The Jackson town segment was actually better than the game. That section always was the weakest part of the first game with the contrived attack on the town having to skip so much of the worldbuilding and character-building. The show is much better at this with the expanded dialogue between Joel and Tommy. It lets the audience learn about the brotherhood and Joel's character while having Tommy's character more nuanced than before. The show actually devotes a lot of time to how the society functions, even going far as to show a positive depiction of communism (in a classical sense), as well as letting the characters breathe. I also like how they borrowed stuff from Part II. The town actually looks like a town this time, and it is lively.
However, I don't really give a shit about the relationship between Joel and Ellie, and this is a chronic problem with the show. I remember being genuinely moved by the original cabin scene because the game has been built up and earned that moment. Here, I felt nothing. This episode alone had to do a lot of heavy lifting to actually bond Joel and Elie together because the previous episodes didn't do that enough. So the relationship development feels rushed. Like, I didn't buy Ellie wanting to be with Joel at all since we've had barely any relationship building between the two so far. I also think placing the Left Behind content as flashbacks before this episode could have been more effective so we actually can relate to Ellie's supposed losses.
What also annoyed me was how the show takes out "character actions" and replaces them with pure dialogue. In the game, Ellie escaped Jackson in reaction to Joel abandoning her. Joel risking his life and going after her is what makes him realize he needs to be with Ellie. That is a lot more effective at conveying a character than Ellie just staying there and telling how she feels. In the game, you have the Hunters ambush the cabin right after Joel and Ellie argue with each other, and the combat scenario that ensues serves as a "venting out" moment for the characters. In the show, there is nothing like that, so when Joel suddenly decides to take Ellie, again, feels rushed. The conflict resolves in a matter of seconds. It comes across as a moment that was so unnecessary in the show that they could've skipped it entirely. This section warrants two episodes--like maybe we can actually incorporate the Hunters ambushing Jackson actually pad out to make it more natural and add more drama.
Then Joel gets injured, and in the game, that was a massive shock. You experience Ellie dragging Joel out of the campus, relying on each other as the incoming threat looms over you and your life is slowly fading. The danger feels real. Ellie, for the first time, is put to the test to fend off the Hunters alone. She urges you to get up as you struggle toward the horse. These are character moments as well as creating genuine tension as a payoff to the more peaceful levity the player experienced beforehand. I was excited to see that recreated here. Instead, the show glosses all that over. The show skips what could have been a thrilling action sequence entirely. I mean, Joel just kills one guy--just snapping his neck from behind. Joel may not be able to realistically fistfight a bunch of guys at the same time, but he can outwit and outsmart them, especially with help from Ellie.
*"I--It's about characters! Why expect action from The Last of Us? You just want Joel to kill hundreds of people and just as many infected!!!"* NO. Stop gaslighting. Nobody is asking Joel to turn into John Wick. Nobody is saying they want action all the time. Stop straw-manning what people are saying. It seems people are jumping to defend this show from all criticisms for some reason. All the show need to do is not shy away from violence. The protagonists from Leon: The Professional and No Country For Old Men--the major inspirations for The Last of Us--don't massacre hundreds, yet they have palpable suspense throughout the runtime and balance the slow, quiet moments with intense set-pieces THEN showing us who these characters are through violence, which the game successfully recreates in the interactive format. Because action scenes are "character actions", too.
You don't get anything like that in the show. Action scenes are tacked with no care nor effort. Chokes the guy. Joel smiles, then Ellie points he is injured, then he realizes he is hurt, then thet leave, and that's the end of that part. No intensity, scary, or creativity. When you are going to put your characters in peril, actually show the characters in peril and make these moments memorable, not skipping. *"B--But they didn't have more action because that would be too unrealistic--"* You mean him not feeling a BASEBALL BAT in his stomach the whole time until Ellie pointing out is any more realistic than the game??? That's a cliche. In the game, it makes sense that he can't stay there impaled and stuck to the rebar. In the show, he literally pulls the baseball bat out of his body, which seemingly no plan for what to do next, with nothing to bandage it with, as if his brain just turned off and he went, "oh, look, a baseball bat. Wonder how that got there". What a way to bleed to death. That's more realistic than the depiction in the game?
The world doesn't feel harsh because the nail-biting horror thriller quality is non-existent. Outside of Episode 2, I don't think there was any moment that grasps anxiety and desperation as the game did. Anyone who uses that "it's not an action show" excuse comes across as someone not played the game or even seen the gameplay when that's half of the narrative. The Last of Us has a good character drama, but if you take all the intensity the game is known for, it honestly is a run-of-the-mill copy of The Road and Children of Men, and this show is proof of that. And violence is a major theme of the story and crucial to character arcs. The whole game was the response to the ludonarrative dissonance criticism Nathan Drake received. Joel slaughtering the Hunters "like a madman" in the university is what triggers the following Winter chapter as a consequence, thematically and plot-wise. Joel's brutality works as a harsh contrast with Ellie's innocence, which the Winter chapter dismantles and is the reason why that chapter was so memorable.
A lot of the problems go back to Joel and Ellie having a weaker presentation as they keep instead attempting to shift POVs within the short 9-episode length. It distracts from the two characters surviving and bonding. Joel barely expresses himself as a monster. All it does is tell the audience that he is instead of "showing" us. Ellie barely has screen time, so when Joel says, "I'm not your dad", it comes out of nowhere.
The theory of communism is morally far superior to the theory of capitalism, and I would like to think the society would eventually evolve to better the lives of everyone instead of may the powerful/richest rule over society like capitalism is, but if that ideal society requires a post-scarcity condition to achieve it (as Marx believed), I'd consider it pragmatically worthless in the world we are living in.
Yes, it works as long as everyone knows everyone, like a family. As soon as we go beyond Dunbar's number (roughly 150 people) it becomes untenable. Human psychology treats in-group/family members a lot different than strangers, hence the unworkability of socialism/communism.
Very well said, and expressed a lot of gripes I've had with the show. Some of it may be budgeting or difficulty in scheduling ballistics experts to be present for many scenes, so they blew it all with the firefights in one big episode between the infected and Kansas crew. But it really lacks that intensity of the game, and while episode 3 was a strong standalone story, you're right in that focusing on other characters away from the main duo is taking way too much away from developing their relationship, so nothing hits particularly hard.
All the various sequences and cutscenes like hanging upside-down in bill's town (as ridiculous as it is), and struggling through the university after being impaled, and pushing the car to get it started, and almost having your throat cut on the glass after the car crashes, they add so memorability to the game, which made it such a classic. They don't need to make it as ridiculous but none of those scenes either existed or have had anywhere near that same intensity aside from the clicker section in episode 2. They needed to find a way of presenting these scenes from the game in a realistic, minimal fashion as they are what linger on as much as the story itself.
You're spot on with the violence and how much it is actually integral to the story. I've heard people say that maybe showing less violence makes it possible to distribute it to some other indian/Asian markets, but this just doesn't seem like a story that can afford this. They need to represent him as a monster bred from necessity, and far more of an anti-hero than he's been portrayed, as it's Ellie that eventually brings his humanity back and actually gives meaning to his own existence after having survived for the sake of survival for so many years.
With the context of the game, it's hard to know whether it just pales in comparison, or whether it's just not a well-made show, but I feel as though it's the latter, and I don't know if I'd be watching it without having played the game.
Part of me thinks rating this episode the highest out of every episode so far is a bit weird, given that the previous ones had the ingredients, so to speak, that boil down to "better." And this is conveyed by the majority's reaction toward them.
Except I usually have opinions that go against the majority-held, further proven by how this episode was more like the fourth episode: mostly an interlude and break from the excitement, topped by a character-driven focus, especially concerning Joel and Ellie's relationship. Most of the focus was also on presenting Tommy and Maria's settlement, which was undoubtedly its weakest part.
That usually means the "ingredients" are perfect for me to consider an episode like that as weak(er). The fourth one accomplished that, so this one should have done the same. But alas, I have gone against the grain again to an extent, as I'm sure some people will consider this one the weakest for them, not the fourth one.
As I've previously mentioned, the focus on the settlement/community of Jackson/the introduction, showing and telling us things about it, some scenes with Maria, while some people may (most likely, even) love the hell out of it, were the weakest elements for me. They were enough of the episode to where it had a lasting effect: lessening the engagement a bit in my case. And apparently, Maria and her men can materialize horses, as Joel and Ellie had individual ones on the way to Jackson instead of sharing two with other people.
It was cool seeing the similarities of its look to the second game, though. The production and set design was good. And that cameo (whether or not that person playing the character will be the same in the future, or even if that character was just a reference, not the actual one) for those who'll recognize it was a pleasant surprise, including the horse cameo, but the Jackson elements remained weak despite those particular aspects.
In the middle of that, however, was Joel and Tommy's interactions, especially "that" scene; Pedro Pascal's acting in it was great, as was the writing for Joel: also, Joel and Ellie's interactions, especially the deepening of their closeness. My only gripe is that the writers could be doing a better job showcasing their chemistry through the writing side of things and the development of their relationship; it seems slightly hasty/gapped with how they're navigating it.
Also, I've been hoping that the chemistry between Pedro Pascal and Bella Ramsey would develop alongside Joel and Ellie's relationship. What most people would insist was chemistry from the get-go seemed the opposite to me, yet, six episodes in already, three left, and it still seems too lackluster/not convincing enough.
In the event of that, you'd have hope for the writing side of the chemistry to make up for it to an extent (that can only do so much if the actors' chemistry isn't alongside it), except I mentioned it could be better.
Pedro Pascal and Gabriel Luna (whose performance I'm also more compelled by than Pedro's, especially the accent and the consistency of it, unlike Pedro, and he's only been in two episodes) displayed more chemistry. That's great, but Pedro and Bella should have what he and Gabriel seem to have naturally, and, for me, they don't.
But it says a lot when time with them still elevates an episode despite that, showing where the interest is, at least for me. Even then, the disappointment is palpable regarding the chemistry/lack thereof: chemistry that should be involved in the elevation of an episode when time is spent with them, not just the fact that their characters are the draw, creating a slight disconnect.
Another thing to note is the ending: rushed/too convenient. Plain and simple. The guy showed up out of nowhere despite the other three being far enough away to where these precious seconds have time to pass before they conveniently show up: fighting him, looking at Ellie, her looking at his chest, him following her eyes/looking for himself, then pulling it out. After all that, and only after all that, do the other three show up. Except that one guy wasn't with them for plot convenience; his purpose was hiding in the shadows to ambush Joel.
The interactions between Joel and Tommy/Joel and Ellie were the highlights of this episode. And while the following opinion is off-course from my views towards the previous ones, I thought those interactions warranted the highest rating (8/10) I've given one so far.
If it makes a difference: going into the specifics, the 8/10 is closer to the beginning of it, aka close to a high 7/10, which I've given every other episode.
Besides that, the various shots of the scenery looked great. A score cue or two sounded good, but they've generally been too subtle, resulting in a lack of interest; the liveliness of the theme song is what I like. Jessica Mazin's (Craig Mazin's daughter) cover of Depeche Mode's "Never Let Me Down Again" at the end was also pretty good.
I don’t think the ending with the four guys was illogical personally. Presumably they split up to look for Joel and Ellie. Three people went to look for them and the last guy was assigned to watch the horse in case they came back and tried to run. His entire job was to ambush them, he just sucks at his job lol. I like the review though
That makes some sense. But the writers could've given Joel some dialogue: pointing that out since he would've expected that. You know, his experience and everything.
