The Last Of Us (TV series)

[Neil]

Well, being one of those four people on the planet who have never played the game, I'm coming to this fairly 'blank canvas'...

S7vJnEp2ckM

[shootemindehead]

Ellie doesn't look like Ellie. :p

Looks reasonably close to the game. I'll be checking it out.

[MinionZombie]

So - thoughts on the first episode, anyone?

For me, coming from someone who has never played the games (I'm an Xbox guy, so...), I enjoyed it overall. The first chunk of it was the best, as it somewhat slowed down to a bit of a crawl after the time jump - but then again, you've got to establish this new apocalyptic world, so you can't complain too much.

I don't see why anyone has complained about Joel being played by Pedro Pascal, he seems to do a fine job to me. Ellie, on the other hand, I don't see this actress fitting the part from what I've heard. We first find her as somewhat of a snarling, overly-sweary beast (surely not the smartest way to act in the apocalypse???), and some of her reactions to situations are, indeed, eyebrow raising and inconsistent (at times she comes across as a potential psycho/sociopath in-the-making).

UMAOdtc0OMs

Some interesting responses here. I disagree with 'AZ' here on the opening portion. If you just tossed the viewers into the action almost immediately you indeed wouldn't know wtf was going on - but for the wrong reasons (and poor storytelling). The audience, which includes folks like me who've not played the game, need to get to know Joel's daughter (especially those who aren't even aware of her fate from the game) and their pre-apoc life, so we have an anchor of the pre-apoc world so we have better context for what's to come. Rushing headlong with fuck all set up doesn't work (or only under very rare circumstances). Case in point, I gave the first episode of Stan Against Evil last night, and was stunned by just how rushed the first episode was - I couldn't get a grasp on who folks were, what the set-up was, and so on. It was just slam-slam-slam from one thing to another, no set-ups or pay-offs, no tension building, little context to sink your teeth into and so on - and I don't think I'll bother with episode two as a result of that.

I'd also disagree with the irritating Melonie Mac (watched some of her videos a while back, but quickly got sick of the 'go boom' YouTuber sign-off and asinine statements such as "taxation is theft", a statement as mind-numbingly idiotic as "property is theft") ... ... rant aside by the wayside ... ... her complaint about Joel not being masculine enough just felt like she went in deliberately looking for something and finding it, much like a researcher paid to find a specific result and then magically finding it. We're only going off the first episode, for one, but to me Joel very much seemed to be someone who has turned himself into a machine, surviving in a shut-down manner with little to live for beyond some basic function tucked away in the back of his brain, which was the only thing left after his keenly-felt tragedy. A story has to unfold, a character has to travel from one state of being to another over the course of a story, so if he was on top of things from the get-go he wouldn't have much of an arc, and to me, it also suggests this will play into him getting to know Ellie and the whole 'surrogate daughter' angle.

Plus, let's be honest, after twenty years of apocalyptic survival, you're probably going to be pretty darn beaten down. Besides, when shit kicks off at the end, it's Joel who steps between the women and the gun and then delivers the brutal - quite masculine - smack down.

It was nice to see mixed opinions on the above video and not just an echo chamber, as can happen too often.

[shootemindehead]

I thought it was an excellent opener and one that didn't make the mistake of holding the hands of the non-gamer portion of the audience. My wife who had no idea what the program as even called, never mind played the game, had no problem at all keeping up which was easily done by simply, ya know, watching the bleeding show. She's now eagerly awaiting the rest of the episodes.

As far as Joel's daughter is concerned, what is there we need to know? She's his kid and she dies during the initial stages of the outbreak...and the scene where she's shot is handled very well. But that's all we need from her and the reason why she exists in the first place becomes obvious as the story unfolds.

All in all, as someone who played the game through twice, I have no complaints about the feature length opening episode. It stuck close to the game's opener and didn't go down the road of changing things just to change them. However, the flip side to that, is that I'm watching a story that I've already been told, so I'm kinda envious of people who never played the game.

also...whomever the hell Melonie Mac is, her "critcism" of the show so far is just bloody stupid.

[MinionZombie]

I thought it was an excellent opener and one that didn't make the mistake of holding the hands of the non-gamer portion of the audience. My wife who had no idea what the program as even called, never mind played the game, had no problem at all keeping up which was easily done by simply, ya know, watching the bleeding show. She's now eagerly awaiting the rest of the episodes.

As far as Joel's daughter is concerned, what is there we need to know? She's his kid and she dies during the initial stages of the outbreak...and the scene where she's shot is handled very well. But that's all we need from her and the reason why she exists in the first place becomes obvious as the story unfolds.

also...whomever the hell Melonie Mac is, her "critcism" of the show so far is just bloody stupid.

1) Aye. Being that this is from Craig Mazin (who did Chernobyl), I knew the storytelling was going to be pretty darn good with intelligent structural choices made. The only things I know about TLOU is random snippets by osmosis, but other than that nothing much to fuck all.

2) If they'd slap-dashed Joel's daughter in the opening of this show, it would've been too quick for most audiences. It's just enough time to connect with her, connect with Joel (who we also get to know before the apocalypse changes him, importantly), see the world as it was before it changes as well etc. Rushing too much usually leads to disconnection and a lack of caring from the audience, who've not been given the chance to invest, so I thought the whole pre-apoc section was well-paced. So I completely disagree with that 'AZ' bloke about the opening, and I wonder if it's just him finding something to whinge about. Adaptations are called that for a reason. You can't pace a film like a book, or a show like a game etc, as they're structurally different storytelling methods.

Out of interest, how much gameplay time do you have before Joel's daughter gets bumped off in the game? Naturally, with a game, a main goal is to get the player into the action and gameplay as quick as possible. There are exceptions (e.g. RDR2 to some extent, maybe QTE-heavy 'movie-like' games like The Quarry etc), but you want the player playing ASAP.

