quote:

---

quote:

---

Personally, if there is a clue to start obsessing over this early, I think its the very opening scene where there are hundreds of markers in a field and you briefly see a "contaminated" sign flash by. Anyone know what that's about? I assume it relates to the railway land Vaughn wants to develop?

---

Was coming here to post the same... on the second viewing, I realized I forgot all about that opening (possibly flash-forward?) scene.

And I thought the same... some sort of roadblock in the alignment of the rail line. The array of the markers was interesting as well. Bodies?

---

I watched again last night and they looked like they were staking out gravesites.

Definitely seemed to be a defined grid, each grid marked individually - could simply be marking construction footprints but the tone of the show leads me to think gravesites (being the obvious dark choice). Contamination might slow down a project but doesn't tend to be a big hurdle for major ones. You're spending billions of dollars, doling out a few hundred thousand to dig up some dirt is no big deal.

I'll say that I doubt that any landscape shots you see in the show are anything more than scene- and tone-setting shots, and that I really doubt that there are clues or future foreshadowing in that. I think we can plan on there being plenty of shots of the Vinci area that set the tone for what kind of an industrial ****hole it is, all while being a stone's throw away from downtown LA. In that way, very similar to all the wide shots of swampland and backcountry in season 1 that set a creepy, desolate vibe.

quote:

---

I've always thought he was underrated. Solid actor and is perfectly cast for this role.

---

Amen- people don't like to admit- but he's a damn good actor. Either he's terrible at choosing his roles- or he's got the worst agent.

quote:

---

why no mention of the crow head mask in the car with the city planner? did i imagine that?

---

Because there is nothing else to springboard off of yet.

Just wait, they'll show a crow flying over one of the main characters and everyone will speculate it means that character is the leaser of a crow cult and he is the one who killed the city inspector.

Although I say all of that, if I were the author, I'd think it would be too good of an opportunity to pass up to make one of the big reveals like everyone expected last season.

Nobody would see it coming.

Didn't Velcaro tell Aspen "if you steal again I'll butt eff your dad with your mom's headless corpse?" That line had me laughing. Brutal but funny

I have the hardest time taking vince vaughn seriously as a bad guy.

quote:

---

I have the hardest time taking vince vaughn seriously as a bad guy.

---

Yep; I'm waiting for his to bust out some sarcastic line or make a joke.

a bad guy can be funny. besides, who's to say HE is the bad guy. he's a criminal. doesn't mean he's the/a bad guy.

Love the show, love the premise, cannot wait to see Colin Farrel develop his character even more, and I have a feeling Taylor Kitsch is going to be a real bad ass asset to the group as he clearly has no fear of death and has a high moral code for the American way of life. I have a feeling that when he finds out people are criminally exploiting hard working Americans and doing hard core criminal stuff, he is going to twist off in ways that we always want our heroes to twist off on bad guys.

But I just have a problem with Vince Vaughn's character. I get that he is supposed to be a bad guy, but he clearly isn't THE bad guy. And I don't buy the line that he is the bad guy that wants to become somewhat legitimate and leave a legacy for his forthcoming child. True Detective is a show about law enforcement. I never expected our criminal to have a face until he is found out at the end. I certainly didn't expect one of the four stars to be our criminal. Perhaps I am secretly holding out hope that Vince Vaughn is tied back to law enforcement some how, some way. I am struck at how the following went down....

1. When Vince is shown the newspaper, his right hand man tells him not to worry, they aren't implicated. This is where we get the line, "Everyone gets touched" They also intimate that the reporter is one of theirs. Meaning he is sympathetic to their group. This implies that the reporter has received funding from Vaughn sometime, somewhere. The fact that the reporter is implicating others at this time, and Vaughn's people say they aren't getting named as of yet, really shows a confidence that this reporter will end up doing as he is told and leave Vaughn out of it. Vaughn doesn't trust it which is why he sends Velcoro to the reporters house to beat his ass and to get his material.

2. The Mayor at the party greets Vaughn with a "Couldn't wait until after this?" further implicating the reporter as a Vaughn guy.

3. When I see a reporter living where he does in a drug riddled area, and now that we know he is on the take from Vaughn, I just don't see this reporter making the career move he did with this story, without Vaughn's consent. That doesn't make sense.

