Skip to main content

I don’t sleep, I just dream.

True Detective
1.1: The Long Bright Dark

Another HBO winner arrives fully formed, it seems. Furnished with a script by Nic Pizzolatto (he has only a couple of episodes of the US version of The Killing to his name) and incarnated in stylish gloom by director Cary Fukunaga (the Mia Wasikowasa Jane Eyre), it’s easy to see why big screen types Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson climbed aboard. This is the kind of perfectly judged, brooding, atmospheric, portentous and almost supernaturally menacing material that, used to excess, over stoked Hannibal’s boiler. In fact, this is succeeds (so far) in nearly all the areas the TV Hannibal proved increasingly disappointing.


This is a hunt for a serial killer where it’s all about the hunters rather than the kills themselves (even though the style of murders is reminiscent of one of Hannibal’s weekly crimson sprees) and Pizzolatto takes full advantage of the opened-up, novelistic canvas to tell his tale with unhurried finesse. That’s what HBO patronage can offer (at the price of occasional lashings of nudity). I watched the first four episodes in one binge, perhaps not the most measured approach. The series pushes its way into the seat of one’s consciousness so inexorably that it really needs time to reflect on and savour.  Tonally, the series it reminds me most of is Red Riding Trilogy; an unsolved mystery in which threads stretch over multiple timeframes into the present; the terrible odour of sinister goings-on and corruption in high places; and the suffocating effects of such malignancy on those attempting to bring order to the world.


Not that McConaughey’s Detyective Rust Cohle has any belief in the essential beneficence of humanity going in. He wears his cerebral disenchantment with a barren universe on his sleeve, and is actively derisive of a part of the America where religious belief is integral to society, community, and family. His partner, Harrelson’s Martin Hart, doesn’t have the eviscerating intellect to extend his own analytical reach so far, but we gradually become aware of how his life is just as much of a battleground as Rust’s. Marty holds onto some vestige of hope even while he is destroying that which he cares for most. Rust merely sees himself as another terrible example of the species, one who happens to be well-tooled enough to deter even more terrible examples of the species.


Structured through 2012 interviews by Detectives Gilborough (Michael Potts, Brother Mouzone in The Wire) and Papania (Tory Kittles) with Rust (now no longer with the force and working in a part-time capacity, but spending three days of the week in a stupor) and Marty (now a private detective), the former partners offer takes both complementary and differing on each other and their investigation into a case Rust is convinced is the work of a serial killer (“She had antlers”). The actors just aboutpull off the visual conceit of posing as their 1995 versions. McCconaughey’s looking way healthier than he did in The Wolf of Wall Street, clearly having managed to pile back on a few pounds since Dallas Buyers Club, but his later incarnation is a desolate image of a man gone to seed; any attempts to stave off addiction and retain a facility for life and his abilities appear to have long-since departed. Marty is older, balder, but not much wiser; an indication of how age may mature us physically but it’s no guarantee of the accumulation of learning or insight. He doeshave a fair degree of insight into his nihilistic partner and recognition of his abilities, however,. Rust’s  loner status is shown to derive from personal tragedy (“Past a certain age, a man without a family can be a bad thing”, we are warned). A passing reference notes that they split up in 2002, 10 years ago.


The interplay between McConaughey and Harrelson, friends in real life but reluctant accomplices here, is electric. The former’s is the naturally showier role, the Holmes to Harrelson’s Watson. But Watson carries around an awful lot of baggage. He is conducting an affair with a court stenographer (Alexandra Daddario) while his wife Maggie (Michelle Monaghan, note perfect and perpetually underrated) is, for the time being, oblivious. Marty can’t get his partner to open up, but when he does he wishes he hadn’t; “I just want you to stop saying odd shit”. Rust’s existential dismay isn’t going to lift (“I don’t sleep, I just dream”), and we learn that in addition to his domestic traumas (he lost a child in a car accident, then his wife left) he subjected himself to the soul-destroying duties of a deep cover narcotics officer. Is Rust drinking Lone Star beer a cute reference to a previous lawman McConaughey played in the film of the same name?