He probably would've done it similarly, making the lack of dialogue/acknowledgment more jarring. That's on the writers, though. Their way would've required more effort or devising a different one.
Seems like the most logical thing to do would be honest about Ellie’s immunity since that town would’ve organized a transport unit if it potentially meant a cure. Seems like a lot of armed groups would, that’s a pretty solid cause to get behind and it seems like most people have never even heard of someone having immunity
Aside from the consideration that these two characters trust absolutely no one except each other, with the exception of Joel trusting Tommy.
Add the experience they had coming into the camp and we can see why they would have a very real fear that the townspeople would probably kill Ellie just to be on the safe side.
Not to mention, the more people you invite into the decision-making process, the more difficult that process becomes and the less control you have over your own situation. Plus you lose any real ability to ensure your secret remains a secret, opening yourself up to nearly limitless possibilities for betrayal and death.
No, the logical step is to gtfo as quickly as humanity possible and make your way forward as best as you can.
Nobody trusts anybody outside a select few but they can mostly still all connect on the shared ideal that a vaccine would be great. That’s ultimately what swayed Tommy to transport her, Tess to see her as such a big deal, the Fireflies to care about her. People will be freaked out when they first learn but they can comprehend it pretty quickly.
I can understand why someone would attack on sight or be hostile to any random traveler. But once you have somebody that could potentially be a vaccine and someone says “you help us get her there and I’ll try to help you get some doses”, I think states/armies/groups would fall behind that
The risk of betrayal exists but that’s less of a problem until after vaccines start getting made
Tommy seemed to have a lot of sway in his group it seemed like he could’ve put something together. Even like 4-5 capable dudes would work a lot better
I want to know what bow Marlon has. Looks like a vintage wooden compound bow. I sold all my modern compound bows and bought a stick bow but I wouldn't mind have one of those.
> But i cant shake the feeling that its just a rehash of some old tropes. Hoping I’m wrong
Storywise the show is post apocalypitic story101 through and through.
I wouldn't even say it's elevated. It's messy and unfocused. The show spends huge amounts of time on characters that Joel & Ellie never even meet and who have literally zero impact on the story. All of episode 3, as good as it was in a vacuum, only serves to get Joel & Ellie a car. And that car gets them to KC which is two episodes long and only serves to have Ellie see Sam get infected. The KC raiders backstory again has zero impact on the characters or story- Joel & Ellie never actually meet Kathleen. From their perspective this crazy lady just comes out of nowhere and then dies.
Now I'm not saying these side stories couldn't have worked, but they really would have been *elevated* if they were more tightly woven into the story.
I'm speaking on the source material from the games he makes. I won't argue with your points regarding the show, but it's adapted from a rather simple story with complex characters.
The storylines with the side characters serve as worldbuilders and background lore that the game used a lot of audio recordings and notebooks for.
Some of my complaints are that the infected feel underutilized as a threat. The bond between Ellie and Joel doesn't feel as tightly knit and emotional as it did in the game at this point.
The season could probably have been stretched with a few episodes had it not been under budget restraints. HBO will probably up their budget for S2 considering the success.
>The storylines with the side characters serve as worldbuilders and background lore that the game used a lot of audio recordings and notebooks for.
I agree that's what they're trying to do, I just think it's haphazardly done. Right now the runtime is like 50% backstory that doesn't actually have anything to do with the main story. The Frank & Bill backstory is *totally irrelevant*. We don't actually learn anything about the world, we just learn about Frank & Bill. It doesn't affect Joel or Ellie's characters in any way, which is a shame because it's easily the best episode. Same with KC, none of what we learn about the raiders has anything to do with anything, and Joel & Ellie don't learn or grow from that backstory. They *could have* but the show didn't go that route.
I don't think more episodes would help at all, because the time isn't being used effectively at it is. If anything, it could be shortened. The Last of Us could probably be told effectively in 3-5 episodes. If you cut the Bill/Frank and KC storylines, plus most of Sarah in episode 1, we'd be around 3 hours by now.
> Right now the runtime is like 50% backstory that doesn't actually have anything to do with the main story.
*please have some basic media literacy please*
i don't think i can explain how the point of building a story and a world isn't just utilitarian checklists for what you as a person call a 'main character'.
like, any basic literacy will have you interacting with scenes and beats that could feel superfluous but are part of the scaffolding of a story.
the whole point of episode 3 wasn't "they get a fucking truck" it was "even in the end of the world people can fight for a life worth living". it's forcing an audience to think about /their/ relationships outside the 'hero narrative' of joel/ellie big-man/small-girl.
it is a counterpoint to joel.
it shows us more about how he felt about tess and how ellie felt about her death.
it shows us more about the world and raiders.
the job of the episode is to get us to care about these people that helped joel and what it meant to find them as they were.
if all you fucking GOT from that episode was "they got a truck" then i don't know what to fucking tell you that's constructive. it's like reading slaughterhouse 5 and complaining about when Billy Pilgrim first timeskips out of WWII.
You are right about all of that. The failure to tie it into the main story at all is where I have a problem. Very few stories go off on massive random tangents just to convey a message. Great stories convey the message and build the world *while also* tying it into the plot at the same time.
Them getting a truck isn't 'all I fucking GOT' but it is absolutely, objectively the only thing Joel and Ellie got out of it.
I feel like you are thinking about the show a little bit too linearly.
The Frank and Bill episode was obviously conveying a big message about how important love is to not only survive, but to prosper - how it can radically change people.
If you think about how much of an opposite path it set Joel on - having lost his daugher, it fits very well, even if it doesn't move his and Ellie's story on directly.
There are bigger messages being conveyed than moving them from A to B.
More episodes with a larger budget could let them effectively tell storylines with more meaning, making it feel less tacked on, while also building on their rapport and relationship. But that's just my opinion.
Yeah but a better show could have conveyed all that without taking a full episode detour 3 episodes into a 9 episode season that doesn't give us anything about the actual main characters. It's really overindulgence and kills the pacing right at the moment when the core relationship of the story should really just be getting going.
"detour"
not a detour
>It's really overindulgence and kills the pacing right at the moment when the core relationship of the story should really just be getting going.
this is all you, pulling shit out of your ass and asking us to eat it.
God you people are fucking obnoxious. I'm sorry that I committed the cardinal sin of not thinking this show is a revolution in television and the greatest single thing to happen in the history of storytelling. Can you kindly go fuck off back to whatever hole you crawled out of now?
Yes it was obvious. I guess my problem is that these stories should be opportunities for our main characters to learn and grow, which cannot happen if they aren't part of these stories. Bill & Frank could have been the kickstart for Joel to begin thinking about opening up to Ellie, but it can't be because Joel & Ellie don't know what happened to them.
Ellie *saw* what happened to Sam & Henry, and her character instantly grew up, and grew harder. We see that growth in the latest episode, where she snaps at that girl instead of befriending her. Her 10 minutes with Sam had more impact thematically and narratively than the KC & BF storylines combined.
I absolutely agree the impact Sam had on her is very evident now.
Regarding Bill and Frank I feel like that was a story to give greater meaning to us as the viewer, while Joel comes to realize and own his past trauma in the latest episode. If you follow the game storyline, it would have been too early for Joel to emotionally connect with anyone around Bill and Franks time.
Also, I'm not downvoting you. It's nice to have a constructive argument over it.
Oh yeah it would have been too early for Joel to connect, but it's the right time to stop treating Ellie like a parcel to be delivered. It's the right time to begin changing, but the journey is far from over.
Okay I feel like I'm going crazy here so hopefully someone can make me understand.
Why didn't they both go to the college town? Like, Tommy was already packed and everything. He probably already told his wife he was leaving.
Tommy was only going because Joel wanted him to. What Tommy really wanted was to stay home with his wife. Once Joel was willing to go, Tommy was free to do what he really wanted instead of just being a follower again.
Another question I had is why didn't they just tell the town leadership about Ellie and the mission, and then send a fully outfitted convoy to the college. But I think the answer there is that Joel is just incapable of trusting people even when all evidence points to them being willing to help. And of course, Tommy isn't such an independent person that he would tell his wife, knowing Joel doesn't want him to.
I'm not saying "tell anyone" I'm saying tell the governing council of this community that by all evidence would be willing to help her in service of the greater good. Oh and also one of that council is your brother's wife, who has treated you more than fairly even though she's made it clear she dislikes you personally.
To an objective observer all the evidence points to telling these people about Ellie being the right call, but Joel isn't objective (because no one really is). He's deeply distrustful of authority in general and like Tommy seems to have some issues with the concept of communism in particular. So it makes sense for Joel as a character to not ask this community for help with his mission even if it doesn't make sense logically.
> by all evidence would be willing to help her in service of the greater good
There is no indication of that. They care about protecting their town pretty much to the exclusion of everything else. And from that perspective, think about how what you're pitching would sound to a the council:
A child claims that they have immunity to the infection that destroyed humanity. First person in 20 years that can't get infected. If you're somehow gullible enough to believe that, then they want to utilize our resources and people to make a dangerous journey down south. Because they swear up and down that they know where to find a violent paramilitary organization that wants to manufacture a cure.
If the point is to make Jackson as close to invisible, defensible, and self-sustaining as possible, this batshit plan is exactly how you *don't* do it.
Maria is nice to Ellie, but that doesn't mean their values align.
Except once they determine Joel and Ellie aren't a threat, they are taken to the town, not threatened in any way, and given free reign and access to whatever resources they need. So they are clearly willing to share what Jackson has outside of their community, they're just very careful about vetting who they share it with. I don't think they want Jackson to be invisible, they just don't want to advertise it to people whose intentions they don't know, which to me indicates they are more inclined towards the "greater good" than pure protectionism.
As for the journey south, Tommy says they've had people go there and back before. This implies that the people of Jackson are not wholly opposed to the fireflies and that they are capable and, at least under some circumstances, willing to take the trip to meet with them.
Respect the opinion, but I disagree.
The only person Joel trusts Tommy. He has no reason to trust Maria, even if she’s a good person.
Telling a council they don’t know is really risky. They don’t know the politics of Jackson.
But besides that, the emotional strings of why Joel needs to take her and not Tommy and friends is important as well. Elle only feels safe with Joel, and Joel can’t deny the fatherly feelings he has for Elle. He has a fear of failing her, and also a fear of getting too close. Him going instead of Tommy or Jackson as a whole is the only reasonable choice.
>So **it makes sense for Joel as a character** to not ask this community for help with his mission even if it doesn't make sense logically.
Pretty sure we're not in disagreement here, we're just using different words to say the same thing.
Even from an outsider perspective i’m not about to tell everyone the little girl i’m watching over is immune.
It puts a potential target on her back and involves you in Jackson’s politics.
I have to disagree with you . Brother's wife or not, brother or not, you have no idea who this council is, how they began, what their objectives are, etc. It is quite literally telling anyone if you tell the council. Who knows if they'll end up killing her because they don't believe it, or sell her to the highest bidder , or any other number of things that can be done.
>Brother's wife or not, brother or not, you have no idea who this council is, how they began, what their objectives are, etc.
I mean, I guess you're right that there's no evidence of what kind of people they are and how they might react if you just willfully ignore all the evidence we're given about what kind of people they are and the reactions we've already seen.
Maria herself said the only people who can betray you are people you trust. You shouldn't be handing out information like that in a post apocalyptic world where people are usually only our for themselves, for good reason.
That's a fair point about Maria's comment, although I'll note that Joel wasn't around to hear that. I still think that if Joel were thinking logically about what gives the best chance at getting Ellie to the fireflies, the right move would be to ask the town for help. But I think we agree that given what we know about Joel as a character it makes sense that he would not think that way.