4. Looking back, Vaughn targeting the reporter, in my opinion, is not trying to find out information. I believe that Vaughn had all that. I believe that Vaughn had transitioned into a new motivation, trying to find out what happened to the City Manager and CYA. Certainly Vaughn doesn't believe that he is the only one that is going to target the reporter. Perhaps even Vaughn wanted the reporters material because he fears someone else finding out that Vaughn fed him a lot of those details.

I am really leaning toward Vaughn being either a rat for the Feds or is actually a deep cover agent hoping to nail much of California's underbelly of society as well as a few international bad guy money men. I also find it a little too convenient that Vaughn is the point man on government funding and cost overages which would be heroin to mob construction companies.

Geez, did the crow have three eyes? Oh, wait...

quote:

---

I have the hardest time taking vince vaughn seriously as a bad guy.

---

Have you never seen Clay Pigeons? He is a very good serial killer/psychopath in that movie.

quote:

---

quote:

---

I have the hardest time taking vince vaughn seriously as a bad guy.

---

Have you never seen Clay Pigeons? He is a very good serial killer/psychopath in that movie.

---

Or a certain movie called psycho...

quote:

---

Have you never seen Clay Pigeons? He is a very good serial killer/psychopath in that movie.

---

had never heard of it. watched the trailer. based on that alone, i disagree.

then he did 100 frat boy movies and kinda type-casted himself

quote:

---

then he did 100 frat boy movies and kinda type-casted himself

---

no way. His role in the remake of psycho was awesome

Just re-watched the pilot. Seeing it with "clear eyes" now, without all the hype and expectation... man, that truly was a great hour television. Way better the second time around, and this is coming from someone who really liked it initially.

A few observations...

- Colin Farrell is masterful in this thing. This was obvious on first watch, but this time around I was really able to appreciate what he's doing, and it's amazing. Cannot wait to see where he takes that character.

- On a similar note, it also hit me that this is the first time I've ever really seen Rachel McAdams act. And I'm digging it. I've always liked her, and she's always been great in everything I've seen, but she's always played a variation of the same basic character (i.e. the wife/girlfriend). It's exciting seeing her branch out like this, and she's more than up for the task it seems.

- When confronting her sister, McAdams says, "I ran this op because I heard a rumor." Missed that the first go around. Good to know it wasn't pure coincidence like I initially thought.

- Velcoro lives RIGHT next to the police station. Like, comically close. Missed that as well on first viewing.

- In that final scene at the dive bar, I didn't get the sense that Semyon "owned" Velcoro. They seemed like genuine acquaintances, and that Velcoro simply does it for the money. I may be wrong, and that may actually be a plot point / point of contention between them down the line, but at least in that scene I got the impression that their working relationship was mutually beneficial; that Ray could potentially walk away at any time (though he obviously won't).

- Also, the waitress at that bar has a pretty gnarly scar on her face. It's fairly prominent, but I didn't notice it the first go around. They definitely make a point to show it, though, however briefly. It almost looks like a burn of some sort, kind of like what Woodrugh has, but not quite. Still, I wonder if the waitress' mark and Woodrugh's marks (since they're from "before" the war) are related in any way, and potentially have anything to do with the "contamination" markers we see in the opening shots?

- Finally, not that it really matters, but I'm confused a bit by the scene where Ray gives his son the sleeping bag / talks to his son's step dad. His kid (apparently) has on the LeBrons when Ray drops him off that morning (Ray looks right at his kid's shoes and says, "Hey, you like your new kicks?"). But when he goes to give him the sleeping bag later that day, and the shoes are gone, the step dad says, "There was a little thing that happened last week. Boys." So did the "thing" start last week and finally just come to a head today? Either way, again, it makes no difference, it just threw me for a loop, because I was already trying to confirm that the entire episode takes place over the same day (it does).

quote:

---

Just rewetted the pilot. Seeing it with "clear eyes" now, without all the hype and expectation... man, that truly was a great hour television. Way better the second time around, and this is coming from someone who really liked it initially.

A few observations...

- Colin Farrell is masterful in this thing. This was obvious on first watch, but this time around I was really able to appreciate what he's doing, and it's amazing. Cannot wait to see where he takes that character.

- On a similar note, it also hit me that this is the first time I've ever really seen Rachel McAdams act. And I'm digging it. I've always liked her, and she's always been great in everything I've seen, but she's always played a variation of the same basic character (i.e. the wife/girlfriend). It's exciting seeing her branch out like this, and she's more than up for the task it seems.