3) She really doesn't come across as the brightest tool in the media criticism kit, and the standard YouTuber checklist of presentational styles and setup has obviously been paid attention to, but to a degree that's quite generic. Then you can see the usual group-think opinions coming through. I packed-in watching Disparu videos once it became clear he only talks negatively about films/shows, deliberately covering stuff he hates ... what's the point in that? He rambles on too long making the same points over and over (even if some or a lot of them hold merit to those particular shows that are objectively crap), but that was all it was. The good thing about Drinker is he highlights things he likes as well, is willing to admit when first impressions were wrong, has a better understanding of writing and storytelling requirements, puts up a fair number of videos with generally well thought out ideas and theories ... ... Melonie Mac, on the other hand, I got the impression from this video that her opinions are somewhat 'group flexible' and, like I said before, based more on deliberately searching for something and unsurprisingly finding it, while using an excuse to justify that unobjective viewing habit. Ironically, she's rather close in methodology to the people she likely rails against constantly, spouting group-think from an echo-chamber.

Have there been plenty of projects that have been ruined by hacks and identity politics and stupid decisions? Oh, sure. But you can't judge every show and film from the get-go based on that, and not every 'possibly woke' thing is actually "woke" (in the negative use of the term - aka hack garbage with shite writing like, for instance, Velma). Go into something looking to be offended and guess what, you'll come out offended - Melonic Mac, just like some blue-haired 'wokester' on a gender studies course at some trumped-up 'university' thinking they're so important to the world, in that regard. It's rather silly and ruins any good points she has come up with. Screech about everything and the things worth screeching about are lost in the tidal wave of over-reaction and blinkered thinking.

/rant :p

[Moon Knight]

My favorite cold open in a long time! They explain everything perfectly too for non gamers. Love the game, and I loved this first episode. Fantastic start.

[shootemindehead]

If they'd slap-dashed Joel's daughter in the opening of this show, it would've been too quick for most audiences. It's just enough time to connect with her, connect with Joel (who we also get to know before the apocalypse changes him, importantly), see the world as it was before it changes as well etc. Rushing too much usually leads to disconnection and a lack of caring from the audience, who've not been given the chance to invest, so I thought the whole pre-apoc section was well-paced. So I completely disagree with that 'AZ' bloke about the opening, and I wonder if it's just him finding something to whinge about. Adaptations are called that for a reason. You can't pace a film like a book, or a show like a game etc, as they're structurally different storytelling methods.

Out of interest, how much gameplay time do you have before Joel's daughter gets bumped off in the game? Naturally, with a game, a main goal is to get the player into the action and gameplay as quick as possible. There are exceptions (e.g. RDR2 to some extent, maybe QTE-heavy 'movie-like' games like The Quarry etc), but you want the player playing ASAP.

I'd say, at best, there's about 20 minutes of an intro with Joel and his kid. Then, IIRC, there's a credits opening and the player is then dumped in Boston. Don't know how long it was in the show, but I'd reckon it's longer. The episode actually follows the game quite closely.


She really doesn't come across as the brightest tool in the media criticism kit, and the standard YouTuber checklist of presentational styles and setup has obviously been paid attention to, but to a degree that's quite generic. Then you can see the usual group-think opinions coming through. I packed-in watching Disparu videos once it became clear he only talks negatively about films/shows, deliberately covering stuff he hates ... what's the point in that? He rambles on too long making the same points over and over (even if some or a lot of them hold merit to those particular shows that are objectively crap), but that was all it was. The good thing about Drinker is he highlights things he likes as well, is willing to admit when first impressions were wrong, has a better understanding of writing and storytelling requirements, puts up a fair number of videos with generally well thought out ideas and theories ... ... Melonie Mac, on the other hand, I got the impression from this video that her opinions are somewhat 'group flexible' and, like I said before, based more on deliberately searching for something and unsurprisingly finding it, while using an excuse to justify that unobjective viewing habit. Ironically, she's rather close in methodology to the people she likely rails against constantly, spouting group-think from an echo-chamber.

Never heard of this Melonie Mac one, but if that snippet of "criticism" is anything to go by, then it'll stay that way.

But the problem with all of these YouTube "critics" is that they're usually just whingers looking for clicks from a certain type who just want to hear their own opinions repeated back to them via the web, and that includes that Drinker lad who, more often than not, is just a whining maggot, and to be honest I'm not all that fond of his schtick. All that one note, preaching to the cheap seats, shite just becomes really tiresome after a while.

The only YouTubers I bother watching are those lads in Red letter Media. But they tend to be very lackadaisical with their output.


Have there been plenty of projects that have been ruined by hacks and identity politics and stupid decisions? Oh, sure. But you can't judge every show and film from the get-go based on that, and not every 'possibly woke' thing is actually "woke" (in the negative use of the term - aka hack garbage with shite writing like, for instance, Velma). Go into something looking to be offended and guess what, you'll come out offended - Melonic Mac, just like some blue-haired 'wokester' on a gender studies course at some trumped-up 'university' thinking they're so important to the world, in that regard. It's rather silly and ruins any good points she has come up with. Screech about everything and the things worth screeching about are lost in the tidal wave of over-reaction and blinkered thinking.

/rant :p

I'm so tired of that dumb term being used as shorthand for everything a certain cohort hates. It's the most redundant phrase. It's everywhere on the bleedin web now and I've still yet to hear it in real life. :lol: I read some bollocks the other day from some clown giving out because Joel's daughter in the show was brown, and just how wOkE the show was and how it was a "disaster". FFS :rolleyes:

But it's a general thing now, I find. Ask someone what they're in favour of and you'll be lucky to get a single, confused, sentence. Ask someone what or who they "hate" and you'll be there all feckin week as they bend the ear off ya. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Neil]

Well, two episodes in and enjoying it so far... Hopefully it will keep on an upward trajectory story/plot/character wise.

[MinionZombie]

Well, two episodes in and enjoying it so far... Hopefully it will keep on an upward trajectory story/plot/character wise.

