Skip to main content

There is no such thing as forgiveness. People just have short memories.

True Detective
1.6: Haunted House

The far-out theorising of the fifth episode (probably my favourite so far) is all but jettisoned as True Detective is brought back down to earth with a thud and a bump and a grind in Haunted House. It’s a definite and intentional pullback from the investigation side (barring a couple of scenes, and one especially memorable one), which tidies the hedgerows and brings the narrative fully up-to-date. And it serves to really cement that this is all about the decaying lives of the detectives at its centre; the solving of the crime needs to pay-off satisfyingly to justify not being a high class variant on The Mentalist’s progressively less-and-less satisfying Red John arc, but it’s the reverberations in the lives of Rust and Marty that really count. And once it’s over the great scenes filter back into the mind; Rust’s interrogation of the murderous mother, his encounter with Tuttle, the most stunning scene of the episode between him and Maggie (that soundtrack is the most sinister the series has produced outside of a crime scene). And through it all, raging at his loss of control over the women in his life is the emotionally impotent Marty.


This episode, from start to finish, shines a light on Marty’s short fuse temper and turbulent inner world. In any situation he cannot take charge of, he resorts to violence. We kick off with him beating up the Emos who went with Audrey (a scene that surprisingly shows the punches being pulled, unlike the superbly executed later altercation with Rust). The rage inside just will not cease. It isn’t long before he is back to his licentious ways (I wonder how the production meetings go with any high-minded potential show runner; presumably there’s a minimum shag content required), and Rust’s eerily predictive rebuke, when Marty gave Beth (Lili Simmons, no stranger to disrobing in Banshee) money to encourage her to find another line of work back in 1995, comes home to roost; it was indeed a down payment. And one that proves to be the final straw in his marriage when Maggie finds out.


His uncontrollable fury finds him poised to strangle her when she reveals she slept with his partner (“I haven’t been fucked like that since before the girls” she says, going for his emotional jugular). The flying fists when Marty encounters Rust for the last time (at least, as far as we know) until 2012 are predictable; one gets the sense Rust shows up at the police station because he’d rather get the inevitable out of the way. And then there’s the last scene, wherein Marty has clearly been sufficiently unsettled by the hypotheses of Gilbough and Papania that he is going armed to his drinking rendezvous with Rust. At least, that’s my take. It could be he’s still out for pure vengeance after all this time, but he surely would have finished it before this point if that were the case.


Harrelson is a tour de force throughout, utterly convincing as a man afflicted by demons he lacks the facility to recognise. He is unable to exert traditional masculine values because they are unwanted or unneeded. He’s out of his depth with his family and his job, and everything he touches he breaks. Not through single-minded drive the way Rust does, but through bull-headed blindness. He is unable to stop and reflect, and unwilling to adjust and restrain himself. He does more than enough here for us to see why his elder daughter disdains him so (and why his even his younger one seems to have had enough). And, while on one level it’s sad that Maggie should sink to the level of enacting pure revenge, for her it’s a cathartic moment and one he’s had coming for a long time.


After putting up with his shit for five episodes, Maggie serves her dish of revenge with jaw-dropping calculation and precision. She knows, from the time of their iced tea afternoon, that Rust reserves affection for her (even though his rational mind and intellect repeatedly reject her), and she is able to use it to her advantage and his abject recoil. We haven’t seen his abilities usurped like this before, his weakness exposed, and the actors, and Pizzolatto and Fukunga, observe the sequence perfectly. She half apologises (“I’m sorry. This will hurt him”), as he is merely an instrument in her husband’s destruction.


But it’s also evident that she doesn’t have Marty’s facility for attachment-free carnal abandon. She couldn’t go through with her bar pick-up; there was a connection with Rust, making her action so much more thunderous and effective. It’s one of the series’ big gasp moments, and Rust’s response (“Get the fuck out of here!”) is of someone who can’t quite believe how he’s been played, and that she would do such a thing. It only goes to reconfirm all his worst thoughts about human nature.


The Maggie of 2012 is delightfully sure of herself. Careful with her words, and revealing nothing more than she feels necessary, Maggie knows just how to control the detectives who make the mistake of treating her like a cop’s wife (because they have wives and think they know how to use the kid gloves to get what they want). The subtle make-up gives Monaghan a slightly gaunt look; if Harrelson is now playing his age, she needs to be aged-up (but she’s still considerably haggard than McConaughey). She is dutifully complimentary with her comments on Rust (to be honest, the device of bringing her in for a quiz seems a bit off; it’s fully needed in story terms, but it doesn’t stand up to much analysis, as they’re hardly going to prove his guilt in the case from someone so peripheral). “Rust knew exactly what he was, and there was no talking him out of it”. She may feel the need to redress the wrong she has done him, but it’s also as simple as his general outlook looks wholly correct when squared against her ex-husband’s follies. She clearly has a deep respect for him (“He was responsible. There are not a lot of responsible people in the world”; an insight into why the trick she pulls is so wrenching).