- When confronting her sister, McAdams says, "I ran this op because I heard a rumor." Missed that the first go around. Good to know it wasn't pure coincidence like I initially thought.

- In that final scene at the dive bar, I didn't get the sense that Semyon "owned" Velcoro. They seemed like genuine acquaintances, and that Velcoro simply does it for the money. I may be wrong, and that may actually be a plot point / point of contention between them down the line, but at least in that scene I got the impression that their working relationship was mutually beneficial; that Ray could potentially walk away at any time (though he obviously won't).

- Also, the waitress at that bar has a pretty gnarly scar on her face. It's fairly prominent, but I didn't notice it the first go around. They definitely make a point to show it, though, however briefly. It almost looks like a burn of some sort, kind of like what Woodrugh has, but not quite. Still, I wonder if the waitress' mark and Woodrugh's marks (since they're from "before" the war) are related in any way, and potentially have anything to do with the "contamination" markers we see in the opening shots?

- Finally, not that it really matters, but I'm confused a bit by the scene where Ray gives his son the sleeping bag / talks to his son's step dad. His kid (apparently) has on the LeBrons when Ray drops him off that morning (Ray looks right at his kid's shoes and says, "Hey, you like your new kicks?"). But when he goes to give him the sleeping bag later that day, and the shoes are gone, the step dad says, "There was a little thing that happened last week. Boys." So did the "thing" start last week and finally just come to a head today? Either way, again, it makes no difference, it just threw me for a loop, because from that point on I made absolutely certain that the entire episode took place over the same day (it does).

---

Definitely caught that line from McAdams to her sister.....surprised you missed it.

On the last item...it was not the same day. He says something when he is dropping him off about see you in 2 weeks or something like that. He does also say he has that camping trip "this weekend". But in the first scene the kid has a striped t-shirt on...in the second one he was wearing a plaid button down over a t-shirt. And CF has a sports coat in the first scene over a blue shirt and just a brown shirt in the second one.

It was confusing cuz he was bringing him a sleeping bag. But the campout was before that...just I think kind of the way he is a f-up dad...too late. He says "i know you have a camping trip coming up...", but the other dad (step dad or boyfriend?) says "the campout was last weekend". So it's at least several days lter (and after the weekend he went camping). The dad has no real concept of the days that have passed (alcohol, distracted, etc.).

quote:

---

quote:

---

On the last item...it was not the same day. He says something when he is dropping him off about see you in 2 weeks or something like that. He does also say he has that camping trip "this weekend". But in the first scene the kid has a striped t-shirt on...in the second one he was wearing a plaid button down over a t-shirt. And CF has a sports coat in the first scene over a blue shirt and just a brown shirt in the second one.

It was confusing cuz he was bringing him a sleeping bag. But the campout was before that...just I think kind of the way he is a f-up dad...too late. He says "i know you have a camping trip coming up...", but the other dad (step dad or boyfriend?) says "the campout was last weekend". So it's at least several days lter (and after the weekend he went camping). The dad has no real concept of the days that have passed (alcohol, distracted, etc.).

---

Nope. It's the same day. Not only is Semyon's presentation intercut/sequenced both before AND after that second school scene, but the time of day gets consistently later in each scene, no matter the character/location.

- Semyon has his coffee at home that morning, has his presentation that day/evening, then meets with Ray that night.

- Woodrugh pulls over the actress that afternoon, is put on leave, f*cks his girlfriend, and leaves for his bike ride that night.

- Bezzerides does her thing with that dude in her apartment that morning, roads the house soon after, sees her dad that afternoon, goes to the casino that night.

- Casper is taken from his house that afternoon (WAY early in the episode), is dropped off in Point Magu that night.

Each of those scenes are intercut with Ray's story in a very particular order, again, with the day progressing as expected, time-wise.

As for the camping / sleeping bag thing, in that opening scene when Ray says "this weekend," his son DOESN'T answer. His son's not telling him he ALREADY skipped out on it last weekend, so as to not be embarrassed (the step dad says after school, "He ended up having a stomach ache," i.e. the kid faked it so he didn't have to go.

---

i think you're wrong about the same day....

he also asks the kid about the shoes and the kid says " i just didn't wear them today".....quite obviously not the same day as the dad dropped him off with the shoes on.