Funny, too, that in the video I posted earlier, the likes of 'Melonie Mac' are whining about what 'could happen', out of pure assumption and blinkered thinking, that they'd keep the lady alive for longer and have her become the hero etc etc etc ... well what did they do? Adhere to the story of the game and kill her off as intended. And, if anything (from what I've heard), the show makes her death more impactful as you get to properly see it - and I must say, it was a great scene.

Ironic, really, that so many 'rage tubers' are as reactionary and presumptive as the people they (unsurprisingly) rail against. Yes, there is plenty of dreck out there (*cough* Velma *cough*), but just going in expecting the worst is exactly the sort of thing the so-called 'woke types' also do: expect the worst of people and only see the world through that prism, and not only that, but expect everyone else to do the same. :rolleyes:

[Neil]

The PC game is due out in a month or so, basically ten years after the original release... Supposedly presales have more than doubled since the TV series started :)

[Moon Knight]

Once again the Cold Open was great. I can watch a whole episode during that initial outbreak era. Dialogue and acting was stellar too.

Fantastic portrayal of the Clickers too! Super creepy. The Stalker scene was um… unexpected lol!

2 solid episodes so far.

[MinionZombie]

Very much enjoying it (and having never played the games), looking forward to the next episode.

Still not yet sold on the actress playing Ellie. Seeing some side-by-side comparisons of game/TV show, I think some of it is coming down to some aspects of her performance - the expression and intonation of certain lines of dialogue. Hopefully the characterisation will improve a bit more in the coming episodes.

The Clickers were very good and creepy - the whole museum sequence worked wonderfully and I genuinely felt the tension. Good to see Joel and the lady (name escapes me right now) laying down the law over moving through the world (i.e. shut the fuck up), with Ellie being too naiive or not thoughtful enough to the realities of the world around her. 'Precocious kids' can be handled so badly in shows/films, so it's good to see a sensible adult just cutting that shit off ... not like, say, the second Jurassic World movie where they all stand aside and let an idiot child make the decision to unleash dinosaurs on the world (good lord, was than an infuriating end to a movie!!!)

Anyway - roll on episode 3!

[shootemindehead]

Once again the Cold Open was great. I can watch a whole episode during that initial outbreak era.

The autopsy scene really creeped me out. That bit where she makes her first incision and under the skin there's a layer of fungus. *shudder*

I don't know why it's given me the willies though. I've seen much worse.

[MinionZombie]

The autopsy scene really creeped me out. That bit where she makes her first incision and under the skin there's a layer of fungus. *shudder*

I don't know why it's given me the willies though. I've seen much worse.

I know what you mean ... perhaps it was just the 'sensation' of that scene ... the way the skin split under the knife, the look of that fungus just beneath the skin. It's like that aversion some people have to patterns of holes, particular in organic matter, that gives them the willies.

Perhaps it's like that scene in The Thing where the thumb gets sliced by the knife during the blood test sequence. There's much, much, much gorier stuff in the movie, and you don't even see the blade slicing the skin, but it's that subtle sound of the knife slice the skin that just makes my skin crawl every single time I see that movie.

That opening sequence was also quite powerful because of the dread on the woman's face - she knows how catastrophic the discovery is, and then when her response to what they should do is simply "bomb" ... ... man, it's giving me shivers just thinking about it.

[shootemindehead]

It was well handled, but I though that the "put them all in a field and bomb the bastards" solution was arrived at a bit too speedily. But I spose there's just no time in the cold opener to flesh out what would more likely happen.


1545

[MinionZombie]

Geeeeeeeez. Episode three just floored me. :stunned:

Also, there's an accompanying podcast for each episode on the HBO Max YouTube channel...

-SEYmfA1GSY

[shootemindehead]

***SPOILERS***


I was left mixed on Ep3.

A bottle episode in a 9 episode show is just weird. As a stand alone movie or story, it would have been grand. But it actually feels like a really awkward insert at this juncture. To spend and entire hour + with two fairly random characters who have no real impact on the general narrative is a really curious choice. Especially as they killed off Bill at the end so he doesn't help Joel and Ellie as he did in the game and no has absolutely nothing to do with the story's continuation.

I probably would be warmer to the episode if Bill had actually lived. Killing him off was odd. The whole thing feels like a different show for a large bulk of it.

[Neil]

***SPOILERS***

Yeh, agree. But I still enjoyed ep3. Although I don't get how:-
1) There was only seemingly one (implied) raid?
2) Why would such a diligent survivalist be standing in the middle of the road shooting at raiders, rather than behind any sort of cover.
3) They happen to die just days before Joel and Ellie turn up. Not months or years... Days...

But generally I liked the episode.

ps: I would have thought a nice touch would have been towards the beginning if Bill had heard sustained gun fire outside the town. ie: The towns folk being shot for the mass grave.

[shootemindehead]

1) There's not many people left in the world and Bill's gaff is pretty out of the way

2) He's a prepper, so probably a pre-apocalypse gun nut who thinks everyone is out to get him. That doesn't mean he's been actually trained in any military discipline. I'd wager a lot of those American gun nut types all think that they're Rambo in their heads, but if they ever had to put themselves to the test, it would be another thing. Plus, panic often makes a person do the exact thing they know they shouldn't be doing.

3) That's possible no?

[MinionZombie]

***SPOILERS***

Yeh, agree. But I still enjoyed ep3. Although I don't get how:-
1) There was only seemingly one (implied) raid?
2) Why would such a diligent survivalist be standing in the middle of the road shooting at raiders, rather than behind any sort of cover.
3) They happen to die just days before Joel and Ellie turn up. Not months or years... Days...

But generally I liked the episode.

ps: I would have thought a nice touch would have been towards the beginning if Bill had heard sustained gun fire outside the town. ie: The towns folk being shot for the mass grave.

