During the third episode of True Detective’s Season 2, there were a few scenes on a movie set. The fictional director had a man-bun and seemed like an alcoholic jerk who goes to industry sex-parties and gets blackout drunk. Since I’m so disconnected and apathetic towards the characters in this world, I didn’t really think much of it. But Vulture has theorized that the “director character” was possibly writer Nic Pizzolatto’s attempt to be a giant bitch about Cary Fukunaga, the director of TD’s Season 1. Now that I’ve read the Vulture piece… yes, it’s more than possible. Fukunaga became an internet crush last year, although I was already familiar with him because A) he dated Michelle Williams and B) he directed the Fassbender in the latest adaptation of Jane Eyre. Cary came off of True Detective with widespread praise and love, while Pizzolatto came off of the first season looking like a temperamental, egotistical, misogynistic douchebag. Of course Pizzolatto is passively-aggressively butthurt about Cary Fukunaga. Here’s part of Vulture’s story:
Rumors of tension between Cary Fukunaga, who directed all eight episodes of season one, and Nic Pizzolatto, who has written every episode of the show, have swirled since before the series even aired, but the two men have kept a tight lid on exactly what happened between them. Fukunaga said all the right things after it came out he wouldn’t be back for the show’s second season — other projects, heavy workload — and he remains onboard as an executive producer. But judging from Sunday night’s scene, it seems there’s a little lingering bad blood between the two, at least on Pizzolatto’s side. Why?
Just like Rust Cohle and Marty Hart, we need to go back to the beginning. As the rumors from last year put it, Pizzolatto and Fukunaga had a basic clash of personalities. Pizzolatto, as anyone who’s read a profile of him knows, is an intense dude; Vanity Fair saw in him “the aura of a bear or some other species of dangerous animal,” and that sentence was written by one of his friends. Fukunaga is said to be more laid-back. Could the bold writer with the raging soul of Hemingway simply have gotten annoyed with the chillaxed snowboard dude? It’s certainly possible, but plenty of people work alongside co-workers with different personalities without excoriating them by proxy.
Maybe their egos were a problem? Both Pizzolatto, a novelist, and Fukunaga, a film director, came from fields where they were used to being the supreme creative authority. It’s not hard to imagine the two men locked in a battle of wills over who had the final say, an impression that’s solidified when you read between the lines of the Hollywood Reporter cover story on Pizzolatto last summer, in which the True Detective team attempted to smooth over the rumors that the dual auteurs were at odds. Producer Scott Stevens allowed that the writer and director were “two people who want to be in charge of things,” but he swore that any disagreements between the two fell well within the bounds of normal on-set behavior. Pizzolatto agreed, telling THR: “Cary and I worked together really smoothly. There was never any contention. Of course, you’re going to have discussions and difference of opinion, but what matters is that everyone is working without ego toward the best realization of what we have.” (Fukunaga did not comment for the THR story.)
But if Pizzolatto was so eager to bury the feud story last year, why is he taking potshots now? The answer could lie in the divergent paths each man’s reputation has taken in the months since the season-one finale. After the underwhelming final installment, the wunderkind mystique fell off Pizzolatto like a heavy coat. His combative persona led to ill-advised tiffs with critics like Emily Nussbaum, particularly over the issue of the first season’s female characters, and he found himself accused of plagiarizing some of Rust Cohle’s best lines. Fukunaga, by contrast, got off nearly scot-free. His post-finale interviews were full of sharp, sensitive answers, and by the time the Emmys rolled around, he’d become the patron hunk of the thinking-woman’s internet. For a large portion of True D’s fan base, the matter was settled: Everything good about the first season was because of Fukunaga and Matthew McConaughey; everything bad was Pizzolatto’s fault.
(You know what else happened at the Emmys? Fukunaga didn’t thank Pizzolatto in his Best Director acceptance speech. Raise your hand if you think Pizzolatto has forgotten that.)