Appropriately for a series where the murders are the backdrop and the effects on these detectives mentally and emotionally is key, the strongest scene in the first episode is Rust’s dinner invitation to Marty’s home. He turns up plastered, and Marty sobers him up enough to enable a few minutes at the family table before a rescue call comes through. But then Rust doesn’t go, finding himself able to open up to Maggie and helping himself to food, much to Marty’s mystification. Rust has made an unlikely connection .


As for the plot and overarching themes, the murder of a prostitute in ritualistic fashion is, on the face of it, a fairly bog premise. But the adornments (and I don’t mean the antlers) hold the key to making it seem fresh. The Christianity versus rational despair is perhaps on the heavy-handed side. Rust takes an extreme view due to his own experiences, one that is no doubt exacerbated by the fervour of the Louisiana setting, but in the wake of True Blood (which is even less subtle) it does feel like the makers are beating a horse that has already been chopped up and reformed as hamburgers. As the tale progresses there will be invocations to deadly dark deeds and Satanic rites (I must admit, the possibility of a supernatural element to the story didn’t occur to me, and I’m unconvinced that such readings will bear fruit), and what’s the betting Reverend Tuttle (Jay O. Sanders) is somewhere in the mix? Or perhaps this is an elaborate red herring, playing on exactly the kind of preconception an audience would have. The ending is a highly effective poser, that won’t find any clarification in the first half of the series at least. “How could it be him, when we already got him in ’95?” It’s a question that casts light on the tecs’ tack in focussing on the ways and means of Rust.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I never strangled a chicken in my life!

Rope (1948) (SPOILERS) Rope doesn’t initially appear to have been one of the most venerated of Hitchcocks, but it has gone through something of a rehabilitation over the years, certainly since it came back into circulation during the 80s. I’ve always rated it highly; yes, the seams of it being, essentially, a formal experiment on the director’s part, are evident, but it’s also an expert piece of writing that uses our immediate knowledge of the crime to create tension throughout; what we/the killers know is juxtaposed with the polite dinner party they’ve thrown in order to wallow in their superiority.

They'll think I've lost control again and put it all down to evolution.

Time Bandits (1981) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam had co-directed previously, and his solo debut had visual flourish on its side, but it was with Time Bandits that Gilliam the auteur was born. The first part of his Trilogy of Imagination, it remains a dazzling work – as well as being one of his most successful – rich in theme and overflowing with ideas while resolutely aimed at a wide (family, if you like) audience. Indeed, most impressive about Time Bandits is that there’s no evidence of self-censoring here, of attempting to make it fit a certain formula, format or palatable template.

You must have hopes, wishes, dreams.

Brazil (1985) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam didn’t consider Brazil the embodiment of a totalitarian nightmare it is often labelled as. His 1984½ (one of the film’s Fellini-riffing working titles) was “ the Nineteen Eighty-Four for 1984 ”, in contrast to Michael Anderson’s Nineteen Eighty-Four from 1948. This despite Gilliam famously boasting never to have read the Orwell’s novel: “ The thing that intrigues me about certain books is that you know them even though you’ve never read them. I guess the images are archetypal ”. Or as Pauline Kael observed, Brazil is to Nineteen Eighty-Four as “ if you’d just heard about it over the years and it had seeped into your visual imagination ”. Gilliam’s suffocating system isn’t unflinchingly cruel and malevolently intolerant of individuality; it is, in his vision of a nightmare “future”, one of evils spawned by the mechanisms of an out-of-control behemoth: a self-perpetuating bureaucracy. And yet, that is not really, despite how indulgently and glee

Oh, you got me right in the pantaloons, partner.