1) Would seeing two or three or four or more raids have added anything? I don't think so at all, it would've just been repetitive. We get the story beat and we see enough of a glimpse of Raiders to understand the threat, while leaving it alone enough that it can be developed in later episodes and interactions - leaving it more for Joel and Ellie to deal with.

2) Yes, that did grate on me, but Shoot also makes valid points. Mind you, considering how he knew how to do all those damn things you'd have thought he'd know the basics of 'use cover to avoid getting shot' ... mind you, it also serves a purpose of tension. You think Bill's going to die of the gunshot wound, but then we flash forward and in the distance on the porch there's a man in a wheelchair, and you think it's Bill, but then you discover it's Frank who has (presumably) had a stroke and has been physically (as opposed to mentally) affected by it.

3) Which adds to the tragedy of it all.

I've seen some comments online from reactionary 'anti-woke warrior' types whining that the ending of this episode gave Bill and Frank a "happy ending" ... what the fuck was "happy" about this ending? It was tragic and sad. The only thing "happy" about it was their last day, but even that was completely tinged with sadness and heartbreak and impending loneliness (hence Bill's decision, which in my view was quite understandable - if I had nobody left to care about I'd be off to find the nearest tall thing to jump off of or whatever else, quite frankly).

4) I like the idea of distant gunshots, but was it happening quite that immediately in the timeline of this apocalypse? Then again, it was those residents who were in that pit (the clothing of the mother and baby shows that to be the case). Unless we missed hearing it somewhere in the episode...?

...

In terms of this being a "bottle episode" ... technically? But I think this episode handled a lot of thematic weight lifting, which is then passed onto the Joel & Ellie story, without going through some of the usual beats we've seen so many times in so many other post-apoc stories. Being that Bill and Frank also knew Joel and Ellie, and that the note mentions Tess, now just recently deceased, adds further emotional impact and further drives home that 'men like Bill and Joel have a purpose' ... ironically, these reactionary anti-woke people have missed that that's one of the most traditional and manliest of male ideals: to be the protector and to have purpose through protection of others. Another irony is that this episode also proves the point that you don't have to 'see yourself' to get emotionally invested in characters on-screen (something that the 'aggressively woke' brigade have rarely ever understood) - as long as it's well written and performed (as this episode very much was), then you can find connection. Similarly, some have whined about 'they wouldn't have spent this time on a heterosexual relationship' and you just think, bitch please, have you seen all of television and film for the past 12+ decades? :lol:

Just following Joel and Ellie walking around for a whole episode would've been dull. We see plenty to get the jist of these two post-Tess, but we also get to explore a whole range of wider themes for the entire story. It also adds some further context for seeing how the world changed and how the apocalypse changed people, and how life still progresses and decays regardless of the apocalypse.

Sometimes you need a breather. Look at episode 6x04 of The Walking Dead (the one with Morgan and the cheese maker), or indeed in the second season of Hunters that just came out the penultimate episode is a 'bottle episode', but tells a compelling story that is relatively isolated, but still has an important connection to the wider story in multiple ways.

[Neil]

1) Would seeing two or three or four or more raids have added anything? I don't think so at all, it would've just been repetitive. We get the story beat and we see enough of a glimpse of Raiders to understand the threat, while leaving it alone enough that it can be developed in later episodes and interactions - leaving it more for Joel and Ellie to deal with.True, but suggesting/implying only one happened? Anyway it's just a niggle...

I like the notion of these stand alone stories weaved into the bigger story line/apocalypse. The Walking Dead had some of these, and typically they worked well...

[MinionZombie]

True, but suggesting/implying only one happened? Anyway it's just a niggle...

I like the notion of these stand alone stories weaved into the bigger story line/apocalypse. The Walking Dead had some of these, and typically they worked well...

I'm not sure if it was implying only one raid happened.

It was interesting that after Joel gave that warning, saying that even though it's been a long time it will happen eventually (in-turn suggesting 1) Bill's remote location, 2) a general lack of people, which in-turn means raiders in small numbers scattered all over), there was a time jump of about three years. I was off-set initially, lulled into a false sense of security, then the raid comes.

I think it's left to the viewer's imagination whether or not there were more raid attempts that we didn't see, but clearly nobody got through those lines of defenses as the fence line was still intact and operational.

I too really dug this episode. It is good to get a flavour of this large world from other people's POVs from time-to-time, as it shows other experiences within that same context. Bill and Frank had a very different story to what Joel has had (and will have) and likewise for Ellie, but it all links together as part of a much larger tapestry. It weaves into the story of TLOU more than the plot, story and plot being two different things. Plot is what's happening right now at any moment, what you see on-screen, whereas story includes everything relating to the characters before, during, and after what we've seen on-screen (i.e. their context, or indeed the context of the world in which this is all set).

I though episode 3 handled some of the larger and core themes of the overall story of TLOU quite well and made them relevant to Joel and Ellie, but also did so in a way that the audience's emotional connection to them will match that of Joel when he reads the letter (or at least match his reaction enough to drive the point home and make it mean something important).

[shootemindehead]

I like the notion of these stand alone stories weaved into the bigger story line/apocalypse. The Walking Dead had some of these, and typically they worked well...

Most TV shows have bottle episodes. Some are more successful than others. However, they don't have them 3 episodes in and they usually don't rip the audience away from the main characters and focus on completely random ones only to kill them off at the end. There is, literally, no significance to the main narrative that stems from either Bill or Frank. They'll have no major impact at all on the story, because the entire episode is a story that's completely their own.

Also, I'd wonder just how this episode would have been greeted is Frank was Francine? I seriously doubt it would be getting all the online critical kudos that it is currently.

[Neil]

Most TV shows have bottle episodes. Some are more successful than others. However, they don't have them 3 episodes in and they usually don't rip the audience away from the main characters and focus on completely random ones only to kill them off at the end. There is, literally, no significance to the main narrative that stems from either Bill or Frank. They'll have no major impact at all on the story, because the entire episode is a story that's completely their own.

