Ha, great point.

Noblemen06 said:

---

We just got through this over the last week - haven't enjoyed a season of a show like this since True Detective, Season 1. Kate Winslet was amazing and the last several episodes were seriously fun/tense.

If I learned anything from both shows (TD:S1 and this one), if there's someone doing lawn maintenance, you need to keep your eye on them.

---

Heck not only those but TD:S3 Mike Ardoin knew the missing girl Julie afrom when they were kids and in fact through his LANDSCAPING business ends up finding Julie many years later as she is at the convent where he is the landscaper. He later marries her and has a kid with her who we see Lucy Ardoin.

So he wasn't the killer - but the landscaper was integral to her remaining hidden and helped fake her death at the convent too.

Just finished. What an absolute garbage ending. Just poor and lazy writing. Sick of the "female lead detective needs help" plot line with crazier endings. Outside of the deacon being a priest I enjoyed it until the end. The atrocities of the ballistics and plot holes to end it completely changed my views.

tk for tu juan said:

---

I do not think I've ever cheered about a kid taking a lunch tray to another kid's head, until tonight

---

What about now?

Carlo4 said:

---

tk for tu juan said:

---

I do not think I've ever cheered about a kid taking a lunch tray to another kid's head, until tonight

---

What about now?

---

Nope, still would cheer. Punk bully deserved it

The writer created some really good characters and wrote a good story. Season 2 may not be terrible, even if most of Mare's personal problems are resolved.

gigemJTH12 said:

---

WelchAg said:

---

I think a second season would be a horrible idea

---

is there really any negative to it?

it will make tons of money. its not going to ruin the rep of season 1. True Detective season 2 was not good IMO and S1 is still talked about as the best season of TV ever by some.

I actually agree that a season 2 of this would not be great. but cant blame them for doing it.

---

Since Season 1 blew, yes, there is.

gigemJTH12 said:

---

WelchAg said:

---

I think a second season would be a horrible idea

---

is there really any negative to it?

it will make tons of money. its not going to ruin the rep of season 1. True Detective season 2 was not good IMO and S1 is still talked about as the best season of TV ever by some.

I actually agree that a season 2 of this would not be great. but cant blame them for doing it.

---

True Detective seasons are also stand alone, so may as well be an entirely different show. Sure, it would make money and I wouldn't blame them, but I don't think it would be good. I just don't see a natural way to start a season 2 without creating a whole new set of circumstances and events. Winslet did a phenomenal job but I was more captured by the interconnected storylines and situations than I was with her character. Her character/story just made it that much more compelling.

The new scenarios would just be hard to believe. I'm with you there. Introducing a new plot would be ridiculous because how many crazy ass things can happen in one small town.

Now, if it fed off one of the other plots, I could see it.

That prediction was definitely off the cuff, and a slight joke since everyone in the town is guilty

Excellent show. My favorite thing about HBO is these one-off miniseries type shows. Next up is Sharp Objects, pretty grim so far but hopefully it can match Mare.

End of ep 5 = Silence of the Lambs.

Holy crap.

Didn't except Zabel to get killed.

TCTTS said:

---

Except that no one here has spoiled anything yet. Once more for the cheap seats, that there is a big death in a murder mystery series - even if specifying said death as occurring in episode five - is not a spoiler, especially in a thread devoted to said series. In a show like this, any character outside of Mare could be offed in any episode. This is the dumbest conversation ever. Again, in all of our bickering, no one has even said who dies! Ha, I don't even know what we're arguing about anymore.

---

Whether that is a spoiler is subjective. You did say tragic and game-changing death.

We're dredging up this - the dumbest conversation ever - over two months later?

It's a murder mystery. "Tragic and game-changing death" comes with the territory.

Also, don't click in the thread of an on-going TV series if you don't want to be spoiled is pretty much TexAgs Entertainment Board 101.

So I'm just starting with the final episode, and my one complaint has to be the gigantic red herring which could also be conceived as a plot hole -- why did Erin claim that Frank was her baby's dad?

Hope that isn't left unresolved...

Went back and starred this. Nicely done.

Great show and a great ending. Kate Winslet has the Emmy in the bag as far as I'm concerned.

I guess my one minor complaint is that they went a little TOO heavy on the red herrings. Frank being the father (still don't get why Erin would say this), Dylan, the deacon, etc. Granted it was fun to theorize along the way, but it would be nearly impossible to guess the actual killer until the fifth episode at the earliest.

Still, one of the best detective shows I've ever seen, and right up there with True Detective as far as I'm concerned.

Jesus Christ, dude.

You have WAY too much time on your hands.

thanks for the 2 months + a few days reply. i guess.

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

So I'm just starting with the final episode, and my one complaint has to be the gigantic red herring which could also be conceived as a plot hole -- why did Erin claim that Frank was her baby's dad?

Hope that isn't left unresolved...

---

I went back and re-watched that scene. Erin did not tell her friend that Frank was the father. She only told her that Dylan was not the real father, but she wouldn't say who actually was. Her friend speculated it was Frank because she saw him dropping off diapers and other items.

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

Also......the focus in that picture Mare was looking at from the lake trip was focused on Erin and Billy at the table staring at her.

But there was a third person standing behind Billy and facing away with a #4 Eagles jersey on.

Could be that person is who is in the other photo the police chief saw. All the Ross's were really evasive about who all was on this trip.

---

We just finished this show and I want to parachute in with a very late comment of "The real killer is Kevin Kolb?!?!"

Philly would be cool with that.

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Went back and starred this. Nicely done.

Great show and a great ending. Kate Winslet has the Emmy in the bag as far as I'm concerned.

I guess my one minor complaint is that they went a little TOO heavy on the red herrings. Frank being the father (still don't get why Erin would say this), Dylan, the deacon, etc. Granted it was fun to theorize along the way, but it would be nearly impossible to guess the actual killer until the fifth episode at the earliest.

Still, one of the best detective shows I've ever seen, and right up there with True Detective as far as I'm concerned.

---

On a work trip so binged this. Erin never said anything about Frank. Her friend saw them together, and made the assumption.

Yes, I was later to this party. Never had HBO until now.

Really appreciate everyone's comments - again, I'm sorry I missed the party.

But I have one question:

When John was arrested for being the shooter, did they ask him where the gun was? Because the bullet in the tree would not have matched John's gun. And the forensics experts knew the gun was a Colt police .38 with left hand striations on the bullet. I don't remember John ever saying he threw the away or in the river, so, except for John confessing, there wasn't any real proof he did it. Right? I would imagine the ballistics expert would have pointed this out and the case wouldn't be closed.

Sorry to bring this up. I know it was a while ago, but you guys were so into it!

I put it on par with the first True Detective.

And as good as the actors were, I was most impressed by Lor.