“Fargo” is the television show that shouldn’t be as good as it is. Named after the acclaimed film by the Coen Brothers, at first glance it looks and feels like a remake — same setting, same crime-drama narrative contours, same Midwestern accent, dontchaknow. But in its first season, which aired on FX in 2014, it also felt like a show that was still trying to define its relationship to its predecessor. What was it supposed to be exactly? How close was it supposed to stay, and how far could it move away from, its source?Thankfully, at least for the show’s creators, “Fargo” was structured as an anthology series. Every season would offer a whole new story with a whole new cast, meaning that whatever didn’t work the first time around could be revised. This idea is not unprecedented in television, but was given a recent boost with the success of the first season of HBO’s “True Detective” and Ryan Murphy’s “American Horror Story” empire, which provided a template that had advantages to both the financial and creative sides of production: aside from the chance to rework the show each season, marquee names are more willing to move to television if the commitment time is reduced.The first season of “Fargo” was well-received and boasted big (enough) names — Billy Bob Thornton, Martin Freeman — within its talented cast, but was continually hindered by its attachment to adaptation. In the second season, the show has gone back in time to 1979, severing all connections to what came previously, and seems more focused on telling a good crime story instead of a good version of the original “Fargo.” They have dialed down the zaniness and brought in some outside influences, mostly visual, from the period in which it’s set — pulling it further away from the template set by the Coen Brothers and turning it into something that is, well, maybe not unique, but closer to its own thing.It’s not an insult to “Fargo” to claim that it’s not unique. It’s clearly indebted to its forbearers, and is not ashamed of announcing its influence. It’s also fun to watch, and lacks a self-importance that “True Detective” is determined to pound into the ground. “True Detective” is also fun to watch, but its embrace of cliché can feel like a burden on the show’s structure and pacing. “Fargo” has no filler: it’s completely engaging episode-to-episode, and shows no sign of letting go of its grip on the viewer in the remaining three episodes. And just remember: the show has already been renewed for a third season, so anything you don’t like might be fixed next year.
↧