Also, I'd wonder just how this episode would have been greeted is Frank was Francine? I seriously doubt it would be getting all the online critical kudos that it is currently.
Get your point, but I enjoyed it. I also feel it gave some depth and gravitas to the 20yrs and the apocalypse that happened. The Walking Dead could have done with more flash backs and other stories from the fall of humanity IMHO.

Out of interest, how does that episode relate to anything in the video game? ie: Was there anything like that episode in the game?

[shootemindehead]

Get your point, but I enjoyed it. I also feel it gave some depth and gravitas to the 20yrs and the apocalypse that happened. The Walking Dead could have done with more flash backs and other stories from the fall of humanity IMHO.

Oh it's certainly enjoyable. It's just a massive jerk away from the direction the show was heading and it kills the momentum badly. It's like say in 'Star Wars' just after Luke decides to leave Tatooine we cut to Degobah to spend and hour with Yoda farting about.


Out of interest, how does that episode relate to anything in the video game? ie: Was there anything like that episode in the game?

In the game, Joel and Ellie meet Bill in order to try and pick up a car. He's a miserable old bollocks and there's some good banter back and forth between him and Ellie. Bill has set up traps and defences all around a town and it's riddled with infected. Bill helps Joel and Ellie pick up a working vehicle and they go on their way. During the section where Joel, Ellie and Bill are looking for the car, they find Frank dead and a note that says he hated Bill and got sick of his rules, so he buggered off. But obviously didn't make it out of town without getting infected. So he killed himself before it could take hold.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byrkFkvYlAM

It's very different and both ways are fine. But the TV show's hard cut to 15 years worth of a flashback did nothing for the flow. It's really a separate story altogether that's jammed in.

[Neil]

-6z-ow9bAus

[Moon Knight]

I believe the purpose for spending so much time with Bill and Frank was to see the passage of time during this epidemic through two complete strangers. I think they could have gotten a bit deeper and showed more of the threat but instead we got a very nice, although tragic, story about two people finding love during the sh*t.

Also, we now know the story behind Joel’s radio and the choice of songs. Joel and Ellie got some weapons, a sweet ride, and much needed deodorant out of it all. Not too bad. :D

[MinionZombie]

While episode three might seemingly have done not too much for the plot, it did plenty for the story, as well as really cementing key themes - especially in relation to Joel, emotionally raw and lost in the wake of Tess' death, and his mission to escort Ellie.

Also, let's not forget that the episode also featured material with Joel and Ellie, which saw them growing a little closer, at the beginning and close of the episode, so it wasn't even an entire episode dedicated to Bill and Frank's tale.

I would also counter-argue that certain people pissing and moaning (the rabidly anti-woke types who are just as bad as the super-woke types, both of them similarly blinkered and entrenched in their views) about this episode are grumpy because it featured two gay men. I'd wager if it was Bill & Francine their whining would've been neutered by comparison.

Call Me Chato, one of these cultural commentator YouTubers (who generally does a good job and doesn't get lost in the extreme weeds) made a point in concern to this episode: a lot of 'super-woke shite' is causing increased negative reactions to anything that could be remotely considered 'woke', such as this episode, just because it features two gay men. However, such reactions to this episode are nonsense, because there's nothing 'woke' in this entire episode. The romance is played no stronger or 'in your face' than if it had been two straight characters (perhaps even a little softer), and at no point are they grinding proceedings to a halt for some poorly written polemic crammed-in by some pissed-off hack excuse for a screenwriter whose concerns for writing begin and almost end with "identity politics" above everything else (certainly plot, story, and characters) ... whereas Craig Mazin has proved himself to be a gifted writer with Chernobyl, and now The Last Of Us.

We get our first glimpse at Raiders, we get more context for the overall story of the apocalypse, Joel and Ellie get to know each other better, Joel has his heart and mind firmly aligned on his mission at a crucial low point for him, etc etc etc.

I wouldn't even call this a 'bottle episode', as 'bottle' episodes are intended to be cheap productions to help save money (think of the episode involving Walt and Jessie trying to kill a fly in Breaking Bad) and somewhat keep things in a holding pattern - whereas this episode is certainly none of those things. While it certainly does more to advance the story as opposed to the plot (they're two different things), it's just not the case that the episode doesn't do anything.

I'd much prefer this than to just seeing Joel and Ellie making their way through some traps and clickers and such (which is really more gameplay as opposed to plot or story) - we've already seen some of that in episode two and will most assuredly be seeing more of it in the coming episodes.

[shootemindehead]

While episode three might seemingly have done not too much for the plot, it did plenty for the story, as well as really cementing key themes - especially in relation to Joel, emotionally raw and lost in the wake of Tess' death, and his mission to escort Ellie.

Also, let's not forget that the episode also featured material with Joel and Ellie, which saw them growing a little closer, at the beginning and close of the episode, so it wasn't even an entire episode dedicated to Bill and Frank's tale.

But all of that is happening without Bill and Frank's story. Even if Bill and Frank are eliminated completely, Joel and Ellie still end up going where they're going and getting closer over the course of their journey. The Last of Us is, literally, that story irrespective of Bill and Frank.

It's Tess who convinced Joel to see the mission through and Joel is going to make the decision to head on to Tommy, as that's where Tess and Joel were going in the first place. Also, we can see that even before Joel and Ellie get to Bill's gaff that he's starting to warm toward her. So we're already on the journey regardless of Bill and Frank. They're a nice little story in their own right. But they're absolutely extraneous to the main one.


I would also counter-argue that certain people pissing and moaning (the rabidly anti-woke types who are just as bad as the super-woke types, both of them similarly blinkered and entrenched in their views) about this episode are grumpy because it featured two gay men. I'd wager if it was Bill & Francine their whining would've been neutered by comparison.

Agreed and the episode is currently getting 1 star reviews on IMDB from that particular cohort. The reality is that, no, it isn't the greatest bit of TV ever and it isn't a 1 star story either.

