So, two of the best critically acclaimed shows that aired this year have started this debate: Which show is the better one?

If you haven’t seen them, don’t worry, there are only mild spoilers here.

Both shows are anthologies, which means they would have a different cast and a different story every season. They both revolve around two times and involve law enforcement trying to hunt a baddie. While True Detective focuses more on the detectives, Fargo shows both sides: the cops and the baddies.

I liked both of them, but one better. So here is my slightly biased opinion.

Plot. TD follows an interview of two detectives on a case that they solved 17 years ago. The general arc is that the serial killer seems to still be alive. The story keeps switching between the past case and the interview, and that’s how we get to witness the character development. I felt however that the writers seemed to have lost their inspiration after about the fifth episode, and the big mystery that was building up and causing the anticipation for the show’s final episodes for two months was reduced to a very generic ending, neither fully resolved nor revealing a fearsome adversary.

Fargo. Not much can be said without revealing the plot, but first, it’s better if you watch The Coen Brothers’ movie first. The show follows the story 9 years after that and it involves a lone drifter who arrives at a small snowy town and influences the population with his violence and sets off a chain of crazy events, particularly for Lester Nygaard.

Characters. Although there are two detectives, Matthew McConaughey’s Rust Cohle got the much deserved attention.

His character is of a man very disturbed by his past, and the show regularly features his dark and nihilistic rants. You could say he’s a dark, brooding good guy. Marty, however is a man ruled by his emotions and impulsiveness, and often finds Rust strange, to say the least. Character development is observed only in these characters, though and the rest of the characters are just rural simpletons or women who have no other agenda than to get in bed with Marty.

Fargo’s lone drifter Lorne Malvo is completely different. Though we don’t know much about his past, we know and love his eccentricity. There are countless references to him being something supernatural, in a sense that he’s not human because he’s evil. He’s charming though, and if you like dark comedy, you will love his twisted shenanigans.

Martin Freeman’s character Lester however undergoes the most change throughout the season. I felt it tried to communicate several times the nature of Lester’s timid personality slowly gaining esteem to the point of ego, and not keeping it in check, and feeling invincible because he had become smart enough to get his away with situations, losing his heart and empathetic nature in the process. Take for example, when the cops tell the classic fox, cabbage and rabbit riddle to Lester and he comes up with the solution in a minute, but just a few minutes later, when Molly tells the story of Gandhi losing his shoe from a train and hence throwing the other one too, so whoever finds them can have some use of them, Lester fails to comprehend the reason behind this.

Tone.

True Detective is moody. The concept itself is dark, revolving around serial killers and paedophiles. It’s not as dark as Hannibal, but it’s dark. A lot of the times, there was a lot more emphasis on the tone, like it was making up for the thinly stretched story.

Fargo is witty. Despite all the crazy stuff going down, characters are cheerful every once in a while and there a lot of scenes where you can make many different inferences from the same lines. Also, it has these little stories and riddles that pull you in and teach you little lessons of life. You could say it’s one of the darkest comedies or one of the funniest yet beautiful crime stories. Fargo transitions very smoothly from serious to funny to serious again, often being bad-ass and funny at the same time. (The building shootout is my favourite TV scene)

Acting.

Both Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson do their job really well, and the acting’s the best part of TD. You could feel the detectives living their lives, relate to their thoughts, especially Rust’s and hope that he has a happy ending and some closure.

In Fargo, Billy Bob Thornton plays the baddie, and I think the Internet agrees that this is his best role to date. Martin Freeman’s acting is good, but as there a lot of other characters, you don’t see much of it. But the side characters are charming enough to glue you to the story too, including the henchmen Mr Numbers and Mr Wrench.

All being said, I liked True Detective but it had no re-watch value. I loved Fargo as it swayed from the mainstream, and had a much more satisfying and beautiful ending.

True Detective- 7/10.

Fargo- 9.5/10

What do you think?