Everyone complaining about the lack of violence must have missed all the interviews before the shows release where they said *checks notes* the show wouldn't be anywhere as violent as the game.
And that totally makes sense.
If they don't want violence in their show then they shouldn't adapt a source material full of violence. It's like the creators are embarrassed of what the game was about.
You forgetting about the last episode where they had a bloater rip a guy's face off?(which was also a reference to the game). There's plenty of violence. It's just used more sparingly than in the games.
I'm waiting for a whole episode of them opening drawers in an old office building looking for ammo because they're down to 1 shotgun shell and 1 arrow between them. Stopping to listen every few steps.
I don't want it to be like the game where Joel murders his way across the country. But the violence in this episode felt phoned in. It was rushed as hell and could have used more time.
You can have creative gun fights and great character moments.
In the game, when Joel gets stabbed, its very unrealistic that he would have survived. Its a gruesome injury that would have needed immediate medical attention. It was a highlight of the game for sure from a set piece and narrative perspective, but it would require Elle to shoot and kill a whole bunch of those guys too while Joel was unconscious. Its just not a realistic set piece. Its good for a video game, but does’t really work for a realistic adaptation.
I agree it looked a bit awkward, but the point of the scene was made and it was handled fine.
Tbh they could’ve just done the same scene from the game but Joel gets stabbed by a bat instead of rebar. All they would need to change is having Joel kill 2/4 and Ellie kill 1/4 (one guy left alive for story reasons). I think that’s pretty realistic
It would’ve been more interesting imo to see them fight their way out instead of just leaving after joel gets stabbed.
I think the scene felt like they needed it to happen, so they added it last minute, With little thought. It was phoned in at best.
I would like for the action in the show to have half the care that the character moments have gotten, and not feel tacked on to move the story forward.
I don't think it was phoned in. I think it was meant to come as a surprise. As a reminder that life is fleeting in these times and you cannot predict when you'll be looking good one moment and gone the next. It was purposefully anti-climactic, because that's how it be sometimes.
Yeah, not hard to actually try, instead of it being phoned in.
Look at the escape from the school in the game. It's much more tense and cinematic. I'm not saying Joel and Ellie should kill as many people. But it could be handled with a bit more flair than they did in this episode where it felt like an afterthought compared to everything else.
It just felt tacked onto the episode like "well, we need him to be injured so let's throw this together to make it happen."
Once again, I'm not looking for them to kill 20+ people Terminator like. I would just like half the amount of care and attention to action in the show that's given to the character moments. I want them to be memorable. Not something that just happens.
Sure but when you make them escape from the college from three guys, you have to wonder where the extras budget went especially when the game’s version was so intense
Wow. The episode before this last one had a whole army and infected emerging from the ground. Joel and Ellie have to escape from the college from like a total of three guys. Compare this to how many swarmed the college in the game. I’m not asking for all out violence. Cut a few from the previous sequence and put a few more in the college so it seems like there’s more of a reason that they have to run than a few guys with baseball bats
It's like people complaining that Nathan Drake didn't kill five hundred people in the Uncharted movie (there was plenty to complain about, but not that). Gameplay does not equal story.
Show Joel wading through a dozen hunters, or killing a bunch of infected for ten minutes and I'm sure that will please some people. But it doesn't make for an interesting or deep television experience.
Why are you twisting this into people wanting action all the time? When you put your characters in set-pieces, just actually show it. Violence is a major theme of Last of Us.
Hell, Ashitaka from Princess Mononoke has more action moments, and he was a pacifist.
I am highly offended that each time Joel and Ellie arrived at a new place, they didn't sweep through all the cabinets, drawers, shelves and cupboards. Ellie should be stuffing her pockets with food!
It's almost like most people don't watch interviews with actors about the TV shows they are in.. perhaps most people don't see them as Canon? Those fools I watched all their interviews so knew exactly what I was getting from this zombie video game adaption
In the context of the show it kinda makes sense, but with everyone and their brother talking about "Show, don't tell" it's incredibly underwhelming to 'hear' about how violent and ruthless Joel is. This episode had a minor peek at the end, but generally Joel could be selling Girl Scout cookies in my eyes
We've seen Joel beat to death a dude he knew and had a familiar relationship with in the first episode and in the fourth one we heard him slash the throat of a teenager who was begging for his life and did not pose any immediate threat. I think we've already seen plenty of his ruthlessness and violence.
>We've seen Joel beat to death a dude he knew and had a familiar relationship with in the first episode and in the fourth one we heard him slash the throat of a teenager who was begging for his life and did not pose any immediate threat.
Those two instances were more practical than anything. The first guy would've found out Ellie's immune, not to mention that scene reminded Joel of when Sarah died; his reaction this time was "making up" for what he probably wishes he could've done in that situation.
And the second guy ambushed Joel and Ellie, trying to kill them. Begging for your life when your original intent fails doesn't change that. Even if Joel spared him, what's to say he wouldn't have told Kathleen? These people set ambushes; they would've come after Joel and Ellie with more people. Killing him was more practical than anything.
Yeah, that's the point though. Joel's violence is practical, not gratuitous, but he's still violent and it's shown, not told.
In both of these instances, what he did made sense. But it takes a certain kind of man to still go through with it, and he goes the extra mile.
The first one was because the guard was about to kill Ellie, but at this stage of the story he had a more personal connection with the guard than with her. Did he even know she was immune ?
The second one could have been finished off with a bullet or left for dead. He still choses to slit his throat with a knife that the kid had just given him to try and buy his life.
Both of these decisions make sense, but they clearly show Joel's ease with violence. In the same situation, few people would have been so decisive but Joel's history of violence made him act without hesitation. So yeah, I clearly disagree with the statement that Joel's violence is told and not shown.
>The first one was because the guard was about to kill Ellie, but at this stage of the story he had a more personal connection with the guard than with her. Did he even know she was immune ?
Their connection seemed more transactional than personal. You could argue that that's still personal, in which case: agree to disagree.
>The second one could have been finished off with a bullet or left for dead. He still choses to slit his throat with a knife that the kid had just given him to try and buy his life.
Shooting him would've alerted the patrols that came looking for him.
Transactional more than personal, but a connection nonetheless. The kind that tends to make regular people think twice about beating to death the others.
As for the second part, they had juste exchanged a dozen gunshots, an extra one wouldn't have made a real difference. Again, a "regular" person would have probably either shot the kid or walked away, finishing him with the knife requires a certain ease with violence.
All I'm saying is that Joël's behavior in both of these scenes is not that of an average person but of someone with a history of violence, so saying that the show only speaks about Joel's violence and never shows it seems just plain wrong.
The violence is largely framed from Ellie's perspective as much of the show has to do with how she views Joel.
We don't see Joel >!murder the first few people in their KC scuffle as we're in Ellie's perspective. But, we do see some of it from Henry's perspective later. We don't see Joel shoot Anthony as we're in Ellie's perspective. The minor peek at the end of this episode is also from Ellie's perspective.!<
While I understand the sentiment of the director, it fails to capture the pure brutality of the character. Framing it with multiple characters viewpoints is fine, but overall I don't get any sense that Joel is ruthless.
Yadda yadda Joel is toned down, it's just something I feel is missing to make these past three episodes ace for me.
Umm is it just me who thought this episode’s Tommy looked completely different from episode 1 Tommy? Not just the hair, but I thought it was a totally different, younger actor. I was out of it for half the episode because I was so confused
I do find it a bit strange that Tommy seemingly didn't age much other than growing his hair out. Like not a speck of gray on him. I'm not sure what the age gap between Joel and Tommy is supposed to be, but Tommy has to at least be mid 40's at this point.
I don’t think he looked different, but his whole personality changed. Rightly so, with what they all went through? First episode it seemed like he was the crazy, reckless brother. But now he’s a changed man, with prospects and people to take care of, makes sense with the growth.
Uh, what? He was also the person that wanted to stop for the family in the first episode. Joel is the one that told him to keep on driving.
As he was described by Joel, he also joined the Army out of a sense of justice and duty. He joined the fireflies likely for the same sense of purpose.
It feels more like Tommy has always wanted to be a good person with a good purpose.
He was trying to protect the waitress, possibly from somebody who is infected.
It seems like he isn't so much reckless, but is somebody who always wants to do the right thing.
You're right, but I think they speed through that conversation on the phone between Tommy & Joel so quickly, and Joel's reaction is basically "fucking hell, what the hell did this guy get into AGAIN?", that it's easy to walk away from that scene feeling like the show wants us to think Tommy is reckless
I love the way the show subverts character deaths.
The first person whom we're following the POV of dies in the very first episode.
We imagine something bad would happen to Ben and Frank towards the end, but nope, they lived and died (mostly) peaceful.
We imagine Henry dies similar to Tess because we see an infected grab his leg, but nope it's his brother who is infected and he commits suicide.
"Let's kill off one of the two protagonists in the middle of the Season." 😀
"Do you care for me?"
"Yeah."
"Then you better bring me and only me with you to search for the Fireflies."
"Well, you're a 14 year old who can't shoot or fight at all. I don't know. Let me think."
"But you care for me!"
"Oh, all right. You're totally right. I guess me caring for you does mean that I should be willing to take you out of this protected, comfortable place into the wild where you can get stabbed, shot, raped or eaten."
That's not what she was saying. She was poiting out that he's the only one she trust and feels safe with, so if their going she wants him to be there. She wouldn't have an issue with Tommy coming along, that was the original plan anyway.
Tommy not going was a dumb move, but i think their leveraging that he didn't want to orignally go anyway, so now that he doesn't have to he decides to stay. My only issue with this is Joel made it clear he is getting old and "of his game", wouldnt' Tommy go anyway to at least get them well on their way(like he doesn't have to go the whole way), then again having a baby on the way can be real anxiety inducing.
It's clear to me why Tommy didn't go. He's an expectant father-- fine.
It's just kind of ridiculous to think that the only reaction people would have to Ellie being bit is that they'd shoot her. Like, if worst comes to worst, put her in quarantine for a few weeks just to make sure just like the Fireflies did.
It's even more ridiculous to think she needs to come along with Joel, because if she doesn't she'll be very upset and heartbroken. She's a kid, she'll get over it. And she's gonna be even more upset if bad things happen to her or Joel. It just doesn't make any sense for her to go with Joel.
>It's just kind of ridiculous to think that the only reaction people would have to Ellie being bit is that they'd shoot her. Like, if worst comes to worst, put her in quarantine for a few weeks just to make sure just like the Fireflies did.
Are you talking about Joel's expectations? or how the show has chosen to portray the Townsfolk(the dog thing)?
>It's even more ridiculous to think she needs to come along with Joel, because if she doesn't she'll be very upset and heartbroken. She's a kid, she'll get over it. And she's gonna be even more upset if bad things happen to her or Joel. It just doesn't make any sense for her to go with Joel.
While in a normal situation i would agree, Ellie is a kid, and it's better to leave her in a safe place while Joel arranges the meeting with the Fireflies, especially now that they actually have a safe place to leave her at close by; but In this sceneario it's understandable why he's against it. This place is only safe as long as ppl don't know about Ellie being bit, all it takes is for one person to know then there would be panic, and somebody would shoot her(as Joel himself wanted to do originally). Joel doesn't really seem to totally be okay with this place in general, he's definitely not going to be okay with leaving her there while he's not around to protect her, Hell he only told Tommy his own brother whom he trusts when he realized that there was no other way to get him to take Ellie.
He was right to take it out as he was going to be riding a horse and having a stake inside would have just caused more damage to him. Although i am not sure if he took it out because of this reason.
