- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: AMC's The Killing
Posted on 6/20/11 at 12:59 pm to glaucon
Posted on 6/20/11 at 12:59 pm to glaucon
I agree. If Holder was in on it from the get-go, what was the purpose of the hooker in the hotel room? Why was he shocked when he saw the poster of the councilman? I think why people are getting upset is that we were hoping this show was different than the rest but it just gave us the typical Hollywood crap we see from other shows like it.
2
Posted on 6/20/11 at 2:15 pm to LSUPERMAN
was a complete bs ending to me thats screams they redid it after finding out they had a season 2.
pretty sure they have come out and said season 2 will be a new case so that means we can find out who did that one at the end of season 2 unless they get picked up for season 3.
pretty sure they have come out and said season 2 will be a new case so that means we can find out who did that one at the end of season 2 unless they get picked up for season 3.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 2:31 pm to glaucon
Veena Sud bent all of you over and inserted a dry brutal fallace and is laughingly telling people to come back for more. 
Posted on 6/20/11 at 3:15 pm to dr smartass phd
quote:
Veena Sud bent all of you over and inserted a dry brutal fallace and is laughingly telling people to come back for more.
Pretty much
Posted on 6/20/11 at 3:23 pm to glaucon
quote:
I was not the first person to bring up BSG and Lost. I just do not see how one could dislike the finale of those two shows and find the season finale of The Killing satisfying
I know you didn't, i was meerly saying I didn't see either so I can't comment on them, however, I again assume you and the poster that brought them up are talking about the series finale and not just the end to a particular season.
quote:
I am having trouble seeing how Holder having some secret agenda throughout the whole season that we were not privy to makes any sort of sense at all.
I'm having trouble seeing what you mean by it doesn't make sense? We were not given a reason yet why Holder would have faked the picture or who was driving the car he got into at the end. Not knowing the reason doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. I can think of dozens of reasons. Now it would certainly seem that faking evidence would adversly affect his career, but that in and of it self doesn't mean he wouldn't do it.
quote:
Not having a resolution is one thing (there is something beautiful about the ending to the Soprano's). Deliberately ending your show with a bs, unearned curve-ball is another thing entirely
Once again you are comapring a series finale, where there will be no more episodes to explain what happened, to a season finale, where we are left with new questions that won't be answered until there are new episodes. I too though the case would be resovled in one season and whether the tricks were cheap or not is a matter of opinion. If you do like the fact you won't know what happend until next year, that's fine, but that does not mean the ending didn't make sense.
quote:
Also, I care so little about Richmond and the family friend I literally do not care what happened there (although not showing if he shot him or not was again just a cheap trick).
that's your opinion and that's fine, but I'd submit if you didn't care, you wouldn't be on here arguing about. The good news is, if you don't care, you don't have to watch next season to see what happened.
This post was edited on 6/20/11 at 3:28 pm
Posted on 6/20/11 at 3:27 pm to LSUPERMAN
quote:
If Holder was in on it from the get-go, what was the purpose of the hooker in the hotel room? Why was he shocked when he saw the poster of the councilman
maybe he wasn't in on it from the begining? We don't know who was in the car. Oh and how do we know the Call girl was telling the truth? Maybe she is working for someone else and was falsley accusing Richmond?
Posted on 6/20/11 at 3:37 pm to H-Town Tiger
Maureen Ryan does a better job of explaining the bs that was this season finale than I ever will. Also, just fyi, I had not read this until just before I made this post but it echos much of what I was getting at earlier and is perhaps even harsher than I was on the show:
Here is the whole article if you would like to read Maureen Ryan's Post on the Finale
quote:
I watched the last few minutes of the season in slack-jawed horror. Not the good kind of horror. I was stunned that the show would double back on so many things and then leave a host of new questions unanswered. Guess what? Richmond didn't do it. But Holder "proved" Richmond did it with evidence that could be easily discounted. If the person on the phone with Linden knew that the cameras on that bridge were out of operation, surely that bureaucrat could supply that information to anyone else who asked. So the fake picture would never hold up in court, if Richmond's case even got that far.
Was the picture produced to ruin Richmond's election chances? Don't know.
Why did Holder engineer or produce that photo? Don't know.
Who was he working for? Don't know.
What was that person's agenda? Don't know.
