>Especially
>since Season 2 was Pizzolatto's reaction to complaints about
>season 1 (not enough characters, not enough plot, etc.).


I read it more as not wanting to tell the same story twice, and possibly more actors putting in bids to get roles in the next season, and I think its sloppiness grew out of a desire to make a bigger thing which the show often felt like it didn't want to be, it just HAD to be. he had however long to plot out season one and then he expanded and produced season two pretty damn quickly. but this is just me projecting onto the show, if he said those things then that's obviously what happened. for me the subtext of season 2 was a guy who very deliberately didn't want to repeat himself, to his and to a lot of his audience's detriment. I personally admired it.


I think if he had used season one as a template, similar to how Noah Hawley does Fargo where every character is the same archetype and generally experiences the same arc and the primary variable is the theme of the season and that determines what looks or feels different, he'd have had a more critically successful show. Fargo is great. but True Detective is more interesting because it got weird in a stupid, messy way, and for as long as HBO wants to do the show it will always be more interesting, even if it's not as consistent or good.


~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." � Jay Bilas
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz