True Detective Season 1 Questions and Theories
 

I guess I'm a TD S1 crackhead, because I've just started watching episode 1 after about a week after my second time watching the entire thing, and some **** bothers me, as it does many people. Consider this the thread to ask your questions and pose your answers (cause the TV thread is not big enough to contain them all).

For me, the first of many little questions that's been bugging me, is why does Rust keep looking into that tiny mirror in his wall? I've got about a million others, but I'm drunk and I'm not about to go off into a Trollheart-length tirade.

Oh, and as an open-ended thing, whether or not The Yellow King is actually supposed to be a real entity, what do you think it all means? Cause it's obviously more than just some literary device just to be interesting.

And go...

Because he's weird.

And I thought the Yellow King was an actual person. Like, probably the person in charge of the whole weird thing.

Now I have to rewatch it. Really is a great season of TV. 2 wasn't terrible but 1 was better to me.

Bat, I have a copy of The Yellow King. PM your address if you want it.

The mirror has to be a metaphor of some sort. Wait till the end of the season to think about it anymore.

I've heard people say that the Yellow King is the killer, the killer's dad, the skull statue thing at the altar in Carcosa, and even that it's a real entity.

Already stolen it off the internet.

I don't even know what basis they would have for that. My impression the entire time was basically that the group of people abducting the women and kids were just very... festive, then that became an elaborate story in the mind of the weird inbred meth addicted whatever killer guy. The Yellow King was probably just a central figure. Hell, maybe it wasn't a real person.

We have to kidnap the writers and ask them at gunpoint.

Maybe not. These two think it was more style over substance.

Whatever my problems with the finale, not explaining **** wasn't one of them. Whether or not they went too far in keeping things mysterious is up for debate, but all of the fun, obsessive discussions going on all over the internet wouldn't be happening if there was a bow wrapped around the end of the show.

Show is really carried by purely by machismo dialogue, great performances and great cinematography. It is essentially an HBO version of other cop shows--which i think was the point.

I know I'm gonna be vindicated for being a male and throwing out the misogynist card (I mostly due it for topic of conversation) but it was a little ridiculous. Woody Harrelson getting phone calls form beutiful young women asking him to **** her in the ass, every female character being some type of prostitute or subordinate wife.

Don't honestly care that much--I've watched the season 3 times.

What do you guys think of the second season? It seemed too driven by feedback from the first, alas all the strong female characters. I thought the casting was too beautiful, I don't like beautiful women doing cop stuff (maybe i'm the misogynist) it breaks the reality for me. Rachel McAdams is too damn pretty too be doing this hard drinking dark bruised cop routine, although I get she was raped. Thats why I liked the wire--the female police didn't wear much makeup and were butch.

I'm all about hyper realism to a perhaps excessive extent. The plot was overly convoluted and kind-of childish in its extreme broodiness--wtf was with that lady always singing at the bar?

However, that scene where colin farrell gets drunk, blasts music and essentially breaks everything in his apartment...I've unfortunately been there.

The whole point of Woody Harrelson's machismo was that it destroyed his life. He was living in a time twenty years removed, in a place probably twenty years removed from even that time, so the fact that the female characters came across as subservient to the men was just natural.

Huh, I hadn't thought to look at it like that.