Did Belko (hey, remember Belko? He still exists. And apparently he's turned into a full-on psycho) actually manage to kill Richmond? Don't know.
Yes, folks, it's true. We all spent 13 hours watching a turgid murder mystery that left us, in some crucial arenas, with LESS INFORMATION than we had the day after we watched the season premiere. That's a great feeling, right?
What a mess. What an avoidable, idiotic, ill-conceived mess. It's actually quite laughable, when you think about it. If the show had managed to make us care about these people, maybe some of these turnabouts and switcheroos would have served as intriguing revelations. [Roseanne Roseannadanna John Belushi voice] "But noooooooooooooooo......" Once again 'The Killing' basically just pulled a bunch of random stuff out of its back pocket, and the most galling part is, the show apparently expects us to think all that is really cool and subversive.
No. When a good show breaks the rules, it offers good justifications for breaking those rules and offers interesting new paradigms, exciting new possibilities and/or great character development. 'The Killing' is not a good show, because it basically took all the questions we had, threw them back in our faces, added some more from left field, and said, "So long, suckers!"
The end of season 2 of 'Battlestar Galactica'? That was a great, great "What the hell" moment. This? This was just a melodramatic crapfest.
quote:
There was so much stupidity on display in 'Orpheus Descending,' and not all of it was in the final minutes. Why was Jack allowed to hang out with his dad again? Why did Linden change her mind about that? Don't know. Why didn't Stan tell Mitch that he's spent all their money on a house for the family? Even if she didn't particularly want the house, wouldn't that have been information that a normal person would have offered at some point? Guess not.
As for Linden's second visit to Richmond's office, I know it was meant to be a big emotional moment for the detective, but I couldn't get over the face that she was once again alone in a room with a guy she thought was a murderer. Last week, it was pretty preposterous that she was in his home when those emails arrived, but this week, her behavior was beyond preposterous. We have no idea whether she knew that Gwen was hanging around, but regardless, this time Linden was sure Richmond was a cold-blooded killer -- and she put herself to be alone in a room with him on purpose. She put herself in danger, she yelled at him for a while, she showed her hand in a pretty decisive way -- and then she didn't arrest him. Honestly, watching this finale was like being hit in the head with a tire iron. Repeatedly.
And then there's the whole reveal about Holder. From the start, has he been gaming the case and trying to frame Richmond? Nope, we don't even get to know when his betrayal began and what Holder's personal motivations have been. As I've been saying for weeks, Joel Kinnaman's performance has been the one redeeming thing about the show. But now his character is revealed to be a massive dirtbag in the last few minutes of the season. Thanks so much.
That isn't character development, because that is confounding information that, as is its wont, the show revealed without a hint of preamble or setup. We had no indication that Holder could play these kinds of deeply vicious games, we were given to understand that he truly cared about Linden as a partner and a friend, and yet we're just supposed to swallow that he was callously betraying her, possibly all season long.
Here is the whole article if you would like to read Maureen Ryan's Post on the Finale
This post was edited on 6/20/11 at 3:40 pm
Posted on 6/20/11 at 3:43 pm to glaucon
That about sums it up.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 3:48 pm to glaucon
That's cool, I don't disagree with some of it, but my view is that all it means is you and this Maureen person didn't like the ending, that's different from saying it didn't make sense. The questionable one is Holder because we have no idea what his motivation is. I assume those questions will be answered next year.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 3:48 pm to glaucon
quote:
Which is not a compelling reason to watch a show.
Why? I mean, we're 13 eps deep. The story is bigger than we thought... just because it's not about the death of Rosie Larsen and that's what the majority expected (case 1: rosie larsen, season finale: killer caught, hooray!. case 2: non descript murder victim, season finale: killer caught, hooray!). We've seen it all before, so many times. I don't need the immediate pay off knowing who killed Rosie... not if it means it's leading to a meatier, better story.
Now, if they do this through next season, I'll be in your camp.
quote:
The whole story has been red herring after red herring none of which have even been all that compelling.
I've seen this line used so much today, and I think improperly.
It's an ongoing investigation in a dramatic TV show. It wouldn't really be compelling or interesting in any way if they just didn't apply any emotion to every varying suspect.