Ha, I totally forgot that Fukunaga didn’t thank Pizzolatto. That must have been salt in the wound because Nic didn’t win any Emmys that night. Ha! But yes, I agree with Vulture’s assessment – considering the clunky, hacky writing of Season 2, we can clearly see that Pizzolatto isn’t really all that. Fukunaga’s direction elevated mediocre scripts in Season 1 and Fukunaga got those performances out of Woody Harrelson and Matthew McConaughey. And Pizzolatto is SO MAD about it.
Photos courtesy of WENN, Getty.
Season 1 mediocre? How was it hacky? When you’ve finished your Kourtney Kardashian post you can respond.
I know right? When your done with your 5th Kim K post of the day maybe you should rewatch it.
+100000000
Relax Nic…
The hacky comments were in regards to season 2…
While I loved Season 1, I agree that the scripts were mediocre. The concept, the style, the tone, the performances – those were great. But the actual lines … no. I didn’t hear anyone raving about the script itself.
True Detectives is basically a white dude’s crime fantasy. Season 1 was a pretty good spin on that collection of tropes, but it wasn’t anything earth shattering. It was talked up SO MUCH as being gritty and realistic and amazing, and then when I finally watched it… I mean, it was good (Woody Harrelson and Matthew Mcwhatever did some amazeballs acting) but I wasn’t crazy impressed with it, overall.
What did I miss??????
Plus one
Gritty and realistic? Moody and dreamlike would be a more accurate description. I don’t think folks were praising it for its realism.
Dead girl in the fridge trope turned into a justification for beardy pseudo-intellectual white men to display their angst is hacky all on its own. No need to rewatch. And yeah, I’d rather watch Kim K whine about her baby weight than that any day.
I think Pizzolato would benefit from some writing staff to help him out.
No comment on the feud other than this seems very likely to have happened.
Yeah, there’s something about working with other people who can argue certain points and call out ideas that don’t work. He is definitely an example of someone who should have a pseudo writer’s room or how about this…maybe work with some women? I think how the female characters on Mad Men benefited so much because there were a lot of women writing that show (as well as producing, directing, etc.). But Cary is really what made season 1 great. His tracking shot in that one episode is all the evidence you need.
Season 1 was good because the evocative music right off fused with the landscape and the actors and it all created a very strong mood, esp. with the great directing of all the other actors.
The writing over time proved to be not up to the level of the initial expectation. And the ending stunk.
When Vince Vaughn was announced, I knew for sure Season 2 would be hideous, and everything I’ve heard confirms it.
Okay but which one is which in the photos? Obviously not a fan here…
Edit: never mind, glasses has the Emmy. Got it!
I just did a google search on this very topic and then came back to this site and here we go. Thanks for covering this. Can we get a do over this season with Cary at the helm?
+1
+1000
Pizzolatto has been showing his ass for a while, so this doesn’t shock me at all.
I mean, I’m sure it is a bitter pill to swallow to see all the praise and attention go to someone else, but when you already have a dubious rep for being hypersensitive, you maybe don’t want to be taking very obvious shots at someone. Obvs this is getting him attention and press, but it isn’t going to make him look better, it will just cement what everyone already thought or suspected.
And you know, people really want to like this show. The notices seem to be getting with each episode and lots of reviewers have already given the season good grades (I personally am going episode to episode right now, but that is me), so why waste that good will by being such a passive aggressive asshat? The fact that this happened so early in the season tells me he has been bitterly planning this for a while, which is kind of pathetic. All he is doing is keeping the feud front and center and making Cary Fukanaga look good. I can’t wait for the angry denial from PIzzolatto that we’re wrong.
I’m not watching season 2. Is it any good without Fukunaga? Not from what I’m reading on the internet. I do believe that the direction is what made it watchable last year. Because the story itself was kinda cliche.
same here. this season really showed how much of the success of the first season was Cary. the moment he moved away, it all came apart.
Did he? Well, he tried but it came out bland and lame just like season 2 of his show so far….
