TV: The Last of Us (HBO)

[Peasy]

At this point I'm just going to assume when they introduce someone new they'll just die by the end of the episode or whenever they move on.

 

[norrisnick]

I thought it was good. I don't know what you mean by completing an objective. The way it played out for me was just sheer chaos. Like, to me it'd be one thing and video game-like if they followed the action from the perspective of a single character but there's a pretty fair interplay between Ellie trying to escape, Joel trying to pick infected off of her, and Kathleen+military dude trying to get the situation under control. I watched the episode twice and I'm not really understanding how that sequence was too video game like.

I agree with the previous poster. The chaos scene to me was by far the weakest of the episode. It stretched the bonds of 'suspension of belief' beyond its limits. The sniping of infected when they get close to Ellie. The 3 kids and Kathleen getting out of the chaos to have a faceoff in the yard only to be saved by the singular infected. It's like the LOTR eagles to me. And I get the why, there's no realistic way to save that scene I don't think.

 

[HanSolo]

You argued something similar yesterday, but being intentional or what they were going for isn't a defense from criticism, IMO. If it were, you could defend just about anything in any TV show or film on the grounds that it's what the filmmakers intended. Film criticism is largely judging what filmmakers thought were good ideas. It shouldn't matter very much what their intentions were. Tommy Wiseau intended for The Room to be a serious film. Whoever made the Star Wars Holiday Special intended for it to be entertaining. Understanding that these filmmakers were going for "what if an ordinary soccer mom type that sounds meek became a psychopathic leader of a resistance force that overthrows a totalitarian regime in an apocalypse" doesn't make it less absurd or safe from criticism.

You keep thinking I'm trying to shut down criticism but just because I offer a competing opinion doesn't mean I think anything in an artistic medium is above criticism. I think such a scenario is possible if not plausible. You don't. Others don't too; not that deep. My first sentence wasn't well stated, I'll admit to that. But I never said the casting/character concept decisions were beyond reproach.

 

[HanSolo]

I agree with the previous poster. The chaos scene to me was by far the weakest of the episode. It stretched the bonds of 'suspension of belief' beyond its limits. The sniping of infected when they get close to Ellie. The 3 kids and Kathleen getting out of the chaos to have a faceoff in the yard only to be saved by the singular infected. It's like the LOTR eagles to me. And I get the why, there's no realistic way to save that scene I don't think.

That I can see. But I still don't think something like that is singularly limited to the video game medium. I'd say it's a fairly common trope for big dramatic moments that should easily kill characters happen in the backdrop of 'battle scenes'

 

[norrisnick]

That I can see. But I still don't think something like that is singularly limited to the video game medium. I'd say it's a fairly common trope for big dramatic moments that should easily kill characters happen in the backdrop of 'battle scenes'

That's true that it's not limited to games.

 

[HanSolo]

That's true that it's not limited to games.

That's my point. The poster I quoted said it was too video game like. I personally enjoyed it for the sheer pandemonium of it, the fact that we actually get to see some wider scale threat from the infected beyond the initial outbreak in Episode 1 and the last shot of the infected running towards the city, at least for me touched on what I mentioned earlier in the thread. KC FEDRA was evil and horrible but at least they kept people safe. KC didn't last two weeks under the incompetent control of a revenge obsessed revolutionary and its pretty easy to infer that all the survivors in the city were going to get wiped out. Which kind of asks a thematic question, is it better to be under the control of an evil and abusive ruling class and live, or be free and have a much higher risk of dying?

But I can see how the direction of the action sequence itself didn't land with everyone. I just don't think "the video game stuff didn't translate" is a good reason.

 

[Tasty Biscuits]

I thought it was good. I don't know what you mean by completing an objective. The way it played out for me was just sheer chaos. Like, to me it'd be one thing and video game-like if they followed the action from the perspective of a single character but there's a pretty fair interplay between Ellie trying to escape, Joel trying to pick infected off of her, and Kathleen+military dude trying to get the situation under control. I watched the episode twice and I'm not really understanding how that sequence was too video game like.

The moment it started I was like "Oh this is the 'protect Natalia' sequence of TLoU." You can just envision the Joel character in the perch sniping random infected around Ellie in the game until she finds safety (whether this type of segment actually happened in the game, I don't know. If it didn't, that's a huge miss of an add).

The camera itself may have jumped around, but to me there was no chaos to the actual structure of the progression, which was quite orderly (again, the level objective of "protect Ellie." Oh that's complete? Ok now we can have the next cutscene where actual plot is progressed. That's what I mean when I say videogame-y).

 

[HanSolo]

The moment it started I was like "Oh this is the 'protect Natalia' sequence of TLoU." You can just envision the Joel character in the perch sniping random infected around Ellie in the game until she finds safety (whether this type of segment actually happened in the game, I don't know. If it didn't, that's a huge miss of an add).

The camera itself may have jumped around, but to me there was no chaos to the actual structure of the progression, which was quite orderly (again, the level objective of "protect Ellie." Oh that's complete? Ok now we can have the next cutscene where actual plot is progressed. That's what I mean when I say videogame-y).