Again, I don't think the idea here is that they are supercops who solve a crime in 10 hours because they found a shred of hair in a huge abyss and prove their overwhelming brilliance. We're walking through this case with them... clues turn them on to different suspects and they zero in on them only to find out if they are the person who committed the crimes (kinda like, ya know, real cops?), and most of the time it turns up nothing (hence the number of unsolved cases).
Of course the show is purposefully misleading you, but not just because "Oh hey, what the hell, let's frame this irrelevant guy" (which is much more how I'd see a red herring), but it's making you walk the steps of an investigation, which is usually a long, grueling process.
quote:
That wouldn't even be all that bad if the characters themselves were interesting and drove the story, but they are all humorless dolts.
That's your opinion, and a fair one. I like several of the characters, personally.
quote:
A murder mystery about a murdered girl could have been a pretty good show.
There's about 50 of them out there...
quote:
This, whatever the hell it is, is not.
We don't know what it is yet, but it's far too early to write it off as shite IMO.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 4:23 pm to OBUDan
quote:
Why? I mean, we're 13 eps deep. The story is bigger than we thought... just because it's not about the death of Laura Palmer and that's what the majority expected (case 1: Laura Palmer, season finale: killer caught, hooray!. case 2: non descript murder victim, season finale: killer caught, hooray!). We've seen it all before, so many times. I don't need the immediate pay off knowing who killed Laura... not if it means it's leading to a meatier, better story.
I've been burned spending time watching a show like this before that started out as if it was about solving a particular crime only to veer off into any number of tangents for what seemed like no other reason than to NOT solve the crime and end the show. In fact, it was my one worry about starting The Killing...that it not be another Twin Peaks. The X Files was like this as well.
And that's the problem...you either make each season finite, solving each case in 13 episodes so that you can have an entire arc, or you place yourself into a position to string the story along either to some hoped end date at which point they can wrap it up as they always planned to on their own terms and in their own time frame (say the producers got a three season deal and they planned to only have the show run three seasons) or as long as the network keeps paying you to produce it and then attempt to wrap it up when they tire of it which ALWAYS results in shitty endings.
Has anyone suggested that this story is completely written out all the way to the final episode at this point? If so and there's a plan, then fine...I might stick around. If not, then they're making it up as they go along and I'm likely out.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 4:29 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:
I've been burned spending time watching a show like this before that started out as if it was about solving a particular crime only to veer off into any number of tangents for what seemed like no other reason than to NOT solve the crime and end the show. In fact, it was my one worry about starting The Killing...that it not be another Twin Peaks.
I saw it compared to Twin Peaks earlier today as well.
So you weren't a fan of Twin Peaks, either? I haven't seen it, so I can't comment.
quote:
Has anyone suggested that this story is completely written out all the way to the final episode at this point? If so and there's a plan, then fine...I might stick around. If not, then they're making it up as they go along and I'm likely out.
The showrunner said this season was planned all the way to the finish, even if they cancelled it. So the ending we got was the ending it would have been. That leads me to believe they at leave have some type of framework for hte future mapped out (but how far, I'm unsure).
Posted on 6/20/11 at 4:40 pm to smokeswithwolves
I have thought about going on AMC.com and watching the episodes. Is it worth the time?
Posted on 6/20/11 at 4:46 pm to OBUDan
quote:
Why? I mean, we're 13 eps deep. The story is bigger than we thought... just because it's not about the death of Rosie Larsen and that's what the majority expected (case 1: rosie larsen, season finale: killer caught, hooray!. case 2: non descript murder victim, season finale: killer caught, hooray!). We've seen it all before, so many times. I don't need the immediate pay off knowing who killed Rosie... not if it means it's leading to a meatier, better story. Now, if they do this through next season, I'll be in your camp.
What made the pilot and concept of the show compelling to me was that the idea of one tragedy and one murder being important enough to observe ripple effects of that event on the police investigating it, the family of the victim, and the community at large in the form of the campaign. Rather than work on that, they decided to have somehow made as constant investigation of one murder into a procedural with the show seeming to settle on one suspect just to undercut that at the beginning of the next episode.
You seem to think that for some reason this is acceptable because it is TV. That said, I can pretty much guarantee you that a good part of AMC's audience does not need that type of bs plotting.
Furthermore, they have not done a particularly good job so far at making anything outside of the primary case (the campaign has been a rather awful and completely unrealistic waste of time) compelling so I don't see why I should be excited about something "bigger." I actually thought the whole point of the show was that one murder was tragic and big enough to matter. I guess not through.
quote:
I've seen this line used so much today, and I think improperly.