However, even if Frank was Francine, the problem with the episode still remains. It's an awkwardly inserted separate story jammed into the story everyone came to see and all at just episode 3 into the bargain.


Call Me Chato, one of these cultural commentator YouTubers (who generally does a good job and doesn't get lost in the extreme weeds) made a point in concern to this episode: a lot of 'super-woke shite' is causing increased negative reactions to anything that could be remotely considered 'woke', such as this episode, just because it features two gay men. However, such reactions to this episode are nonsense, because there's nothing 'woke' in this entire episode. The romance is played no stronger or 'in your face' than if it had been two straight characters (perhaps even a little softer), and at no point are they grinding proceedings to a halt for some poorly written polemic crammed-in by some pissed-off hack excuse for a screenwriter whose concerns for writing begin and almost end with "identity politics" above everything else (certainly plot, story, and characters) ... whereas Craig Mazin has proved himself to be a gifted writer with Chernobyl, and now The Last Of Us.

This "woke" word has become a nonsensical shorthand for "things I don't like" from a certain cohort on the right, especially the American right. It's a reductive, tiresome and thoroughly divisive catchword that only serves to inflame, and it drowns out any legitimate criticism that can be levelled toward any media. Frankly, when someone cries "woke", I just tend to tune out of anything else they have to say at this point and in any case, for me this a "webism". I never hear it in real life.

[MinionZombie]

But all of that is happening without Bill and Frank's story. Even if Bill and Frank are eliminated completely, Joel and Ellie still end up going where they're going and getting closer over the course of their journey. The Last of Us is, literally, that story irrespective of Bill and Frank.

Well, that's the plot of The Last Of Us, but the story includes everything surrounding (as well as including) Joel and Ellie and the world they are living in - and this episode plays right into that, primarily handling some significant thematic weight.


It's Tess who convinced Joel to see the mission through and Joel is going to make the decision to head on to Tommy, as that's where Tess and Joel were going in the first place. Also, we can see that even before Joel and Ellie get to Bill's gaff that he's starting to warm toward her. So we're already on the journey regardless of Bill and Frank. They're a nice little story in their own right. But they're absolutely extraneous to the main one.

Joel's only in it in episode one (and most of two) purely to get a car battery. He has no commitment to Ellie personally. Tess does indeed convince Joel to continue the mission, but even still, his commitment is only to Tess at that point - out of obligation to Tess, not Ellie. Upon reading the note from Bill - the meaning of which can only truly be felt and expressed through the story we've witnessed with Bill and Frank - Joel finally commits to Ellie. She's not a chip getting bargained with with a car battery as the pot o'gold at the end of the shades-of-brown rainbow, she's not an obligation made to Tess (essentially her dying wish), but she's now properly Joel's mission in his heart as well as his head. That is the key purpose of this episode.


Agreed and the episode is currently getting 1 star reviews on IMDB from that particular cohort. The reality is that, no, it isn't the greatest bit of TV ever and it isn't a 1 star story either.

However, even if Frank was Francine, the problem with the episode still remains. It's an awkwardly inserted separate story jammed into the story everyone came to see and all at just episode 3 into the bargain.

This "woke" word has become a nonsensical shorthand for "things I don't like" from a certain cohort on the right, especially the American right. It's a reductive, tiresome and thoroughly divisive catchword that only serves to inflame, and it drowns out any legitimate criticism that can be levelled toward any media. Frankly, when someone cries "woke", I just tend to tune out of anything else they have to say at this point and in any case, for me this a "webism". I never hear it in real life.

"Woke" gets in the way on both sides. On one side you've got terrible writers and showrunners who just focus on identity politics and boxes to be ticked and messages to be pushed with all the subtlety of a bulldozer at a maternity ward - instead of focusing on story, plot, and character (the key fundamentals of storytelling) with any themes handled deftly - while on the other side you've got people who get so hung-up on the bad examples that they 1) can't see good, and objectively non-"woke" material for what it is (falsely calling it "woke"), and 2) any valid opinions or points that they have to make are automatically ignored by folks who immediately disregard them because a four-letter word, 'webism' or not, has been used. It's a whole whirlwind with farts flying in everyone's faces. :lol:

I can objectively understand and respect the point that some (including the rabidly 'anti-woke' ragetubers) have put forth about its place structurally - but I personally do not agree. Joel and Ellie both featured in the episode to top and tail it, and not just a few measily minutes either, and their inclusion is tied to the Bill and Frank tale for the above-mentioned reasons. It's arguably in Mazin's playbook to write and structure in unexpected ways - Chernobyl doesn't show you the 'inside' of the disaster until the final episode, while the first time we see the infamous event is far in the distance through a small window, or the episode that primarily focuses on three individuals in the teams who were charged with putting down any and all animals in the area.

[Neil]

yVoNEVJgHBE

[shootemindehead]

Joel's only in it in episode one (and most of two) purely to get a car battery. He has no commitment to Ellie personally. Tess does indeed convince Joel to continue the mission, but even still, his commitment is only to Tess at that point - out of obligation to Tess, not Ellie. Upon reading the note from Bill - the meaning of which can only truly be felt and expressed through the story we've witnessed with Bill and Frank - Joel finally commits to Ellie. She's not a chip getting bargained with with a car battery as the pot o'gold at the end of the shades-of-brown rainbow, she's not an obligation made to Tess (essentially her dying wish), but she's now properly Joel's mission in his heart as well as his head. That is the key purpose of this episode.

That's the point of the whole story though. Joel's relationship with Ellie and how that evolves over time. Joel has no commitment to Ellie in the game either. But he warms up to her over the course of their journey. This idea that Bill's letter is somehow a catalyst for this doesn't wash as far as I'm concerned, because this was going to happen anyway. It wasn't even in the game and Joel stills comes to see Ellie as a surrogate daughter over the course of the game's events. Joel will grow to love Ellie whether Bill's letter exists or not.