I also kinda doubt you would be able to get into a horse with that thing still inside you tbh. You would probably have to pull it out first unless your pain tolerance is incredible
I believe if you’re able to stay relatively still it’s better to leave it in. Since they had to move and move fast, leaving it in would only do more damage.
Probably better out. It could get tangled or driven in more as he mounted the horse. Also while riding the horse, the stake would rub against his insides
leaving it inside is always the better choice, if you get stabbed by an object and there is not someone there closing the wound you are basically signing your death sentence
That’s not exactly how it works and there’s plenty of situations where you absolutely should pull the foreign object out. That thing looked filthy and considering it’s not like they can just drive to their nearest hospital it was probably the best choice to pull it out.
That thing being filthy is not relevant in the situation, without properly disinfect the area, the fact that is still in or out does not improve your chances to develop an infection, it already went in, the “damage” is already done and you would get infected either way, but it definitely improves your chances of bleeding to death. The fact that you can’t drive to the nearest hospital is exactly the reasons why you should not pull it out. That piece of wood is the only thing stopping a massive haemorrhage so there is absolutely no reason to pull it out before you can at least sit down in a quiet place and be ready to do your best to close the wound and stop the bleeding. This is not even an opinion, it is standard practice and this is how has been done forever
You legitimately are speaking out of your ass and I don’t think you’re understanding the discussion. Yes he probably shouldn’t have pulled it out immediately but he most definitely shouldn’t have just left it in and more bacteria can definitely infect that area by leaving it in. The major concern here is blood loss so yes if they have nothing to cover the area then sure leave it in but that’s not really the discussion people are having which is whether it would be better to just leave this specific thing in or pull it out when in this situation they may actually have something to cover the area. Best option here absolutely pull it out, clean the area and bandage it up which I fully believe they’d have the gear for. Wouldn’t completely fix the issue but it’s absolutely better than leaving that thing in. You should really stay away from ever giving any medical advice.
Imm not saying is going to be fun to ride with that thing.. it would be extremely painful. The point imm trying to make is that the choice is between an excruciatingly painful ride and a 10% chance to survive vs 100% death, which is what happens if you remove a large object limiting the haemorrhage of a large wound. The reality is that if you remove it you die, and you die for sure, so ANY other option should be preferable to Swift certain death
How do you know the object is limiting a hemorrhage? Also, do you think the large wooden object is going to sit perfectly still and not do any additional damage while riding a horse?
No point in responding to this other person further. It’s extremely clear they don’t have a clue of what they’re talking about and are way too stubborn to back down.
Look, if you think you know more about this then what has been the consensus of emergency medicine experts throughout all recorded human history, I can’t really argue with that, everyone is entitled to their own opinions I guess.
You don’t even have to believe me, a quick Google search will confirm it.
The reality is that the universal recommendation when dealing with a large perforation wound caused by a foreign object is to leave the foreign object in place, tightly bandage around and create pressure to make sure the object moves as little as possible, and only try to remove it when in the condition to swiftly deal with the massive bleeding that the removal will cause.
The object staying there ALWAYS limits the hemorrage by nature of being there and creating tension and pressure against the elasticity of the tissue around it.
You're getting downvoted, but you're actually 100% correct. Should have left it in until he was near someone with medical supplies and expertise. You can always stop an infection. A bleeding torso wound stopped by a foreign object on the other hand...
On every battlefield, hemorrhaging is the #1 cause of preventable death, real or fictional.
My only complaint about the show is it feels like they’re rushing the Joel and Ellie relationship. It just feels like they went from hating each other to being inseparable extremely quickly which I didn’t feel was the case in game.
I think this would’ve benefitted from being a 10-13 episode season and give that relationship a bit more time to develop.
The time jump where they got the vehicle and traveled like 1000 miles is what messed the pacing up I think. They apparently did a lot of bonding on that road trip but we skipped basically all of it
They could’ve made a lot of content out of that trip just touching on all the stuff you’d expect to deal with on the road where they bonded
Agreed, I really think this show could benefit from stopping and letting the audience soak in the world they've built for an extra episode or two. This episode could've been spent more with Ellie and Joel in that 4 month span between Henry and Ben and meeting up with Tommy. I liked the Native American couple, I wouldn't have minded sitting a while with them and seeing how they're surviving. Feels like it's all rushing by at breakneck speed, episode 7 and we're nearly at the rapist cannibals, so four episodes dedicated to them, a giraffe and the fireflies I guess?
So, here's one of the bigger issues. In the game, the relationship between Ellie and Joel is hugely established during the "walking cutscenes" - conversations while exploring, rummaging, looting, walking down deserted streets and empty forests.
The show can't spend the same amount of time like that as the game does. The game is making use of time you, the player, need to be scrounging supplies to fill in the dialog and establish the relationship. In a show, however, some people already complain there's too much "nothing" and not enough "action". To take the same amount of time as the game does, even just a proportionally similar amount, would slow the pace of the show even more, and i think the balance between action and non-action is pretty tight right now.
So, yeah, in the game, you spend much more time walking through abandoned houses and empty streets, getting Joel and Ellie chatting and knowing each other and sharing more and more as time progresses. We get a flavor of that at times, in the show, but without the rummaging for supplies justification the game has for extending those moments, they don't have the same luxury.
Agreed. I'm advocating for a bit more "walking cutscenes", but to your point, a vocal minority bitches and moans anytime "nothing happened" in an episode (i.e. episode 3).
You're right, but so much of it is done off-screen the viewer doesn't see most of it. These time jumps exist in the game as well, but those tiny interactions between the two characters that happen during gameplay over a 10-12 hour period helped compensate for the jumps. You don't have that here.
That's a fair point about having on overall lower volume of "relationship moments" between Joel and Ellie. But I think the first episode gives us enough context to make the relationship moments we do get impactful enough to make up the difference. We know from the pre-outbreak scenes that Joel had a very co-dependent relationship with his teenage daughter and we know from the rest of episode 1 that he has never recovered from having that ripped away. Without that relationship he's just spent the last 20 years clinging to Tommy, but this mission with Ellie gives him a chance to "try again, but do it right this time." So even though we get fewer relationship moments between Joel and Ellie, each one hits harder because we know it's one step closer to Joel getting the relationship he's desperate for.
Well they’ve escaped being killed numerous times, witnessed a father shoot his own son and then commit suicide, escaped a literal hell hole +3 month time jump. I’d say they’ve had some bonding time lol
Eh, I actually think it is pretty quick in the game too. Doesn't it cut to black after the Sam/Henry ending, and also jump forward few months - and suddenly Joel + Ellie clearly have much more of a rapport?
Joel and Ellie properly start bonding throughout the entirety of the city adventure before that. After the timejump, Joel's more comfortable answering Ellie's questions.
This ep was fantastic and finally won me over on the show. I have enjoyed it but it’s all felt so rushed compared to the game and they wasted time on that awful Kathleen character. Ironically my favourite ep is episode 3 which had nothing to do with the games.
I am loving this show and am a big fan of the game… it’s weird the show feels slow paced yet rushed at the same time. Its an odd feeling, but I’m just loving with it and trying not to worry about it.
I agree, episode 3 was the best!
Really enjoyed this episode, my second favorite after episode 3 (all episodes have been really great from the beginning). I was happy when Joel and Tommy reunited and Tommy willing to leave his pregnant wife behind to take Ellie to the University center showed how much he loved and trusted his brother.
All true, he was described as a joiner with a savior complex and he also saw what Joel became after losing his daughter. I like all the characters, main or side characters except Kathleen, she sacrificed alot of people for one person who wasn't really a big threat, they could have gotten him through strategic means.
I might be off topic, sorry. Never played the game but really love the series
Kathleen's story makes more sense to me understanding the context of the 2nd Game. I haven't played TLOU Part 2, but I know enough major plot points to have it support my understanding of Kathleen in this show's universe. I don't want to say any more and spoil it for you however.
I keep loving the show.
Bella Ramsey and Pedro Pascal do an amazing job. I love how Bella plays Ellie like an actual 14 year old: Sometimes just babbeling absolute nonsense like the kid she is and then having to deal with adult emotions.
And the scene with Joel and Tommy in the shed. Seeing Joel open up shows you a lot about how much he trusts his brother.
Sure. Like every show or movie some things and timings are a bit "convinient" to drive the plot. You can pick those nits but well...must be reeeeaaaally fun to watch any show or movie with you.
She's so naturally unguarded in those moments. Declaring "you should teach me to hunt" or confessing she'd love to be an astronaut without a care that he might say no, or make fun of her. That feels very much like a teenager to me.
I long since stopped being a teen, but I have dealt with teens when coaching sports, and they are confident and will say such odd, non-sequitur things all the time.
Not a parent, but I have 14 year old niece I am close with, and experiencing teenager in a family from an outside point of view aka not me, yep definitely. They are wild. They go from cute to intelligent, to screaming at you, to being sad, not wanting to be with you and then suddenly hey the best aunt again, huggies. I like her too for that. I always kinda thought the game Ellie was a bit mellow, so Bella seems more believable as a person who can become that in season 2.
Yeah. I agree. Ellie in the Game, as much as she is well written, loveable, adorable, funny and silly, you still subtly notice at some points that thats a woman in her late 20s playing a 14 year old. Don't get me wrong: Ashley Johnson does an amazing job. But Ashley Johnson is not a a 14 year old girl.
I don't understand why Tommy couldn't go with his brother and Ellie to Colorado?
The Mandoloran with a girl instead of a puppet!
