The fourth episode of Lanterns involved a few dialog scenes between John and Hal reminiscent of those in True Detective between Marty and Rust. This makes sense as one of the main creators of Lanterns, Peter Safran, admires True Detective and wanted to make Lanterns a detective story similar to it.
In the first season of True Detective the two main protagonists, Marty and Rust, often speak to one another candidly while driving from one location to another. John and Hal attempt to emulate these conversations in the fourth episode of Lanterns. It doesn’t work, or at least it doesn’t work as well. Why not, you ask? A good question. Let’s examine.
Marty and Rust Dialogs
The dialogs between Marty and Rust are captivating, hilarious, informative, and move the story along. They start in the first episode and continue throughout the series. The vast majority of viewers love these scenes. They are not action scenes with explosions and gun fights. It’s just two guys sitting in a car, talking about the case, their philosophy about life, and their own lives. It works, but why?
There are a number of factors about these scenes that make them compelling. The overarching plot of the horrific murder is interesting. The two men are working together to solve the case, and while being fundamentally different, respect each other greatly. Woody Harrelson and Matthew McConaughey are fantastically good actors. They react to one another realistically and the dialog rings true. Yes, I say as I watch, that’s the exact reaction I expect from Marty to Rust’s metaphysical mumbo-jumbo. The dialog is hilarious at times and shocking at times. It varies. Sometimes Rust gets the best of Marty, sometimes it’s the other way around.
The dialog reveals the nature of both men, their outlook on life. We learn about them, we learn about the case, their plans, their lives. The story moves forward every time they talk. Perhaps the case doesn’t move forward but we learn something. We know more than we did before the conversation started.
John and Hal Dialogs
The dialogs between John and Hal are largely dull, lifeless, and do not move the story forward. They don’t start until the fourth episode. I don’t want to be too harsh here, the dialogs aren’t awful but in comparison to Marty and Rust, they are weak. Why don’t they have that same crackling energy?
A big part of the problem is John’s character. He is lifeless, boring, monotone. I don’t think the problem is with Aaron Pierre’s acting ability. This is the direction the character is driven. He is largely one-dimensional, fearless is his only trait. I follow orders. Yes, ma’am. I do what I’m told. Hal is a broader character, a far more interesting character in many ways but he is also somewhat one-dimensional, he’s a self-centered jerk.
The two characters just don’t listen to each other in the same way Marty and Rust do. Marty and Rust respond to each other. John and Hal simply speak their programmed lines in proper order. They don’t really listen to each other, react to what the other one just said, and therefore it’s less of a conversation and more of a pair of monologues. I am Hal and this is why I am the way I am. I am John and this is the way I am.
The conversations don’t really move the plot forward a great deal. We just hear John and Hal talking but nothing is accomplished. There is some movement but it’s minimal. They drone and I tune out.
Lack of a Compelling Plot
The overall plot of Lanterns is far less compelling that True Detective. In True Detective the opening scene is the disturbing murder. Lanterns just doesn’t have this compelling plot. What is going on? Some guy is a Manhunter which is bad. Why? Not sure. What has this Manhunter done that’s so awful? Not sure. Because the mystery is much less compelling, the dialog is also.
Conclusion
It’s not easy to explain why the dialog between Marty and Rust is so fantastic and that between John and Hal is pedestrian. There are many factors. Acting, writing, plot, themes, and more. I think it’s great that Lanterns tries to emulate the dialog of True Detective but I’m afraid it falls well short. This is not a terrible insult. It’s difficult to match near perfection, and hey, they are trying!
Tom Liberman