It's an ongoing investigation in a dramatic TV show. It wouldn't really be compelling or interesting in any way if they just didn't apply any emotion to every varying suspect.
Again, I don't think the idea here is that they are supercops who solve a crime in 10 hours because they found a shred of hair in a huge abyss and prove their overwhelming brilliance. We're walking through this case with them... clues turn them on to different suspects and they zero in on them only to find out if they are the person who committed the crimes (kinda like, ya know, real cops?), and most of the time it turns up nothing (hence the number of unsolved cases)
No, no, no and no. You can't defend this show on the quality of how well it follows the police investigation. It took them almost two weeks to really examine the biggest piece of physical evidence they had? Why the car was not the focus of the whole damn investigation was just maddeningly stupid. Seriously, in order to watch the show, you just had to shut off your brain when it came to the detective work (seriously, half of the red herrings probably should have been eliminated because they did not have any connection with the car). Which, by the way, I grant is the same for most TV shows but don't go pretending they were doing something novel with gritty realism here.
quote:
Of course the show is purposefully misleading you, but not just because "Oh hey, what the hell, let's frame this irrelevant guy" (which is much more how I'd see a red herring), but it's making you walk the steps of an investigation, which is usually a long, grueling process.
Which may have worked had decided to do the show from the detectives point of view. I wouldn't have a problem following them as the stumbled from suspect to suspect based upon the limited information that they and the audience had. But that isn't this show. The camera is an observer that follows any character whenever it wants to. It lingers on suspects acting guilty when they are alone. It gives us, the audience, more information to implicate the suspect than the detectives. It then, whenever the writer feels like, just undercuts that knowledge with new information that comes out of left field. Deus ex machina over and over again.
quote:
That's your opinion, and a fair one. I like several of the characters, personally
I liked some of the performances but as far as characters were concerned they all in the end were little more than plot devices for whatever the hell the writers wanted them to do.
quote:
There's about 50 of them out there...
Season long arcs about one murder? Not really. Homicide and Twin Peaks are probably closest and neither of them fit well.
quote:
We don't know what it is yet, but it's far too early to write it off as shite IMO.
Given that everything else in the show has turned into crap and the same creative team is going to be making season 2 I feel pretty confident in my projections.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 4:50 pm to glaucon
quote:
I can pretty much guarantee you that a good part of AMC's audience does not need that type of bs plotting.
One of the reasons for Breaking Bad's success, Vince pays off 3 or 4 times a season.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 5:01 pm to OBUDan
quote:
I saw it compared to Twin Peaks earlier today as well.
So you weren't a fan of Twin Peaks, either? I haven't seen it, so I can't comment.
At first...yes, quite a bit. It was hip, and cool and so different than anything else on. then it became a phenomenon and it became clear that David Lynch had absolutely no clue what he wanted to do with the story other than introduce cool, hip characters. By the time season two ended, it completely fizzled and no one cared anymore. It was recently posted here that the guy they finally pinned the murder on was actually only a camera guy who was shooting the show but had accidentally gotten caught in a reflection in one of the scenes!! The frick?!?
quote:
The showrunner said this season was planned all the way to the finish, even if they cancelled it. So the ending we got was the ending it would have been. That leads me to believe they at leave have some type of framework for hte future mapped out (but how far, I'm unsure).
If that's the case, then fine...though I do question that. it's rare that any production company is going to artificially limit itself to a set time to be sure to tell the story they want even if they can string it along and get paid some more. That's why, personally, I'd have preferred long, very dense 13 episode arcs...which would have made this show VERY different than every other crime drama on TV that wraps everything up in 50 minutes.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 6:05 pm to glaucon
quote:
What made the pilot and concept of the show compelling to me was that the idea of one tragedy and one murder being important enough to observe ripple effects of that event on the police investigating it, the family of the victim, and the community at large in the form of the campaign.
Well it seems you are more upset it didn't go the way you wanted/expected than anything.
quote:
Rather than work on that, they decided to have somehow made as constant investigation of one murder into a procedural with the show seeming to settle on one suspect just to undercut that at the beginning of the next episode.