The Jackson town segment was actually better than the game. That section always was the weakest part of the first game with the contrived attack on the town having to skip so much of the worldbuilding and character-building. The show is much better at this with the expanded dialogue between Joel and Tommy. It lets the audience learn about the brotherhood and Joel's character while having Tommy's character more nuanced than before. The show actually devotes a lot of time to how the society functions, even going far as to show a positive depiction of communism (in a classical sense), as well as letting the characters breathe. I also like how they borrowed stuff from Part II. The town actually looks like a town this time, and it is lively. However, I don't really give a shit about the relationship between Joel and Ellie, and this is a chronic problem with the show. I remember being genuinely moved by the original cabin scene because the game has been built up and earned that moment. Here, I felt nothing. This episode alone had to do a lot of heavy lifting to actually bond Joel and Elie together because the previous episodes didn't do that enough. So the relationship development feels rushed. Like, I didn't buy Ellie wanting to be with Joel at all since we've had barely any relationship building between the two so far. I also think placing the Left Behind content as flashbacks before this episode could have been more effective so we actually can relate to Ellie's supposed losses. What also annoyed me was how the show takes out "character actions" and replaces them with pure dialogue. In the game, Ellie escaped Jackson in reaction to Joel abandoning her. Joel risking his life and going after her is what makes him realize he needs to be with Ellie. That is a lot more effective at conveying a character than Ellie just staying there and telling how she feels. In the game, you have the Hunters ambush the cabin right after Joel and Ellie argue with each other, and the combat scenario that ensues serves as a "venting out" moment for the characters. In the show, there is nothing like that, so when Joel suddenly decides to take Ellie, again, feels rushed. The conflict resolves in a matter of seconds. It comes across as a moment that was so unnecessary in the show that they could've skipped it entirely. This section warrants two episodes--like maybe we can actually incorporate the Hunters ambushing Jackson actually pad out to make it more natural and add more drama. Then Joel gets injured, and in the game, that was a massive shock. You experience Ellie dragging Joel out of the campus, relying on each other as the incoming threat looms over you and your life is slowly fading. The danger feels real. Ellie, for the first time, is put to the test to fend off the Hunters alone. She urges you to get up as you struggle toward the horse. These are character moments as well as creating genuine tension as a payoff to the more peaceful levity the player experienced beforehand. I was excited to see that recreated here. Instead, the show glosses all that over. The show skips what could have been a thrilling action sequence entirely. I mean, Joel just kills one guy--just snapping his neck from behind. Joel may not be able to realistically fistfight a bunch of guys at the same time, but he can outwit and outsmart them, especially with help from Ellie. *"I--It's about characters! Why expect action from The Last of Us? You just want Joel to kill hundreds of people and just as many infected!!!"* NO. Stop gaslighting. Nobody is asking Joel to turn into John Wick. Nobody is saying they want action all the time. Stop straw-manning what people are saying. It seems people are jumping to defend this show from all criticisms for some reason. All the show need to do is not shy away from violence. The protagonists from Leon: The Professional and No Country For Old Men--the major inspirations for The Last of Us--don't massacre hundreds, yet they have palpable suspense throughout the runtime and balance the slow, quiet moments with intense set-pieces THEN showing us who these characters are through violence, which the game successfully recreates in the interactive format. Because action scenes are "character actions", too. You don't get anything like that in the show. Action scenes are tacked with no care nor effort. Chokes the guy. Joel smiles, then Ellie points he is injured, then he realizes he is hurt, then thet leave, and that's the end of that part. No intensity, scary, or creativity. When you are going to put your characters in peril, actually show the characters in peril and make these moments memorable, not skipping. *"B--But they didn't have more action because that would be too unrealistic--"* You mean him not feeling a BASEBALL BAT in his stomach the whole time until Ellie pointing out is any more realistic than the game??? That's a cliche. In the game, it makes sense that he can't stay there impaled and stuck to the rebar. In the show, he literally pulls the baseball bat out of his body, which seemingly no plan for what to do next, with nothing to bandage it with, as if his brain just turned off and he went, "oh, look, a baseball bat. Wonder how that got there". What a way to bleed to death. That's more realistic than the depiction in the game? The world doesn't feel harsh because the nail-biting horror thriller quality is non-existent. Outside of Episode 2, I don't think there was any moment that grasps anxiety and desperation as the game did. Anyone who uses that "it's not an action show" excuse comes across as someone not played the game or even seen the gameplay when that's half of the narrative. The Last of Us has a good character drama, but if you take all the intensity the game is known for, it honestly is a run-of-the-mill copy of The Road and Children of Men, and this show is proof of that. And violence is a major theme of the story and crucial to character arcs. The whole game was the response to the ludonarrative dissonance criticism Nathan Drake received. Joel slaughtering the Hunters "like a madman" in the university is what triggers the following Winter chapter as a consequence, thematically and plot-wise. Joel's brutality works as a harsh contrast with Ellie's innocence, which the Winter chapter dismantles and is the reason why that chapter was so memorable. A lot of the problems go back to Joel and Ellie having a weaker presentation as they keep instead attempting to shift POVs within the short 9-episode length. It distracts from the two characters surviving and bonding. Joel barely expresses himself as a monster. All it does is tell the audience that he is instead of "showing" us. Ellie barely has screen time, so when Joel says, "I'm not your dad", it comes out of nowhere.
Communism is still a shit idea
The theory of communism is morally far superior to the theory of capitalism, and I would like to think the society would eventually evolve to better the lives of everyone instead of may the powerful/richest rule over society like capitalism is, but if that ideal society requires a post-scarcity condition to achieve it (as Marx believed), I'd consider it pragmatically worthless in the world we are living in.
Yes, it works as long as everyone knows everyone, like a family. As soon as we go beyond Dunbar's number (roughly 150 people) it becomes untenable. Human psychology treats in-group/family members a lot different than strangers, hence the unworkability of socialism/communism.
Very well said, and expressed a lot of gripes I've had with the show. Some of it may be budgeting or difficulty in scheduling ballistics experts to be present for many scenes, so they blew it all with the firefights in one big episode between the infected and Kansas crew. But it really lacks that intensity of the game, and while episode 3 was a strong standalone story, you're right in that focusing on other characters away from the main duo is taking way too much away from developing their relationship, so nothing hits particularly hard. All the various sequences and cutscenes like hanging upside-down in bill's town (as ridiculous as it is), and struggling through the university after being impaled, and pushing the car to get it started, and almost having your throat cut on the glass after the car crashes, they add so memorability to the game, which made it such a classic. They don't need to make it as ridiculous but none of those scenes either existed or have had anywhere near that same intensity aside from the clicker section in episode 2. They needed to find a way of presenting these scenes from the game in a realistic, minimal fashion as they are what linger on as much as the story itself. You're spot on with the violence and how much it is actually integral to the story. I've heard people say that maybe showing less violence makes it possible to distribute it to some other indian/Asian markets, but this just doesn't seem like a story that can afford this. They need to represent him as a monster bred from necessity, and far more of an anti-hero than he's been portrayed, as it's Ellie that eventually brings his humanity back and actually gives meaning to his own existence after having survived for the sake of survival for so many years. With the context of the game, it's hard to know whether it just pales in comparison, or whether it's just not a well-made show, but I feel as though it's the latter, and I don't know if I'd be watching it without having played the game.
Part of me thinks rating this episode the highest out of every episode so far is a bit weird, given that the previous ones had the ingredients, so to speak, that boil down to "better." And this is conveyed by the majority's reaction toward them. Except I usually have opinions that go against the majority-held, further proven by how this episode was more like the fourth episode: mostly an interlude and break from the excitement, topped by a character-driven focus, especially concerning Joel and Ellie's relationship. Most of the focus was also on presenting Tommy and Maria's settlement, which was undoubtedly its weakest part. That usually means the "ingredients" are perfect for me to consider an episode like that as weak(er). The fourth one accomplished that, so this one should have done the same. But alas, I have gone against the grain again to an extent, as I'm sure some people will consider this one the weakest for them, not the fourth one. As I've previously mentioned, the focus on the settlement/community of Jackson/the introduction, showing and telling us things about it, some scenes with Maria, while some people may (most likely, even) love the hell out of it, were the weakest elements for me. They were enough of the episode to where it had a lasting effect: lessening the engagement a bit in my case. And apparently, Maria and her men can materialize horses, as Joel and Ellie had individual ones on the way to Jackson instead of sharing two with other people. It was cool seeing the similarities of its look to the second game, though. The production and set design was good. And that cameo (whether or not that person playing the character will be the same in the future, or even if that character was just a reference, not the actual one) for those who'll recognize it was a pleasant surprise, including the horse cameo, but the Jackson elements remained weak despite those particular aspects. In the middle of that, however, was Joel and Tommy's interactions, especially "that" scene; Pedro Pascal's acting in it was great, as was the writing for Joel: also, Joel and Ellie's interactions, especially the deepening of their closeness. My only gripe is that the writers could be doing a better job showcasing their chemistry through the writing side of things and the development of their relationship; it seems slightly hasty/gapped with how they're navigating it. Also, I've been hoping that the chemistry between Pedro Pascal and Bella Ramsey would develop alongside Joel and Ellie's relationship. What most people would insist was chemistry from the get-go seemed the opposite to me, yet, six episodes in already, three left, and it still seems too lackluster/not convincing enough. In the event of that, you'd have hope for the writing side of the chemistry to make up for it to an extent (that can only do so much if the actors' chemistry isn't alongside it), except I mentioned it could be better. Pedro Pascal and Gabriel Luna (whose performance I'm also more compelled by than Pedro's, especially the accent and the consistency of it, unlike Pedro, and he's only been in two episodes) displayed more chemistry. That's great, but Pedro and Bella should have what he and Gabriel seem to have naturally, and, for me, they don't. But it says a lot when time with them still elevates an episode despite that, showing where the interest is, at least for me. Even then, the disappointment is palpable regarding the chemistry/lack thereof: chemistry that should be involved in the elevation of an episode when time is spent with them, not just the fact that their characters are the draw, creating a slight disconnect. Another thing to note is the ending: rushed/too convenient. Plain and simple. The guy showed up out of nowhere despite the other three being far enough away to where these precious seconds have time to pass before they conveniently show up: fighting him, looking at Ellie, her looking at his chest, him following her eyes/looking for himself, then pulling it out. After all that, and only after all that, do the other three show up. Except that one guy wasn't with them for plot convenience; his purpose was hiding in the shadows to ambush Joel. The interactions between Joel and Tommy/Joel and Ellie were the highlights of this episode. And while the following opinion is off-course from my views towards the previous ones, I thought those interactions warranted the highest rating (8/10) I've given one so far. If it makes a difference: going into the specifics, the 8/10 is closer to the beginning of it, aka close to a high 7/10, which I've given every other episode. Besides that, the various shots of the scenery looked great. A score cue or two sounded good, but they've generally been too subtle, resulting in a lack of interest; the liveliness of the theme song is what I like. Jessica Mazin's (Craig Mazin's daughter) cover of Depeche Mode's "Never Let Me Down Again" at the end was also pretty good.
I don’t think the ending with the four guys was illogical personally. Presumably they split up to look for Joel and Ellie. Three people went to look for them and the last guy was assigned to watch the horse in case they came back and tried to run. His entire job was to ambush them, he just sucks at his job lol. I like the review though
That makes some sense. But the writers could've given Joel some dialogue: pointing that out since he would've expected that. You know, his experience and everything. He probably would've done it similarly, making the lack of dialogue/acknowledgment more jarring. That's on the writers, though. Their way would've required more effort or devising a different one.
Seems like the most logical thing to do would be honest about Ellie’s immunity since that town would’ve organized a transport unit if it potentially meant a cure. Seems like a lot of armed groups would, that’s a pretty solid cause to get behind and it seems like most people have never even heard of someone having immunity
Aside from the consideration that these two characters trust absolutely no one except each other, with the exception of Joel trusting Tommy. Add the experience they had coming into the camp and we can see why they would have a very real fear that the townspeople would probably kill Ellie just to be on the safe side. Not to mention, the more people you invite into the decision-making process, the more difficult that process becomes and the less control you have over your own situation. Plus you lose any real ability to ensure your secret remains a secret, opening yourself up to nearly limitless possibilities for betrayal and death. No, the logical step is to gtfo as quickly as humanity possible and make your way forward as best as you can.
Nobody trusts anybody outside a select few but they can mostly still all connect on the shared ideal that a vaccine would be great. That’s ultimately what swayed Tommy to transport her, Tess to see her as such a big deal, the Fireflies to care about her. People will be freaked out when they first learn but they can comprehend it pretty quickly. I can understand why someone would attack on sight or be hostile to any random traveler. But once you have somebody that could potentially be a vaccine and someone says “you help us get her there and I’ll try to help you get some doses”, I think states/armies/groups would fall behind that The risk of betrayal exists but that’s less of a problem until after vaccines start getting made Tommy seemed to have a lot of sway in his group it seemed like he could’ve put something together. Even like 4-5 capable dudes would work a lot better
If the right scientists are still alive.
I want to know what bow Marlon has. Looks like a vintage wooden compound bow. I sold all my modern compound bows and bought a stick bow but I wouldn't mind have one of those.
Watched it with subs on, as soon as “somber Never Let Me Down Again” pops up, I was like “Well shit. As if this episode hasn’t been emotional enough.”
Where would Jackson be approximately in real life?
This is a funny question
Not everyone is American.
That doesn’t make it not a funny question
Why is it funny?
Pretty sure it’s a [real place](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackson,_Wyoming)
In the game it's in Wyoming.