The Party (1968) (SPOILERS) Blake Edwards’ semi-improvisational reunion with Peter Sellers is now probably best known for – I was going to use an elephant-in-the-room gag, but at least one person already went there – Sellers’ “brown face”. And it isn’t a decision one can really defend, even by citing The Party ’s influence on Bollywood. Satyajit Ray had also reportedly been considering working with Sellers… and then he saw the film. One can only assume he’d missed similar performances in The Millionairess and The Road to Hong Kong ; in the latter case, entirely understandable, if not advisable. Nevertheless, for all the flagrant stereotyping, Sellers’ bungling Hrundi V Bakshi is a very likeable character, and indeed, it’s the piece’s good-natured, soft centre – his fledgling romance with Claudine Longet’s Michele – that sees The Party through in spite of its patchy, hit-and-miss quality.

I'm an old ruin, but she certainly brings my pulse up a beat or two.

The Paradine Case (1947) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock wasn’t very positive about The Paradine Case , his second collaboration with Gregory Peck, but I think he’s a little harsh on a picture that, if it doesn’t quite come together dramatically, nevertheless maintains interest on the basis of its skewed take on the courtroom drama. Peck’s defence counsel falls for his client, Alida Valli’s accused (of murder), while wife Ann Todd wilts dependably and masochistically on the side-lines.

A herbal enema should fix you up.

Never Say Never Again (1983) (SPOILERS) There are plenty of sub-par Bond s in the official (Eon) franchise, several of them even weaker than this opportunistic remake of Thunderball , but they do still feel like Bond movies. Never Say Never Again , despite – or possibly because he’s part of it – featuring the much-vaunted, title-referencing return of the Sean Connery to the lead role, only ever feels like a cheap imitation. And yet, reputedly, it cost more than the same year’s Rog outing Octopussy .

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019) (SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You can’t climb a ladder, no. But you can skip like a goat into a bar.

Juno and the Paycock (1930) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s second sound feature. Such was the lustre of this technological advance that a wordy play was picked. By Sean O’Casey, upon whom Hitchcock based the prophet of doom at the end of The Birds . Juno and the Paycock , set in 1922 during the Irish Civil War, begins as a broad comedy of domestic manners, but by the end has descended into full-blown Greek (or Catholic) tragedy. As such, it’s an uneven but still watchable affair, even if Hitch does nothing to disguise its stage origins.

I think you’re some kind of deviated prevert.

Dr. Strangelove  or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) (SPOILERS) Kubrick’s masterpiece satire of mutually-assured destruction. Or is it? Not the masterpiece bit, because that’s a given. Rather, is all it’s really about the threat of nuclear holocaust? While that’s obviously quite sufficient, all the director’s films are suggested to have, in popular alt-readings, something else going on under the hood, be it exposing the ways of Elite paedophilia ( Lolita , Eyes Wide Shut ), MKUltra programming ( A Clockwork Orange, Full Metal Jacket ), transhumanism and the threat of imminent AI overlords ( 2001: A Space Odyssey ), and most of the aforementioned and more besides (the all-purpose smorgasbord that is The Shining ). Even Barry Lyndon has been posited to exist in a post-reset-history world. Could Kubrick be talking about something else as well in Dr. Strangelove ?

Sir, I’m the Leonardo of Montana.

The Young and Prodigious T.S. Spivet (2013) (SPOILERS) The title of Jean-Pierre Jeunet’s second English language film and second adaptation announces a fundamentally quirky beast. It is, therefore, right up its director’s oeuvre. His films – even Alien Resurrection , though not so much A Very Long Engagement – are infused with quirk. He has a style and sensibility that is either far too much – all tics and affectations and asides – or delightfully offbeat and distinctive, depending on one’s inclinations. I tend to the latter, but I wasn’t entirely convinced by the trailers for The Young and Prodigious T.S. Spivet ; if there’s one thing I would bank on bringing out the worst in Jeunet, it’s a story focussing on an ultra-precocious child. Yet for the most part the film won me over. Spivet is definitely a minor distraction, but one that marries an eccentric bearing with a sense of heart that veers to the affecting rather than the chokingly sentimental. Appreciation for