as a gratuitous sandwich-making scene that I wish they hadn’t included.

[Anonymous]

Sex happens. It wasn’t over the top and it showed how she was not connecting emotionally with people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sex happens. It wasn’t over the top and it showed how she was not connecting emotionally with people.

Poop happens, too. That doesn’t mean I want to watch a character’s bowl movements to get a better sense of who he or she is. Sex scenes should only be included if they are in fact sexy. There should be a build up to the scene and I should want the characters to have sex, rather than getting grossed out and wanting to fast forward. That scene was unnecessary, unsexy, and added nothing to the story. No, thank you!

[Anonymous]

I thought Ep 1 was soooo good. I’m definitely intrigued.

I too thought the sex scenes filled out the characters. I’ll take a sex scene that seems realistic over lingerie and stilettos anytime.

If my 17 yr old had wanted to watch, I would have been ok with it. Very soon he’s in college and watching whatever the heck he wants.

Now I’m interested in checking out the earlier seasons