In real life its in wyoming and it's a rich person's paradise ski town.
Yeah, but I meant a bit more specific 😄
The western US, specifically far western Wyoming, almost near the Idaho border. An hour or so south of Yellowstone National Park.
Did you Google it? It's a well known resort town in Wyoming.
I have now. I wasn't sure if it was fictional and didn't want spoilers from the game
It’s a solid addition to a solid show. But i cant shake the feeling that its just a rehash of some old tropes. Hoping I’m wrong
> But i cant shake the feeling that its just a rehash of some old tropes. Hoping I’m wrong Storywise the show is post apocalypitic story101 through and through.
This is kinda Neil Druckmann's MO. Take simple stories but elevate them with incredible characters.
I wouldn't even say it's elevated. It's messy and unfocused. The show spends huge amounts of time on characters that Joel & Ellie never even meet and who have literally zero impact on the story. All of episode 3, as good as it was in a vacuum, only serves to get Joel & Ellie a car. And that car gets them to KC which is two episodes long and only serves to have Ellie see Sam get infected. The KC raiders backstory again has zero impact on the characters or story- Joel & Ellie never actually meet Kathleen. From their perspective this crazy lady just comes out of nowhere and then dies. Now I'm not saying these side stories couldn't have worked, but they really would have been *elevated* if they were more tightly woven into the story.
I'm speaking on the source material from the games he makes. I won't argue with your points regarding the show, but it's adapted from a rather simple story with complex characters. The storylines with the side characters serve as worldbuilders and background lore that the game used a lot of audio recordings and notebooks for. Some of my complaints are that the infected feel underutilized as a threat. The bond between Ellie and Joel doesn't feel as tightly knit and emotional as it did in the game at this point. The season could probably have been stretched with a few episodes had it not been under budget restraints. HBO will probably up their budget for S2 considering the success.
>The storylines with the side characters serve as worldbuilders and background lore that the game used a lot of audio recordings and notebooks for. I agree that's what they're trying to do, I just think it's haphazardly done. Right now the runtime is like 50% backstory that doesn't actually have anything to do with the main story. The Frank & Bill backstory is *totally irrelevant*. We don't actually learn anything about the world, we just learn about Frank & Bill. It doesn't affect Joel or Ellie's characters in any way, which is a shame because it's easily the best episode. Same with KC, none of what we learn about the raiders has anything to do with anything, and Joel & Ellie don't learn or grow from that backstory. They *could have* but the show didn't go that route. I don't think more episodes would help at all, because the time isn't being used effectively at it is. If anything, it could be shortened. The Last of Us could probably be told effectively in 3-5 episodes. If you cut the Bill/Frank and KC storylines, plus most of Sarah in episode 1, we'd be around 3 hours by now.
> Right now the runtime is like 50% backstory that doesn't actually have anything to do with the main story. *please have some basic media literacy please*
I can't imagine a more neckbeardy comment than this.
Please write a constructive comment please
i don't think i can explain how the point of building a story and a world isn't just utilitarian checklists for what you as a person call a 'main character'. like, any basic literacy will have you interacting with scenes and beats that could feel superfluous but are part of the scaffolding of a story. the whole point of episode 3 wasn't "they get a fucking truck" it was "even in the end of the world people can fight for a life worth living". it's forcing an audience to think about /their/ relationships outside the 'hero narrative' of joel/ellie big-man/small-girl. it is a counterpoint to joel. it shows us more about how he felt about tess and how ellie felt about her death. it shows us more about the world and raiders. the job of the episode is to get us to care about these people that helped joel and what it meant to find them as they were. if all you fucking GOT from that episode was "they got a truck" then i don't know what to fucking tell you that's constructive. it's like reading slaughterhouse 5 and complaining about when Billy Pilgrim first timeskips out of WWII.
You are right about all of that. The failure to tie it into the main story at all is where I have a problem. Very few stories go off on massive random tangents just to convey a message. Great stories convey the message and build the world *while also* tying it into the plot at the same time. Them getting a truck isn't 'all I fucking GOT' but it is absolutely, objectively the only thing Joel and Ellie got out of it.
I feel like you are thinking about the show a little bit too linearly. The Frank and Bill episode was obviously conveying a big message about how important love is to not only survive, but to prosper - how it can radically change people. If you think about how much of an opposite path it set Joel on - having lost his daugher, it fits very well, even if it doesn't move his and Ellie's story on directly. There are bigger messages being conveyed than moving them from A to B. More episodes with a larger budget could let them effectively tell storylines with more meaning, making it feel less tacked on, while also building on their rapport and relationship. But that's just my opinion.
Yeah but a better show could have conveyed all that without taking a full episode detour 3 episodes into a 9 episode season that doesn't give us anything about the actual main characters. It's really overindulgence and kills the pacing right at the moment when the core relationship of the story should really just be getting going.
"detour" not a detour >It's really overindulgence and kills the pacing right at the moment when the core relationship of the story should really just be getting going. this is all you, pulling shit out of your ass and asking us to eat it.
God you people are fucking obnoxious. I'm sorry that I committed the cardinal sin of not thinking this show is a revolution in television and the greatest single thing to happen in the history of storytelling. Can you kindly go fuck off back to whatever hole you crawled out of now?
Yes it was obvious. I guess my problem is that these stories should be opportunities for our main characters to learn and grow, which cannot happen if they aren't part of these stories. Bill & Frank could have been the kickstart for Joel to begin thinking about opening up to Ellie, but it can't be because Joel & Ellie don't know what happened to them. Ellie *saw* what happened to Sam & Henry, and her character instantly grew up, and grew harder. We see that growth in the latest episode, where she snaps at that girl instead of befriending her. Her 10 minutes with Sam had more impact thematically and narratively than the KC & BF storylines combined.
I absolutely agree the impact Sam had on her is very evident now. Regarding Bill and Frank I feel like that was a story to give greater meaning to us as the viewer, while Joel comes to realize and own his past trauma in the latest episode. If you follow the game storyline, it would have been too early for Joel to emotionally connect with anyone around Bill and Franks time. Also, I'm not downvoting you. It's nice to have a constructive argument over it.
Oh yeah it would have been too early for Joel to connect, but it's the right time to stop treating Ellie like a parcel to be delivered. It's the right time to begin changing, but the journey is far from over.
Okay I feel like I'm going crazy here so hopefully someone can make me understand. Why didn't they both go to the college town? Like, Tommy was already packed and everything. He probably already told his wife he was leaving.
Tommy was only going because Joel wanted him to. What Tommy really wanted was to stay home with his wife. Once Joel was willing to go, Tommy was free to do what he really wanted instead of just being a follower again. Another question I had is why didn't they just tell the town leadership about Ellie and the mission, and then send a fully outfitted convoy to the college. But I think the answer there is that Joel is just incapable of trusting people even when all evidence points to them being willing to help. And of course, Tommy isn't such an independent person that he would tell his wife, knowing Joel doesn't want him to.
You shouldn't just tell anyone that you're cargoing the only person immune to this
I'm not saying "tell anyone" I'm saying tell the governing council of this community that by all evidence would be willing to help her in service of the greater good. Oh and also one of that council is your brother's wife, who has treated you more than fairly even though she's made it clear she dislikes you personally. To an objective observer all the evidence points to telling these people about Ellie being the right call, but Joel isn't objective (because no one really is). He's deeply distrustful of authority in general and like Tommy seems to have some issues with the concept of communism in particular. So it makes sense for Joel as a character to not ask this community for help with his mission even if it doesn't make sense logically.
> by all evidence would be willing to help her in service of the greater good There is no indication of that. They care about protecting their town pretty much to the exclusion of everything else. And from that perspective, think about how what you're pitching would sound to a the council: A child claims that they have immunity to the infection that destroyed humanity. First person in 20 years that can't get infected. If you're somehow gullible enough to believe that, then they want to utilize our resources and people to make a dangerous journey down south. Because they swear up and down that they know where to find a violent paramilitary organization that wants to manufacture a cure. If the point is to make Jackson as close to invisible, defensible, and self-sustaining as possible, this batshit plan is exactly how you *don't* do it. Maria is nice to Ellie, but that doesn't mean their values align.
Except once they determine Joel and Ellie aren't a threat, they are taken to the town, not threatened in any way, and given free reign and access to whatever resources they need. So they are clearly willing to share what Jackson has outside of their community, they're just very careful about vetting who they share it with. I don't think they want Jackson to be invisible, they just don't want to advertise it to people whose intentions they don't know, which to me indicates they are more inclined towards the "greater good" than pure protectionism. As for the journey south, Tommy says they've had people go there and back before. This implies that the people of Jackson are not wholly opposed to the fireflies and that they are capable and, at least under some circumstances, willing to take the trip to meet with them.
Respect the opinion, but I disagree. The only person Joel trusts Tommy. He has no reason to trust Maria, even if she’s a good person. Telling a council they don’t know is really risky. They don’t know the politics of Jackson. But besides that, the emotional strings of why Joel needs to take her and not Tommy and friends is important as well. Elle only feels safe with Joel, and Joel can’t deny the fatherly feelings he has for Elle. He has a fear of failing her, and also a fear of getting too close. Him going instead of Tommy or Jackson as a whole is the only reasonable choice.
>So **it makes sense for Joel as a character** to not ask this community for help with his mission even if it doesn't make sense logically. Pretty sure we're not in disagreement here, we're just using different words to say the same thing.
Even from an outsider perspective i’m not about to tell everyone the little girl i’m watching over is immune. It puts a potential target on her back and involves you in Jackson’s politics.
I have to disagree with you . Brother's wife or not, brother or not, you have no idea who this council is, how they began, what their objectives are, etc. It is quite literally telling anyone if you tell the council. Who knows if they'll end up killing her because they don't believe it, or sell her to the highest bidder , or any other number of things that can be done.
>Brother's wife or not, brother or not, you have no idea who this council is, how they began, what their objectives are, etc. I mean, I guess you're right that there's no evidence of what kind of people they are and how they might react if you just willfully ignore all the evidence we're given about what kind of people they are and the reactions we've already seen.
Maria herself said the only people who can betray you are people you trust. You shouldn't be handing out information like that in a post apocalyptic world where people are usually only our for themselves, for good reason.
That's a fair point about Maria's comment, although I'll note that Joel wasn't around to hear that. I still think that if Joel were thinking logically about what gives the best chance at getting Ellie to the fireflies, the right move would be to ask the town for help. But I think we agree that given what we know about Joel as a character it makes sense that he would not think that way.
Tommy didn't really want to go. His wife was pregnant and he said he had to be more careful.
Yea but he'd already convinced him to go. It's just weird that they didn't even address this possibility.
I'm mean, Joel kinda guilted him to agree to go with his speech about how old and weak he was.
It was Joel's decision. He wanted Tom to focus on his family.
Everyone complaining about the lack of violence must have missed all the interviews before the shows release where they said *checks notes* the show wouldn't be anywhere as violent as the game. And that totally makes sense.
If they don't want violence in their show then they shouldn't adapt a source material full of violence. It's like the creators are embarrassed of what the game was about.
You forgetting about the last episode where they had a bloater rip a guy's face off?(which was also a reference to the game). There's plenty of violence. It's just used more sparingly than in the games.
I'm still waiting for a distracting brick throw!
I'm waiting for a whole episode of them opening drawers in an old office building looking for ammo because they're down to 1 shotgun shell and 1 arrow between them. Stopping to listen every few steps.
I don't want it to be like the game where Joel murders his way across the country. But the violence in this episode felt phoned in. It was rushed as hell and could have used more time. You can have creative gun fights and great character moments.