The excellent directing, beautiful cinematography and acting masked Season 1s writing issues big time. I’m trying to give season 2 a fair shake but it’s rough.
I agree. I hadn’t watched the first few episodes of season 1 but was bored one night. The single shot scene with Matthew was on and I was hooked from then. Obsessively so.
I stopped at episode 1. Too many ‘leads’, too much going on for a detective story [of any genre, anthology or whatever else]. Messy. Bad casting.
Writer/director feuds are always entertaining.
Especially when written with such flourish:
“Could the bold writer with the raging soul of Hemingway simply have gotten annoyed with the chillaxed snowboard dude? It’s certainly possible, but plenty of people work alongside co-workers with different personalities without excoriating them by proxy.”
I wonder what possessing the “raging soul of Hemingway” would feel like? I think I would like to have the “raging soul of Raggedy Ann.”
How is Pizzolatto’s writing hacky? When I think of a hack, I think of someone just phoning it in…barely putting in any effort to write good dialogue or logical plots. I think you can make many arguments about Pizzolatto’s writing – the dialogue is sometimes pretentious and unnatural, there’s a reliance on clichés and as Sunday’s episode proved the occasional cheap cliffhanger. But I don’t think Pizzolatto is phoning it – I think he’s trying really hard. He’s just not as talented as initially believed.
I think sometimes “hacky” can mean unoriginal, which one can definitely argue is a problem with Pizzolatto’s writing. Also, I think Pizzolatto definitely phoned in the ending of season 1. That was a rushed, unsatisfying ending. All that build up for what? But yes, people are realizing that this guy is not as talented as we all thought. As much as he thinks the show’s success is all about him, it’s not. Cary and Matthew had a lot to do with it.
Not just Fukunaga and McConaughey, but also Harrelson, and Arkapaw (the cinematographer). Together they really elevated what was, in the end, a disappointingly run-of-the-mill serial killer story.
So disappointing! I really thought there would be something to all that Carcosa/Yellow King/governor & religious dude’s family stuff and there just wasn’t. I went on some reddit before the last episode and there were people doing in-depth analysis of yearbook pictures that appeared in the background in different episodes, and giving these crazy elaborate but amazing theories. Every single thing I read would’ve been better than how it actually ended. Pizolatto should’ve consulted that particular reddit, the ending would’ve been much better.
hacky, as in he plagiarized a lot of his writing from other works.
In the sense that a hack is a writer who produces dull and unoriginal work, which I would argue is an overwhelmingly appropriate descriptor in the case of Pizzolatto. He may be trying or he may not be, but whatever the case, more often than not, his work is dull, trite and cliché-laden. On the rare occasion that it is not, it is what would more generously be called strongly influenced and less generously directly lifted from other authors’ works.
Reminds me of Steve McQueen (12 Years a Slave) fake applauding his writer when he won the Oscar. Hello passive aggression!
This is the kind of shot you take in season 3 after you’ve made season 2 a massive success without him. As is and given the so so reception of season 2 it makes Pizzolatto look pretty pathetic.
A good friend and I have both given up on this season: me after the second episode and her the third. It’s clear the magic was with Fukunaga. Now that’s he’s gone, we are left with supernatural schlock that makes Lost look sublime and well planned.
They can run all the PR they want for season 2, but this show is on its last legs. It’s a writing mess, a directorial mess, a casting mess. Too much of a mess to salvage.
So far I am unimpressed with season 2 of TD. I did catch the Fukunaga thing during the show. I sure hope it gets better because so far it’s confusing and not very compelling!
Took me four attempts to get through episode 2. It just shouldn’t be that hard. And whomever cast Vince Vaughan should be fired. He should stick to comedy.
+1000 on Vince
I’m team chillaxed snowboarder.
With Cary walking away with hardware and not Nic, you knew it was the beginning of the end.
I’m just here to lick the pictures of Cary Fukunaga, I mean damn
I could even learn to live with the stupid hairstyles