I see it as a living investigation. Most cop shows don't really do the investigation justice, right? They leap around from event to event and you are just left to assume they figured out the necessary clues. I felt like The Killing took you through the process of actually investigating better than any show I've seen (note: I haven't see Homicide: Life of the Streets, which is supposedly the grand master of police procedurals). I felt like I was part of the investigation, rather than watching some people bully a couple of assailants and solving the crime through some abstract wit.
quote:
You seem to think that for some reason this is acceptable because it is TV. That said, I can pretty much guarantee you that a good part of AMC's audience does not need that type of bs plotting.
I'm not sure what this means, but sure, it's their story, they can tell it like they want. Just because it didn't proceed they wanted most expected/wanted doesn't mean it was bad, per se.
quote:
Furthermore, they have not done a particularly good job so far at making anything outside of the primary case (the campaign has been a rather awful and completely unrealistic waste of time) compelling so I don't see why I should be excited about something "bigger." I actually thought the whole point of the show was that one murder was tragic and big enough to matter. I guess not through.
The campaign was weak, I do agree there. But I do find Richmond interesting, as well as the mayor, as well as the power donor, and they all play some sort of sordid role in this deal.
See, we reacted entirely differently. Let me be clear: I Do not love this show. In fact, I was rather lukewarm to it most of the season. The finale made me actually like it a lot more. Why? Well, rather than putting a nice bow on it and moving along like all of life is happy and good, they take you down a different, and unexpected path. I found the idea of following a single murder to be retread and tired... but when it's revealed that this is actually a much deeper, layered story about corruption/deceit, it became a lot more compelling to me, personally.
But yes, I do see why people would hate it if they just wanted the typical murder, investigation, solve the crime, happiness type of plot.
quote:
No, no, no and no. You can't defend this show on the quality of how well it follows the police investigation. It took them almost two weeks to really examine the biggest piece of physical evidence they had? Why the car was not the focus of the whole damn investigation was just maddeningly stupid. Seriously, in order to watch the show, you just had to shut off your brain when it came to the detective work (seriously, half of the red herrings probably should have been eliminated because they did not have any connection with the car). Which, by the way, I grant is the same for most TV shows but don't go pretending they were doing something novel with gritty realism here.
Regardless of the quality of the police work (and there were a lot of questionable details I agree), to me it put you in the investigation better than other show. Not saying it was necessarily some flawless inside look at police work, but I felt like I was part of an investigation rather than watching a couple of stereotypical cops do the good/cop bad cop interviews, finding a piece of clothing and calling it a day.
quote:
Given that everything else in the show has turned into crap and the same creative team is going to be making season 2 I feel pretty confident in my projections.
Agree to disagree, then. Good discussion.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 7:08 pm to OBUDan
So just as an off topic to the debate whether the finale was good or not
does anyone still believe the councilman did it?
does anyone still believe the councilman did it?
Posted on 6/20/11 at 7:24 pm to TruLsu
quote:
does anyone still believe the councilman did it?
naw. i thought it was clear he was innocent for a while though... even after last week's events i was assuming it was someone close to him that was screwing him over somehow or he was just trying to help them keep it covered.
Posted on 6/20/11 at 7:29 pm to OBUDan
Yea I feel the same way. Felt they almost exposed him too early but then again I'm just not sure. I just watched the finale again and starting to piece together random probably wrong assumptions of how it could have possibly been holder who killed her.....
Thinking about how he owed the money for his 12 step program, how potentially someone who was hurt by the mob and possibly paid holder to kill Rosie because of Stan. Over and over all season holder had been trying to get linden to leave and how he could handle the case. He knew about the gas station in the middle of nowhere. Was involved in faking the photograph to frame the councilman.
shite I don't know could be anything. After my initial reaction of being pissed last night, I am enjoying how they ended it and they have me thinking about it more than usual. Well played IMO
Thinking about how he owed the money for his 12 step program, how potentially someone who was hurt by the mob and possibly paid holder to kill Rosie because of Stan. Over and over all season holder had been trying to get linden to leave and how he could handle the case. He knew about the gas station in the middle of nowhere. Was involved in faking the photograph to frame the councilman.
shite I don't know
could be anything. After my initial reaction of being pissed last night, I am enjoying how they ended it and they have me thinking about it more than usual. Well played IMO This post was edited on 6/20/11 at 7:32 pm
Page 22 of 23
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News