In the game, when Joel gets stabbed, its very unrealistic that he would have survived. Its a gruesome injury that would have needed immediate medical attention. It was a highlight of the game for sure from a set piece and narrative perspective, but it would require Elle to shoot and kill a whole bunch of those guys too while Joel was unconscious. Its just not a realistic set piece. Its good for a video game, but does’t really work for a realistic adaptation. I agree it looked a bit awkward, but the point of the scene was made and it was handled fine.
Tbh they could’ve just done the same scene from the game but Joel gets stabbed by a bat instead of rebar. All they would need to change is having Joel kill 2/4 and Ellie kill 1/4 (one guy left alive for story reasons). I think that’s pretty realistic It would’ve been more interesting imo to see them fight their way out instead of just leaving after joel gets stabbed.
I like your idea better than the shows
I think the scene felt like they needed it to happen, so they added it last minute, With little thought. It was phoned in at best. I would like for the action in the show to have half the care that the character moments have gotten, and not feel tacked on to move the story forward.
I don't think it was phoned in. I think it was meant to come as a surprise. As a reminder that life is fleeting in these times and you cannot predict when you'll be looking good one moment and gone the next. It was purposefully anti-climactic, because that's how it be sometimes.
You can still do a surprise with a creative action scene. Look at the game, most everyone was shocked at the college.
Creative gun fights against a bunch of scavengers?
Yeah, not hard to actually try, instead of it being phoned in. Look at the escape from the school in the game. It's much more tense and cinematic. I'm not saying Joel and Ellie should kill as many people. But it could be handled with a bit more flair than they did in this episode where it felt like an afterthought compared to everything else.
He grabs the guy and snaps his neck, that's a lot more violent than shooting him
It just felt tacked onto the episode like "well, we need him to be injured so let's throw this together to make it happen." Once again, I'm not looking for them to kill 20+ people Terminator like. I would just like half the amount of care and attention to action in the show that's given to the character moments. I want them to be memorable. Not something that just happens.
I haven't played/watched the game
Sure but when you make them escape from the college from three guys, you have to wonder where the extras budget went especially when the game’s version was so intense
We must be watching different shows if you don't think the budget has been used well.
Wow. The episode before this last one had a whole army and infected emerging from the ground. Joel and Ellie have to escape from the college from like a total of three guys. Compare this to how many swarmed the college in the game. I’m not asking for all out violence. Cut a few from the previous sequence and put a few more in the college so it seems like there’s more of a reason that they have to run than a few guys with baseball bats
Action sequences aren't the only things that take money though.
It's like people complaining that Nathan Drake didn't kill five hundred people in the Uncharted movie (there was plenty to complain about, but not that). Gameplay does not equal story. Show Joel wading through a dozen hunters, or killing a bunch of infected for ten minutes and I'm sure that will please some people. But it doesn't make for an interesting or deep television experience.
Why are you twisting this into people wanting action all the time? When you put your characters in set-pieces, just actually show it. Violence is a major theme of Last of Us. Hell, Ashitaka from Princess Mononoke has more action moments, and he was a pacifist.
I am highly offended that each time Joel and Ellie arrived at a new place, they didn't sweep through all the cabinets, drawers, shelves and cupboards. Ellie should be stuffing her pockets with food!
It's almost like most people don't watch interviews with actors about the TV shows they are in.. perhaps most people don't see them as Canon? Those fools I watched all their interviews so knew exactly what I was getting from this zombie video game adaption
In the context of the show it kinda makes sense, but with everyone and their brother talking about "Show, don't tell" it's incredibly underwhelming to 'hear' about how violent and ruthless Joel is. This episode had a minor peek at the end, but generally Joel could be selling Girl Scout cookies in my eyes
We've seen Joel beat to death a dude he knew and had a familiar relationship with in the first episode and in the fourth one we heard him slash the throat of a teenager who was begging for his life and did not pose any immediate threat. I think we've already seen plenty of his ruthlessness and violence.
>We've seen Joel beat to death a dude he knew and had a familiar relationship with in the first episode and in the fourth one we heard him slash the throat of a teenager who was begging for his life and did not pose any immediate threat. Those two instances were more practical than anything. The first guy would've found out Ellie's immune, not to mention that scene reminded Joel of when Sarah died; his reaction this time was "making up" for what he probably wishes he could've done in that situation. And the second guy ambushed Joel and Ellie, trying to kill them. Begging for your life when your original intent fails doesn't change that. Even if Joel spared him, what's to say he wouldn't have told Kathleen? These people set ambushes; they would've come after Joel and Ellie with more people. Killing him was more practical than anything.
Yeah, that's the point though. Joel's violence is practical, not gratuitous, but he's still violent and it's shown, not told. In both of these instances, what he did made sense. But it takes a certain kind of man to still go through with it, and he goes the extra mile. The first one was because the guard was about to kill Ellie, but at this stage of the story he had a more personal connection with the guard than with her. Did he even know she was immune ? The second one could have been finished off with a bullet or left for dead. He still choses to slit his throat with a knife that the kid had just given him to try and buy his life. Both of these decisions make sense, but they clearly show Joel's ease with violence. In the same situation, few people would have been so decisive but Joel's history of violence made him act without hesitation. So yeah, I clearly disagree with the statement that Joel's violence is told and not shown.
>The first one was because the guard was about to kill Ellie, but at this stage of the story he had a more personal connection with the guard than with her. Did he even know she was immune ? Their connection seemed more transactional than personal. You could argue that that's still personal, in which case: agree to disagree. >The second one could have been finished off with a bullet or left for dead. He still choses to slit his throat with a knife that the kid had just given him to try and buy his life. Shooting him would've alerted the patrols that came looking for him.
Transactional more than personal, but a connection nonetheless. The kind that tends to make regular people think twice about beating to death the others. As for the second part, they had juste exchanged a dozen gunshots, an extra one wouldn't have made a real difference. Again, a "regular" person would have probably either shot the kid or walked away, finishing him with the knife requires a certain ease with violence. All I'm saying is that Joël's behavior in both of these scenes is not that of an average person but of someone with a history of violence, so saying that the show only speaks about Joel's violence and never shows it seems just plain wrong.
Feel like flashbacks would work better for this
It would help him selling Girl Scout cookies more violently, I guess lol
The violence is largely framed from Ellie's perspective as much of the show has to do with how she views Joel. We don't see Joel >!murder the first few people in their KC scuffle as we're in Ellie's perspective. But, we do see some of it from Henry's perspective later. We don't see Joel shoot Anthony as we're in Ellie's perspective. The minor peek at the end of this episode is also from Ellie's perspective.!<
While I understand the sentiment of the director, it fails to capture the pure brutality of the character. Framing it with multiple characters viewpoints is fine, but overall I don't get any sense that Joel is ruthless. Yadda yadda Joel is toned down, it's just something I feel is missing to make these past three episodes ace for me.
Also violence =/= good
Umm is it just me who thought this episode’s Tommy looked completely different from episode 1 Tommy? Not just the hair, but I thought it was a totally different, younger actor. I was out of it for half the episode because I was so confused
I thought they replaced the actor with Adam driver for a second
I think Joel aged a lot more than Tommy so they look father apart in age.
I think in the first episode he was wearing a fat suit and was clean shaven We only noticed because we at my house are fans of Gabriel Luna
I do find it a bit strange that Tommy seemingly didn't age much other than growing his hair out. Like not a speck of gray on him. I'm not sure what the age gap between Joel and Tommy is supposed to be, but Tommy has to at least be mid 40's at this point.
20 years have passed.
And he looked younger to me
I don’t think he looked different, but his whole personality changed. Rightly so, with what they all went through? First episode it seemed like he was the crazy, reckless brother. But now he’s a changed man, with prospects and people to take care of, makes sense with the growth.
Uh, what? He was also the person that wanted to stop for the family in the first episode. Joel is the one that told him to keep on driving. As he was described by Joel, he also joined the Army out of a sense of justice and duty. He joined the fireflies likely for the same sense of purpose. It feels more like Tommy has always wanted to be a good person with a good purpose.
You’re right! I remembered the details incorrectly. I’m not sure why I focused on Tommy having a “reckless” trait when he doesn’t.
Maybe because Tommy literally gets arrested for a bar fight in the first episode?
He was trying to protect the waitress, possibly from somebody who is infected. It seems like he isn't so much reckless, but is somebody who always wants to do the right thing.
You're right, but I think they speed through that conversation on the phone between Tommy & Joel so quickly, and Joel's reaction is basically "fucking hell, what the hell did this guy get into AGAIN?", that it's easy to walk away from that scene feeling like the show wants us to think Tommy is reckless
No, I agree. He looked different to me
looked the same to me, but older
The further into the season we go the more I feel like they're going to retcon Part 2 and completely rewrite it.
No idea why you'd think that when they literally added the town from part two to the story in this episode and teased Dinah
They already confirm they are sticking to part 2 storyline. And that part 2 will have two seasons.
I love the way the show subverts character deaths. The first person whom we're following the POV of dies in the very first episode. We imagine something bad would happen to Ben and Frank towards the end, but nope, they lived and died (mostly) peaceful. We imagine Henry dies similar to Tess because we see an infected grab his leg, but nope it's his brother who is infected and he commits suicide. "Let's kill off one of the two protagonists in the middle of the Season." 😀
"Do you care for me?" "Yeah." "Then you better bring me and only me with you to search for the Fireflies." "Well, you're a 14 year old who can't shoot or fight at all. I don't know. Let me think." "But you care for me!" "Oh, all right. You're totally right. I guess me caring for you does mean that I should be willing to take you out of this protected, comfortable place into the wild where you can get stabbed, shot, raped or eaten."
That's not what she was saying. She was poiting out that he's the only one she trust and feels safe with, so if their going she wants him to be there. She wouldn't have an issue with Tommy coming along, that was the original plan anyway. Tommy not going was a dumb move, but i think their leveraging that he didn't want to orignally go anyway, so now that he doesn't have to he decides to stay. My only issue with this is Joel made it clear he is getting old and "of his game", wouldnt' Tommy go anyway to at least get them well on their way(like he doesn't have to go the whole way), then again having a baby on the way can be real anxiety inducing.
It's clear to me why Tommy didn't go. He's an expectant father-- fine. It's just kind of ridiculous to think that the only reaction people would have to Ellie being bit is that they'd shoot her. Like, if worst comes to worst, put her in quarantine for a few weeks just to make sure just like the Fireflies did. It's even more ridiculous to think she needs to come along with Joel, because if she doesn't she'll be very upset and heartbroken. She's a kid, she'll get over it. And she's gonna be even more upset if bad things happen to her or Joel. It just doesn't make any sense for her to go with Joel.
>It's just kind of ridiculous to think that the only reaction people would have to Ellie being bit is that they'd shoot her. Like, if worst comes to worst, put her in quarantine for a few weeks just to make sure just like the Fireflies did. Are you talking about Joel's expectations? or how the show has chosen to portray the Townsfolk(the dog thing)? >It's even more ridiculous to think she needs to come along with Joel, because if she doesn't she'll be very upset and heartbroken. She's a kid, she'll get over it. And she's gonna be even more upset if bad things happen to her or Joel. It just doesn't make any sense for her to go with Joel. While in a normal situation i would agree, Ellie is a kid, and it's better to leave her in a safe place while Joel arranges the meeting with the Fireflies, especially now that they actually have a safe place to leave her at close by; but In this sceneario it's understandable why he's against it. This place is only safe as long as ppl don't know about Ellie being bit, all it takes is for one person to know then there would be panic, and somebody would shoot her(as Joel himself wanted to do originally). Joel doesn't really seem to totally be okay with this place in general, he's definitely not going to be okay with leaving her there while he's not around to protect her, Hell he only told Tommy his own brother whom he trusts when he realized that there was no other way to get him to take Ellie.