In some ways this is Maggie’s episode, and it may be why it hasn’t gone down quite as well with the more True Fandom-orientated desire for further word on Carcosa. That just isn’t really happening now, is it? Apparently Pizzolatto said all the clues were there in the first episode, so any descent into hell is going to be an interior one for the now ex-detectives rather than a lurid reveal of diabolical occultism. I’d imagine the climax to Seven, without Kevin Spacey (or the colourful killings that preceded his entrance); what’s important in that film is the effect all this has on the detectives. That’s what lingers most in Fincher’s film. But, as I said, if the solving of the mystery is a damp squib it may go to weaken the series’ bid for instant classic status. There’s a balance to be struck.


Rust is also on a path to his low point here. He summarises his sour insight into an empty universe as, following his punch-up with Marty, he resigns; “Yeah, fuck this. Fuck this world”. Even there, his words are punctuated by philosophical analysis (although his acid humour is also present as he compliments Marty on his hook).  In fact, there are more than enough moments in this episode to satisfy the detective story side, it’s just that they aren’t so vital.


Shea Whigham’s return as now ex-reverend Theriot is a surprisingly sympathetic one, and rather undercuts the contempt shown by Rust at their last encounter. He’s shown to be a man of integrity but a weakness for the liquor. His nuggets of information add to the mythology of the investigation, as he drops references to a 12th century Franciscan mystic named Telios De Lorca and a folder within the monk’s tome containing pictures of naked children. It’s confirmation to Rust of his suspicions of the Tuttle ministry (Theriot left soon after) but the main event is Rust’s meeting with Tuttle himself. But Tuttle’s full involvement in this dark ring of abuse (“Women, children disappearing” as Rust says) must surely remain debatable right now since, whether Rust offed the reverend or not, it clearly hasn’t stopped the murders.


The encounter is riveting viewing. Set in a bright airy room, watched over by suitably bad taste neon cross, the two square off against each other with equal composure. Tuttle allows no tells to slip when Rust sets out why he’s there and Jay O Sanders ensures he is wonderfully sharp with his insights (“It’s hard to trust a man who cant trust himself with a beer, don’t you think?”) Maybe Tuttle knows this because Rust is on Carcosa now or, more mundanely, he just has good contacts in the police department. And his goodbye (“Goodbye detective. You’ll be in my thoughts”) suggests Rust may have mis-stepped, especially since he still hasn’t wrapped things up a decade later. All Rust has done is bring the full weight of the police department down on himself (he gets suspended) and shown his hand to Tuttle before it was perhaps opportune to do so.


As Rust says on getting the news that he’s to be disciplined, “I’m the person least in need of counselling in this entire fucking state”. But it’s also evident that by this point his ruthless focus has impaired his ability to pursue his goal. Wilfully inciting his partner’s anger by pointing out his deficiencies as a detective (“You’re nobody without me. There is no you. So type the fucking report, huh?”; in part, it isn’t entirely true, as Marty was a shining star before Rust joined, although there are occasions enough to veer towards agreement with “Goddam, you moron!”), he has as little respect for the chain of command (accusing his bosses of incompetence).


Most illustrative of Rust’s unvarnished honesty is his interrogation of a mother who has killed her children but claimed sudden infant death syndrome. His thoughts on family are consistent with his previous form (“Some people mistake a child as an answer. A way to change their story”). He shows all the tactility necessary to elicit a confession and then, without missing a beat, instructs, “Prison can be very hard on those who hurt kids. If you get a chance, you should kill yourself”. It’s a breath-taking moment, as instructive of Rust’s worldview as his reaction to being used by Maggie.


The other moment to note involving Rust is his visit to the girl he and Marty rescued in 1995, now in a semi-catatonic state. She is roused by his arrival, and confirms the existence of the giant man with the scars (is he the guy on the lawnmower, then? I guess he’d need to stand up for us to be sure. Or maybe Kevin Spacey will enter, on stilts); he was the worst, we learn. And then she starts screaming hysterically. Can she see the demon within Rust?