I can objectively understand and respect the point that some (including the rabidly 'anti-woke' ragetubers) have put forth about its place structurally - but I personally do not agree. Joel and Ellie both featured in the episode to top and tail it, and not just a few measily minutes either, and their inclusion is tied to the Bill and Frank tale for the above-mentioned reasons. It's arguably in Mazin's playbook to write and structure in unexpected ways - Chernobyl doesn't show you the 'inside' of the disaster until the final episode, while the first time we see the infamous event is far in the distance through a small window, or the episode that primarily focuses on three individuals in the teams who were charged with putting down any and all animals in the area.

I probably would have felt better about the episode if Bill had lived and helped Joel to find a vehicle as he does in the game. But having him top himself as well just makes the whole extended flashback kinda redundant to me. We spend a significant amount of time with two secondary characters that have no real impact on the story and will never have because they're both dead. It's just a bloody weird way of doing things.

[MinionZombie]

And in this adaptation, Bill's letter - and what it means to Joel and the audience (as a result of spending some time with Bill and Frank) - is now part of the stepping stones towards Joel coming to think of Ellie as a surrogate daughter.

By the sounds of it, TLOU has been quite faithful to the game, practically copying parts of it verbatim, so if it was just exactly one-for-one then that'd be a bit dull - and it's already been said that episode three is the 'biggest departure' from the game in the series, so it's hardly as if it's going to go off on some wild tangent, despite the doom-laden pre-emptives from ragetubers making random assumptions based on fuck all.

I understand there's a degree of controversy with this Druckman chap relating to the writing of the original game (I think someone else was involved, but kinda got swept aside or something like that?), and I'm aware that TLOU2 proved particularly divisive.

I've warmed up a little more to Ellie in the show, but I'm still not super convinced she was the right casting choice. I think some of these YouTubers are reading a little too much into her performance and ignoring certain other things (as if trying to posit that Joel is some sort of beaten down simp or something - despite clearly laying down the law to Ellie at the end of episode three! :rolleyes: ), but at the same time there are wobbles with how she's been written or performed at times ... she kinda comes off as a bit of a sociopath or a psychopath at different times. That creepy scene in the basement of that store, with her cutting the forehead of that infected, just gave off serial-killer-to-be vibes. :rockbrow:

[shootemindehead]

And in this adaptation, Bill's letter - and what it means to Joel and the audience (as a result of spending some time with Bill and Frank) - is now part of the stepping stones towards Joel coming to think of Ellie as a surrogate daughter.

By the sounds of it, TLOU has been quite faithful to the game, practically copying parts of it verbatim, so if it was just exactly one-for-one then that'd be a bit dull - and it's already been said that episode three is the 'biggest departure' from the game in the series, so it's hardly as if it's going to go off on some wild tangent, despite the doom-laden pre-emptives from ragetubers making random assumptions based on fuck all.

I understand there's a degree of controversy with this Druckman chap relating to the writing of the original game (I think someone else was involved, but kinda got swept aside or something like that?), and I'm aware that TLOU2 proved particularly divisive.

I've warmed up a little more to Ellie in the show, but I'm still not super convinced she was the right casting choice. I think some of these YouTubers are reading a little too much into her performance and ignoring certain other things (as if trying to posit that Joel is some sort of beaten down simp or something - despite clearly laying down the law to Ellie at the end of episode three! :rolleyes: ), but at the same time there are wobbles with how she's been written or performed at times ... she kinda comes off as a bit of a sociopath or a psychopath at different times. That creepy scene in the basement of that store, with her cutting the forehead of that infected, just gave off serial-killer-to-be vibes. :rockbrow:

The letter thing is being bandied about by people that want to illustrate that this episode is somehow essential to the story. When the reality is that Joel and Ellie's relationship was going to play out like it does in the game anyway. When the 9 episodes are done, you could probably be able to skip episode 3 and miss nothing really.

For sure the TV show been very close to the game. Whether that's a good thing or not is up to viewers to decide. And don't get me wrong, the Bill and Frank episode features a good story. It's just a separate story and one that was a significant detour away from Joel and Ellie's story as it was in the game and as it started out in the TV show. It feels like an awkward left turn to me, because it was an awkward left turn, even if it was an entertaining one. It's also going to come off as more awkward, because the next episode we're back to normal, as it were. So episode 3 is going to feel more like, hey let's take a look at what these secondary characters have done for 15 years, because I don't think we're going to be getting any more "special" flashback episodes for anyone else.

Also, departures aren't the issue. Departures that make sense are fine and Bill and Frank's episode makes a certain amount of sense. It's just that it comes on the back of a whiplash break in momentum that was built up over the previous two episodes and will no have no real significance to anything that's happening afterward.

As to Bella Ramsey, I think she's doing a very good job at capturing Ellie from the game. She's feisty, mouthy and petulant. But also still a child that's trying to find her place and trying to suss out what the adults are all about. I think she's doing a 14 year old girl pretty damn well. I don't see anything sociopathic or psychopathic about her at all. Also, if you played the game, you'd see there are a great number of similarities with game Ellie, aside from the looks department.

The cutting the forehead was probably her just being fascinated at just what exactly these infected are. To be honest, it's probably something I might do myself. :lol: But this is her first time at being able to get close to one of these things without the risk of infection or death. So I think her cutting the skin of one of them is more to do with a morbid curiosity rather than a psychopathy. Plus, she was one step away from becoming one of them, before she found out that she was immune. So there's probably a fear and loathing mixed in there with the curiosity.

Personally, I'd be wondering just how much is left of the human under all the cordyceps. If there's still some brainpower and thought left of the person that once was, then that's a truly terrifying concept.

[MinionZombie]

There's just a few things, certain looks or reactions, that can read a bit 'iffy' in regards to Ellie ... although I did like the "hehehehehe" moment from episode three, and the music chat in the car, which warmed her up a bit.

