For a brief moment in time, was one of the best series on television. By most accounts, it appeared that HBO had pulled the plug on the anthology series for good. But in a surprise move, the premium cable network that it would be rebooting the series after its two-year hiatus. Fans and critics responded to the news with a mixture of excitement and skepticism. With the right creative minds in place, the series stands a chance to redeem itself. There was plenty of star power in Season 2, as well. As a result, the second season felt more like a bunch of actors trying as hard as they could to prove they were True Detective material, rather than an organic fusion of two eccentric, but brilliant performers. Luckily, HBO appears to be off to a good start, after recently announcing that Moonlight will be playing a lead role in Season 3. Create a compelling friction between the characters Frank and Ray in Season 2 of True Detective HBO In Season 2 of True Detective, one of the biggest issues was that the main characters seemed to lack a solid connection to one another. While they were drawn together due to the nature of the investigation, they still often felt as though they were living in different versions of the same reality. But in the end, it was hard to get entirely invested in any of the characters because their connection to each other was tenuous at best. And their efforts need to extend beyond replicating the winning formula from Season 1. But it needs to be about more than just a battle of the wills. Adding a bit of diversity could help widen the narrative perspective. More than anything, the characters need to genuinely connect with each other this time around. And the result was a suite of hour-long chapters that felt like a complete full-length picture rather than an episodic drama. Fukunaga stepped away in Season 2, and remained a producer in name only, allegedly due to creative differences with Pizzolatto. His absence was obvious, and though the multiple directors brought on in his stead obviously did their best to cobble together a cohesive vision, the results were spotty, to say the least. The best thing Pizzolatto could do is bring back Fukunaga for Season 3. Likewise, it needs to be someone who can think outside the box and offer up a police procedural that feels fresh and inventive. They may not have always made sense, but his existential reflections livened up an anotherwise cut-and-dry police drama. In contrast, Season 2 suffered from a lack of any truly memorable, story-driven moments. There was no truly gripping dialogue to speak of. Most of the characters failed to really grow or change in significant ways. Split the balance between slow burn and monotony Frank and his crew in Season 2 of True Detective HBO Slow burn dramas can be immensely satisfying. If a series does a great job of teasing out every twist and turn, it can leave viewers on the edge of their seats. The overarching plot got bogged down in minutiae. Instead of drawing viewers in, True Detective Season 2 usually felt like it was stringing us along. It dangled the prospect of an exciting development in front of us without ever really delivering. Find a unique setting Rural Louisiana in Season 1 of True Detective HBO The best crime stories reveal hidden secrets of places that many viewers would have never thought to explore. That was certainly the case with Season 1 of True Detective. Season 2, on the other hand, was based in California. There have been dozens of crime dramas set in or near Los Angeles and the Bay Area, so while the crimes were actually set in Ventura County and the fictional town of Vinci, California the scenery felt all too familiar. True Detective could and probably should try to stake its claim on another, less-traversed region if it wants to regain the sense of original storytelling it had in Season 1. From the moody lighting to the frequent presence of smoke and smog, it had a noir vibe that called back to crime classics like Chinatown and L. But in many cases the atmosphere became a substitute for compelling storytelling. And the characters were appropriately somber given their lot in life. All told, the eight episodes ultimately were more about style than substance. If Season 3 of True Detective melds effective intrigue with an atmosphere that matches the action, the series will yield a much stronger result. And in Season 1, it delivered that in spades. And the payoff at the end felt that much greater, because we knew they had waited so long to solve the case. While this helped us understand them better on a psychological level, their interpersonal dramas often overshadowed the case they were trying to solve. In the third season, it would be great to see a return to an expanded scope where the plot is concerned. Longer timelines, nonlinear storytelling, or a more thrilling premise could all give the narrative a much-needed boost. Season 2, by contrast, struggled to find an overarching theme — at least, one that could be put into words. Instead, it punctuated its deliberate, slow storytelling with moments that seemed designed solely for shock value. There was the unexpected near-death shooting of Roy, the mass-casualty shootout that seemed to come out of nowhere, and the fact that most of the main characters wound up dead by the time the season was over. Make it a little bit weird again Rust watches swirling birds in True Detective Season 1 HBO Unforgettable TV series have that intangible something. From the first episode to the last, the series zigged when we thought it would zag. We re-watched episodes, looking for ways to tie the oddities together. We theorized about what each new turn of events could mean. Season 2 had its surreal qualities as well, but by and large it was considerably more straight laced. If True Detective can find the weirdness again in Season 3, it will feel much more like the show that fans fell in love with in the first place. Follow Katherine Webb on Twitter Check out on Facebook!