So is that it for flashbacks? It would certainly appear so. Rust has been driving around with the same busted tail light for 10 years, and now he’s going to buy Marty a drink. Scratch that, “Actually, why don’t you buy me a beer”. I’m looking forward to hearing what they have to talk about. Nice to hear Marty get in one of his weekly cracks at Rust (they’re rare, but well-judged): “Change your hair?” I name checked Seven before, and I can only reiterate the feeling that, even if both these guys are left standing in two episodes time, something irreversibly shattering to their lives and minds is yet to transpire.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How would Horatio Alger have handled this situation?

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) (SPOILERS) Gilliam’s last great movie – The Zero Theorem (2013) is definitely underrated, but I don’t think it’s that underrated – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas could easily have been too much. At times it is, but in such instances, intentionally so. The combination of a visual stylist and Hunter S Thompson’s embellished, propulsive turn of phrase turns out, for the most part, to be a cosmically aligned affair, embracing the anarchic abandon of Raoul Duke and Doctor Gonzo’s Las Vegas debauch while contriving to pull back at crucial junctures in order to engender a perspective on all this hedonism. Would Alex Cox, who exited stage left, making way for the Python, have produced something interesting? I suspect, ironically, he would have diluted Thompson in favour of whatever commentary preoccupied him at the time (indeed, Johnny Depp said as much: “ Cox had this great material to work with and he took it and he added his own stuff to it ”). Plus

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

You were a few blocks away? What’d you see it with, a telescope?

The Eyes of Laura Mars (1978) (SPOILERS) John Carpenter’s first serial-killer screenplay to get made, The Eyes of Laura Mars came out nearly three months before Halloween. You know, the movie that made the director’s name. And then some. He wasn’t best pleased with the results of The Eyes of Laura Mars, which ended up co-credited to David Zelag Goodman ( Straw Dogs , Logan’s Run ) as part of an attempt by producer Jon Peters to manufacture a star vehicle for then-belle Barbra Streisand: “ The original script was very good, I thought. But it got shat upon ”. Which isn’t sour grapes on Carpenter’s part. The finished movie bears ready evidence of such tampering, not least in the reveal of the killer (different in Carpenter’s conception). Its best features are the so-uncleanly-you-can-taste-it 70s New York milieu and the guest cast, but even as an early example of the sub-genre, it’s burdened by all the failings inherit with this kind of fare.

To survive a war, you gotta become war.

Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985) (SPOILERS?) I’d like to say it’s mystifying that a film so bereft of merit as Rambo: First Blood Part II could have finished up the second biggest hit of 1985. It wouldn’t be as bad if it was, at minimum, a solid action movie, rather than an interminable bore. But the movie struck a chord somewhere, somehow. As much as the most successful picture of that year, Back to the Future , could be seen to suggest moviegoers do actually have really good taste, Rambo rather sends a message about how extensively regressive themes were embedding themselves in Reaganite, conservative ‘80s cinema (to be fair, this is something one can also read into Back to the Future ), be those ones of ill-conceived nostalgia or simple-minded jingoism, notional superiority and might. The difference between Stallone and Arnie movies starts right here; self-awareness. Audiences may have watched R ambo in the same way they would a Schwarzenegger picture, but I’m

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

One final thing I have to do, and then I’ll be free of the past.

Vertigo (1958) (SPOILERS) I’ll readily admit my Hitchcock tastes broadly tend to reflect the “consensus”, but Vertigo is one where I break ranks. To a degree. Not that I think it’s in any way a bad film, but I respect it rather than truly rate it. Certainly, I can’t get on board with Sight & Sound enthroning it as the best film ever made (in its 2012’s critics poll). That said, from a technical point of view, it is probably Hitch’s peak moment. And in that regard, certainly counts as one of his few colour pictures that can be placed alongside his black and white ones. It’s also clearly a personal undertaking, a medley of his voyeuristic obsessions (based on D’entre les morts by Pierre Boileau and Thomas Narcejac).

You don’t know anything about this man, and he knows everything about you.

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s two-decades-later remake of his British original. It’s undoubtedly the better-known version, but as I noted in my review of the 1934 film, it is very far from the “ far superior ” production Truffaut tried to sell the director on during their interviews. Hitchcock would only be drawn – in typically quotable style – that “ the first version is the work of a talented amateur and the second was made by a professional ”. For which, read a young, creatively fired director versus one clinically going through the motions, occasionally inspired by a shot or sequence but mostly lacking the will or drive that made the first The Man Who Knew Too Much such a pleasure from beginning to end.