It's always risky writing teen characters, as so often we either get annoying arses, or all-knowing wunderkids that adults bow down to regardless of whatever stupid shite has lolled out of their traps (see the end of Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom as an example - sure, let's leave a kid to decide whether or not we unleash these dinosaurs on an innocent population!) There's not enough well-written teen characters, looking back ... it's tricky because, yes, a lot of teenagers are stupid idiots who are annoying (I was one myself), but it's just gotta be handled very carefully and it's so easy to get it wrong.

I got into Joel and Tess very easily, but it's taking time to figure out where I am with Ellie.

[shootemindehead]

There's just a few things, certain looks or reactions, that can read a bit 'iffy' in regards to Ellie ... although I did like the "hehehehehe" moment from episode three, and the music chat in the car, which warmed her up a bit.

It's always risky writing teen characters, as so often we either get annoying arses, or all-knowing wunderkids that adults bow down to regardless of whatever stupid shite has lolled out of their traps (see the end of Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom as an example - sure, let's leave a kid to decide whether or not we unleash these dinosaurs on an innocent population!) There's not enough well-written teen characters, looking back ... it's tricky because, yes, a lot of teenagers are stupid idiots who are annoying (I was one myself), but it's just gotta be handled very carefully and it's so easy to get it wrong.

I got into Joel and Tess very easily, but it's taking time to figure out where I am with Ellie.

It's like that when you first meet her in the game too. She's brash and a bit annoying, because she's a teenager. I spose we all think our shit smells of strawberries at that age.

[MinionZombie]

Two good episodes (4 and 5).

Finding Ellie working much better now.

That big scene in episode 5 was pretty schweet.

[Moon Knight]

Two good episodes (4 and 5).

Finding Ellie working much better now.

That big scene in episode 5 was pretty schweet.

That action sequence was so good!

[MinionZombie]

That action sequence was so good!

That "We The People" crowd were proper scary. Revolutions are as awful and violent and deadly as the totalitarianism/dictatorship/whatever they're overthrowing, so the show did a great job of digging into that ... and all the murky depth of it.

I did chuckle when Kathleen used her logic of maybe the kid was supposed to die, and I just thought "bitch, I could say the same to you about your fucking brother". :lol:

The infected that snuck into the jeep with Ellie ... creeeeeeepy! :eek:

Loved all the puns/Dad jokes. It's good listening to these TLOU accompanying podcasts, too. Apparently some of Ellie's fascinated look with Joel's violent outburst at the end of episode one was to try and show Ellie being impressed with Joel's ability to protect, but also wanting to emulate that herself ... ... not sure they quite pulled off that suggestion as she did seem a bit more skewing towards 'turned-on psycho' response, haha, but good to know what the intent actually was.

[Moon Knight]

That "We The People" crowd were proper scary. Revolutions are as awful and violent and deadly as the totalitarianism/dictatorship/whatever they're overthrowing, so the show did a great job of digging into that ... and all the murky depth of it.

I did chuckle when Kathleen used her logic of maybe the kid was supposed to die, and I just thought "bitch, I could say the same to you about your fucking brother". :lol:

The infected that snuck into the jeep with Ellie ... creeeeeeepy! :eek:

Loved all the puns/Dad jokes. It's good listening to these TLOU accompanying podcasts, too. Apparently some of Ellie's fascinated look with Joel's violent outburst at the end of episode one was to try and show Ellie being impressed with Joel's ability to protect, but also wanting to emulate that herself ... ... not sure they quite pulled off that suggestion as she did seem a bit more skewing towards 'turned-on psycho' response, haha, but good to know what the intent actually was.

All great points. I really need to listen to that after show podcast, so much cool info!

That kid Infected being the one to jump Kathleen was poetic, haha!

[MinionZombie]

I see some of the ragetubers have been shitting their knickers over "communist propaganda" in the latest episode. :rolleyes:

Never mind that Joel and his brother both roll their eyes at the comment mentioned in the episode by Joel's brother's wife, but that Joel also explains to Ellie a little bit later in the episode that communism never worked on a large scale.

Funny how these ragetubers never had a hissy fit over The Walking Dead - where basically every community that was good was under a communist-esque shape of some sort. In those particular circumstances it works (very small scale, and in a world where you absolutely need everyone pitching in for the benefit of the entire group, and where prosperity is measured in being able to feed yourself, protect your border, and so on). It's no surprise it collapses on a large scale and just doesn't work for all sorts of reasons, but in the post-apocalypse on a small scale of course it's going to be the way it's done. In that context if you've got some useless layabout you kick them right the fuck out of the team. :lol:

Then again, morons are gonna be morons. I see one of them, the one who has this irritating habit of putting on huge guffaws - either fake for lame effect, or genuine ones over something that really isn't anywhere near that funny - thought that Joel's brother's wife gave Ellie female contraception rather than what it obviously was (a 'Diva cup' ... which is a shite name). Says a lot about them, eh?

Was that moment a bit forced? Maybe. We'd already had the 'tampon treasure find' in episode three, and yes, while it'd be a real practical problem still in that context, it's like okay, we've covered that, yeah? However - would a Diva Cup even survive for 20 years? Surely the material would've perished? Also, I dunno about you, but I wouldn't be keen to be inserting something that's been kicking around for two decades... :shifty:

I saw they were also moaning about Joel having emotions and being afraid of letting Ellie down - the entire point being that he now sees her as a surrogate daughter and, building upon his own past trauma, it's only natural that he'd be having panic attacks (another ragetuber mis-read, some thinking they're setting up a heart problem to kill him off). Numpties, carrying on like that. Chill the fuck out. Men have emotions, men have fears, fathers in particular - and then ramp all that up in the context of a fucking apocalypse, yeah?

Sheesh!

Anyway - still good, still enjoying it. Roll on the next three episodes.

[Osticlbreta]

What are your thoughts on the portrayal of communism in the latest episode, and do you agree with the interpretation that Joel's emotional struggles are a natural response in the context of a post-apocalyptic world?