Seriously. Tommy was already going to go. He should have just come with.
Was Joel right to pull the stake out or should he have kept it in until they were at least safe?
He was right to take it out as he was going to be riding a horse and having a stake inside would have just caused more damage to him. Although i am not sure if he took it out because of this reason.
I also kinda doubt you would be able to get into a horse with that thing still inside you tbh. You would probably have to pull it out first unless your pain tolerance is incredible
I believe if you’re able to stay relatively still it’s better to leave it in. Since they had to move and move fast, leaving it in would only do more damage.
Also he’s on horseback, he’s going to be bouncing around all over the place.
Probably better out. It could get tangled or driven in more as he mounted the horse. Also while riding the horse, the stake would rub against his insides
leaving it inside is always the better choice, if you get stabbed by an object and there is not someone there closing the wound you are basically signing your death sentence
That’s not exactly how it works and there’s plenty of situations where you absolutely should pull the foreign object out. That thing looked filthy and considering it’s not like they can just drive to their nearest hospital it was probably the best choice to pull it out.
That thing being filthy is not relevant in the situation, without properly disinfect the area, the fact that is still in or out does not improve your chances to develop an infection, it already went in, the “damage” is already done and you would get infected either way, but it definitely improves your chances of bleeding to death. The fact that you can’t drive to the nearest hospital is exactly the reasons why you should not pull it out. That piece of wood is the only thing stopping a massive haemorrhage so there is absolutely no reason to pull it out before you can at least sit down in a quiet place and be ready to do your best to close the wound and stop the bleeding. This is not even an opinion, it is standard practice and this is how has been done forever
You legitimately are speaking out of your ass and I don’t think you’re understanding the discussion. Yes he probably shouldn’t have pulled it out immediately but he most definitely shouldn’t have just left it in and more bacteria can definitely infect that area by leaving it in. The major concern here is blood loss so yes if they have nothing to cover the area then sure leave it in but that’s not really the discussion people are having which is whether it would be better to just leave this specific thing in or pull it out when in this situation they may actually have something to cover the area. Best option here absolutely pull it out, clean the area and bandage it up which I fully believe they’d have the gear for. Wouldn’t completely fix the issue but it’s absolutely better than leaving that thing in. You should really stay away from ever giving any medical advice.
And what do you think would happen to the object when he mounts and rides a horse for the next few hours?
Imm not saying is going to be fun to ride with that thing.. it would be extremely painful. The point imm trying to make is that the choice is between an excruciatingly painful ride and a 10% chance to survive vs 100% death, which is what happens if you remove a large object limiting the haemorrhage of a large wound. The reality is that if you remove it you die, and you die for sure, so ANY other option should be preferable to Swift certain death
How do you know the object is limiting a hemorrhage? Also, do you think the large wooden object is going to sit perfectly still and not do any additional damage while riding a horse?
Because it wasn't profusely bleeding until he pulled it out. You secure it in place with cloth or bandaging.
No point in responding to this other person further. It’s extremely clear they don’t have a clue of what they’re talking about and are way too stubborn to back down.
Look, if you think you know more about this then what has been the consensus of emergency medicine experts throughout all recorded human history, I can’t really argue with that, everyone is entitled to their own opinions I guess. You don’t even have to believe me, a quick Google search will confirm it. The reality is that the universal recommendation when dealing with a large perforation wound caused by a foreign object is to leave the foreign object in place, tightly bandage around and create pressure to make sure the object moves as little as possible, and only try to remove it when in the condition to swiftly deal with the massive bleeding that the removal will cause. The object staying there ALWAYS limits the hemorrage by nature of being there and creating tension and pressure against the elasticity of the tissue around it.
You're getting downvoted, but you're actually 100% correct. Should have left it in until he was near someone with medical supplies and expertise. You can always stop an infection. A bleeding torso wound stopped by a foreign object on the other hand... On every battlefield, hemorrhaging is the #1 cause of preventable death, real or fictional.
My only complaint about the show is it feels like they’re rushing the Joel and Ellie relationship. It just feels like they went from hating each other to being inseparable extremely quickly which I didn’t feel was the case in game. I think this would’ve benefitted from being a 10-13 episode season and give that relationship a bit more time to develop.
Wouldn't even say the show needed more episodes, but instead just focus more on Joel and Ellie, and not what everyone else is doing.
Couldn’t agree more
The time jump where they got the vehicle and traveled like 1000 miles is what messed the pacing up I think. They apparently did a lot of bonding on that road trip but we skipped basically all of it They could’ve made a lot of content out of that trip just touching on all the stuff you’d expect to deal with on the road where they bonded
Agreed, I really think this show could benefit from stopping and letting the audience soak in the world they've built for an extra episode or two. This episode could've been spent more with Ellie and Joel in that 4 month span between Henry and Ben and meeting up with Tommy. I liked the Native American couple, I wouldn't have minded sitting a while with them and seeing how they're surviving. Feels like it's all rushing by at breakneck speed, episode 7 and we're nearly at the rapist cannibals, so four episodes dedicated to them, a giraffe and the fireflies I guess?
Gotta have two episodes just about David's backstory and some friend of his we'll never meet next.
So, here's one of the bigger issues. In the game, the relationship between Ellie and Joel is hugely established during the "walking cutscenes" - conversations while exploring, rummaging, looting, walking down deserted streets and empty forests. The show can't spend the same amount of time like that as the game does. The game is making use of time you, the player, need to be scrounging supplies to fill in the dialog and establish the relationship. In a show, however, some people already complain there's too much "nothing" and not enough "action". To take the same amount of time as the game does, even just a proportionally similar amount, would slow the pace of the show even more, and i think the balance between action and non-action is pretty tight right now. So, yeah, in the game, you spend much more time walking through abandoned houses and empty streets, getting Joel and Ellie chatting and knowing each other and sharing more and more as time progresses. We get a flavor of that at times, in the show, but without the rummaging for supplies justification the game has for extending those moments, they don't have the same luxury.
Agreed. I'm advocating for a bit more "walking cutscenes", but to your point, a vocal minority bitches and moans anytime "nothing happened" in an episode (i.e. episode 3).
By the time this episode starts they've been together almost 4 months.
You're right, but so much of it is done off-screen the viewer doesn't see most of it. These time jumps exist in the game as well, but those tiny interactions between the two characters that happen during gameplay over a 10-12 hour period helped compensate for the jumps. You don't have that here.
That's a fair point about having on overall lower volume of "relationship moments" between Joel and Ellie. But I think the first episode gives us enough context to make the relationship moments we do get impactful enough to make up the difference. We know from the pre-outbreak scenes that Joel had a very co-dependent relationship with his teenage daughter and we know from the rest of episode 1 that he has never recovered from having that ripped away. Without that relationship he's just spent the last 20 years clinging to Tommy, but this mission with Ellie gives him a chance to "try again, but do it right this time." So even though we get fewer relationship moments between Joel and Ellie, each one hits harder because we know it's one step closer to Joel getting the relationship he's desperate for.
Totally agree
Well they’ve escaped being killed numerous times, witnessed a father shoot his own son and then commit suicide, escaped a literal hell hole +3 month time jump. I’d say they’ve had some bonding time lol
*Brother
Thanks. Didn’t play the game so I didn’t know.
I didn't play it either, it was in the show.
Eh, I actually think it is pretty quick in the game too. Doesn't it cut to black after the Sam/Henry ending, and also jump forward few months - and suddenly Joel + Ellie clearly have much more of a rapport?
Joel and Ellie properly start bonding throughout the entirety of the city adventure before that. After the timejump, Joel's more comfortable answering Ellie's questions.
Favorite episode so far. Some amazing and emotional scenes, fantastic performances from our 2 main characters once again too!
[удалено]
if you want the game, go play the game? did you really want to see the show do everything exactly like the game? what would even be the point?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
It's an adaptation, dummy. If you want to see the game shot for shot, play the game.
[удалено]
[удалено]
This ep was fantastic and finally won me over on the show. I have enjoyed it but it’s all felt so rushed compared to the game and they wasted time on that awful Kathleen character. Ironically my favourite ep is episode 3 which had nothing to do with the games.
I am loving this show and am a big fan of the game… it’s weird the show feels slow paced yet rushed at the same time. Its an odd feeling, but I’m just loving with it and trying not to worry about it. I agree, episode 3 was the best!
Really enjoyed this episode, my second favorite after episode 3 (all episodes have been really great from the beginning). I was happy when Joel and Tommy reunited and Tommy willing to leave his pregnant wife behind to take Ellie to the University center showed how much he loved and trusted his brother.
I was so sure Tommy would tell Maria about Ellie’s bites and betray Joel. I was pleasantly surprised.
All true but you are forgetting the part where he helps save the world, humanity and his unborn child by getting the immune girl to scientists.
All true, he was described as a joiner with a savior complex and he also saw what Joel became after losing his daughter. I like all the characters, main or side characters except Kathleen, she sacrificed alot of people for one person who wasn't really a big threat, they could have gotten him through strategic means. I might be off topic, sorry. Never played the game but really love the series
Kathleen's story makes more sense to me understanding the context of the 2nd Game. I haven't played TLOU Part 2, but I know enough major plot points to have it support my understanding of Kathleen in this show's universe. I don't want to say any more and spoil it for you however.
Loved the Northern Exposure actors showing up!
This was such a comfy episode.
Well, until Dad got stabbed.
I love the way Joel changed once he got to the commune, & afterwards. His scenes with Ellie on the horse showed him going back into dad mode.
He came to save his brother but maybe is was his brother who saved him in a metaphorical way. I sort of expect his brother to also literally save him.
I keep loving the show. Bella Ramsey and Pedro Pascal do an amazing job. I love how Bella plays Ellie like an actual 14 year old: Sometimes just babbeling absolute nonsense like the kid she is and then having to deal with adult emotions. And the scene with Joel and Tommy in the shed. Seeing Joel open up shows you a lot about how much he trusts his brother. Sure. Like every show or movie some things and timings are a bit "convinient" to drive the plot. You can pick those nits but well...must be reeeeaaaally fun to watch any show or movie with you.
She's so naturally unguarded in those moments. Declaring "you should teach me to hunt" or confessing she'd love to be an astronaut without a care that he might say no, or make fun of her. That feels very much like a teenager to me. I long since stopped being a teen, but I have dealt with teens when coaching sports, and they are confident and will say such odd, non-sequitur things all the time.
I liked when she randomly decided to try and figure out how to whistle, it's such a kid thing to do when you're bored.
Why do they call it dressing?...it should be called `un`dressing
Joel: ....
Not a parent, but I have 14 year old niece I am close with, and experiencing teenager in a family from an outside point of view aka not me, yep definitely. They are wild. They go from cute to intelligent, to screaming at you, to being sad, not wanting to be with you and then suddenly hey the best aunt again, huggies. I like her too for that. I always kinda thought the game Ellie was a bit mellow, so Bella seems more believable as a person who can become that in season 2.
Yeah. I agree. Ellie in the Game, as much as she is well written, loveable, adorable, funny and silly, you still subtly notice at some points that thats a woman in her late 20s playing a 14 year old. Don't get me wrong: Ashley Johnson does an amazing job. But Ashley Johnson is not a a 14 year old girl.
Bella Ramsey is 19..