.......so explain this:
opening scene:

later scene - supposedly the same day...both are wearing different clothes. seems odd.

so the kid had a complete change of clothes and other shoes with him? cuz when he is picked up he is wearing shoes (the step dad makes mention of it). And Ray also went and changed clothes at some point - didn't seem like he had time for that if it was one day. And he never was shown going back home.







In fact I think those scenes were flashbacks actually...not even the same clothes in either shot that he is wearing during the talk with the lawyer or later that day:





dude changes clothes a lot in one day - is he a woman?

Also, Velcoro is wearing different clothes?

quote:

---

Also, Velcoro is wearing different clothes?

---

right...well that was a flashback too....CF was wearing full uniform in that shot....and it was before his wife's rape which was 10 years or so ago before the kid was born.....

Guys, it's ABSOLUTEY the same day. I just presented like a dozen pieces of irrefutable evidence and y'all come back with is the kid's clothes?

quote:

---

Felt lost for a lot of the show. Having a hard time figuring out who we are supposed to relate to or like. Strongly do not like the female lead. Highway patrol guy is just weird and serial killer like. Colin Ferrell is probably the most likable, but damn they laid the bad cop on thick with him.

And I keep waiting for Vince Vaughn to break out with a joke. It's really screwing me up. I'm kind of confused as to what it is VV does, exactly.

---

Watch some of Vaughan's early films. He can play a very creepy villain.

People change clothes during the day ALL THE TIME.

I always brought a complete change of street clothes with me to school every day.

Maybe he got his ass kicked and his step dad brought a change of clothes. Maybe he changed after gym class. Either way, why am I having to explain away one tiny bit of evidence instaed of you guys refuting the beyond solid argument I just made? There's no way Ray's scenes, save for the initial bar scene, are flashbacks. That makes absolutely no sense.

Not sure if it's been addressed, but the reviews I've read have a plot synopsis (Episode 1) in which Vaughan's character is a former mid level crime boss who is trying to go straight, but is involved with some people who won't seem to let him get away clean and desperately trying to silence the rumors of his former life. He viewed the Rail Project as his way to finally get out of the underworld. With Caspre's death, Vaughan becomes extremely interested in what's going on as he thinks that something in his past is trying to destroy him.

quote:

---

People change clothes during the day ALL THE TIME.

---

uh huh....except every other scene....before the second school scene and after he is wearing what he has on in the last photo there.....the bolo tie and gray shirt with dark blazer
so your theory is he

• had a morning outfit, casual blazer to drop the kid off
• changed into the bolo and a different dark gray blazer for the interview with the lawyer and then the investigation into the missing guy thorughout the day.....
• but changed into jeans and a casual shirt, no blazer to surprise the kid and bring him a sleeping bag at school...
• and then changed BACK into the bolo and grayish blazer for the scene where he beat the kids dad up, and the scene getting drunk that night and showing up at the end crime scene where they discover the body

is your theory that he knows the kid does not like bolo ties so he keeps that in the trunk and changes in and out of it so the kid will only see him in casual clothes?


Or is it more likely that......

he is wearing the bolo tie and gray shirt with dark blazer all through the day of the events of this episode except for 3 flashbacks:

1. dropping his kid off for school with new shoes on one day
2. surprising him at school on a later day when it's not his day to pick him up, with the sleeping bag (only it was after the campout because he was on a bender perhaps)....
3. the scene 10 years or so before in the full cop uniform when he finds out the identity of the rapist

quote:

---

Maybe he got his ass kicked and his step dad brought a change of clothes. Maybe he changed after gym class. Either way, why am I having to explain away one tiny bit of evidence instaed of you guys refuting the beyond solid argument I just made? There's no way Ray's scenes, save for the initial bar scene, are flashbacks. That makes absolutely no sense.

---

why does it make no sense?

why do the school scenes have to be any part of that contiguous day?

he is talking to a lawyer and reflecting on his kid....so maybe he thinks back to when he dropped him off and when he picked him up another day.....and decides that day (cuz he is wearing the same bolo) to now go kick that kids dads ass.

if the kid got his ass kicked i think that might have come up...he got his shoes stolen. and it was days before....or you think he got his ass kicked and they just left him at school but with a change of clothes. seems like a pretty protective step-dad or whatever....i think they would have just taken him home that day if he got his shoes stolen and his ass kicked.....nah just give him fresh clothes, he'll be fine.