I mean I guess. But that's kind of how all, let's just compare this to a battle scene because I don't have enough to go off with zombie chaos, but that's basically how all sequences like this typically go. Think of the big battles in Two Towers and Return of the King or Battle of the Bastards in GOT, or literally any battle sequence in 300. Like I can't think of any examples of pure chaos of battle or say, zombie attacks where there aren't scripted objective like high points or cool factor moments for the characters in a video game-esque manner. I'll concede that the Kathleen death was a bit cheesy but other than that I'm not seeing what you're seeing when it comes to a big action sequence having scripted moments for the characters to be badasses and that being an issue relative to other big action set pieces in film and television.

 

[Tasty Biscuits]

I mean I guess. But that's kind of how all, let's just compare this to a battle scene because I don't have enough to go off with zombie chaos, but that's basically how all sequences like this typically go. Think of the big battles in Two Towers and Return of the King or Battle of the Bastards in GOT, or literally any battle sequence in 300. Like I can't think of any examples of pure chaos of battle or say, zombie attacks where there aren't scripted objective like high points or cool factor moments for the characters in a video game-esque manner. I'll concede that the Kathleen death was a bit cheesy but other than that I'm not seeing what you're seeing when it comes to a big action sequence having scripted moments for the characters to be badasses and that being an issue relative to other big action set pieces in film and television.

You can still have character development in big action pieces through small individualized moments (just off the top of my head, you've got the exchange between gimli and legolas it RoTK since you referenced that. Not sure 300 and anything revolving around Ramsay Bolton are the paragons of quality that you want to be referencing, tho the trampling pile burying J Snow was a great moment and great symbolism). I don't think we got any of that here. It was just "escape the baddies." No revelatory moments where we learned anything more about the characters. Hell, even in the scene right before we got the "don't" moment from Joel and the old man. That's more than anything we get from the big sequence.

Judging the action in the series on its own, the clicker sequence works well since its played for suspense against unique individualized entities. The initial city sequence where Joel protects Ellie from a few hunters works because 1) we humanize them, and 2) it's an opportunity to develop Ellie's character further based off the ensuing discussion about killing. There wasn't anything like that in this sequence or anything after. It was a means to an end to get rid of Kathleen and get Sam bit (the former of which didn't even technically need to happen, and the latter could've been accomplished plenty of ways).

Random violence (or I should say, violence against random entities) is much more palatable in a game since you are the one who's completing the task. You're the active driver. There's a skill involved. It's not nearly as rewarding when you're watching it, unless it's stylishly coordinated in some sense (hello Mr. Wick). That's why when I saw a lot of people were lamenting the exclusion of some iconic upside-down sequence in the Bill/Frank episode, I thought I bet that was a lot more fun to play than it would be to watch.

To be clear, this isn't me trying to convert you to my way of thinking, I'm just trying to clarify my position.

 

[HanSolo]

You can still have character development in big action pieces through small individualized moments (just off the top of my head, you've got the exchange between gimli and legolas it RoTK since you referenced that. Not sure 300 and anything revolving around Ramsay Bolton are the paragons of quality that you want to be referencing, tho the trampling pile burying J Snow was a great moment and great symbolism). I don't think we got any of that here. It was just "escape the baddies." No revelatory moments where we learned anything more about the characters. Hell, even in the scene right before we got the "don't" moment from Joel and the old man. That's more than anything we get from the big sequence.

Judging the action in the series on its own, the clicker sequence works well since its played for suspense against unique individualized entities. The initial city sequence where Joel protects Ellie from a few hunters works because 1) we humanize them, and 2) it's an opportunity to develop Ellie's character further based off the ensuing discussion about killing. There wasn't anything like that in this sequence or anything after. It was a means to an end to get rid of Kathleen and get Sam bit (the former of which didn't even technically need to happen, and the latter could've been accomplished plenty of ways).

Random violence (or I should say, violence against random entities) is much more palatable in a game since you are the one who's completing the task. You're the active driver. There's a skill involved. It's not nearly as rewarding when you're watching it, unless it's stylishly coordinated in some sense (hello Mr. Wick). That's why when I saw a lot of people were lamenting the exclusion of some iconic upside-down sequence in the Bill/Frank episode, I thought I bet that was a lot more fun to play than it would be to watch.

To be clear, this isn't me trying to convert you to my way of thinking, I'm just trying to clarify my position.

Those were just easy examples off the top of my head. Not necessarily examples of excellence and it was more to the point of comparison between, let's say highlight reel moments in battle sequences in video games compared to film and TV. And I'd disagree that we didn't get anything of value from the big sequence. Mileage may vary on how much an individual may apportion value to what I'm about to list but we saw that: 1) Ellie may not necessarily be fearless in a dire situation like this but she's brave enough to take action to save herself and others and get her hands dirty along the way 2) Joel is either devoted enough to his mission or has come to care enough about Ellie that he's not shooting at the zombies to save anyone but is instead keeping his full focus on clearing a path for Ellie and keeping her as safe as he can. It may be a subtle thing to overlook, but he still needs to survive to save his brother but he doesn't run from the chaos when it would have been easier for him to do so than it would be for anyone else 3) a smaller thing but that military dude with Kathleen stays devoted to her right to the very end and gives her a window to try to escape 4) I already discussed earlier but you get into result of "what happens when there's no FEDRA to keep the infected at bay anymore" and 5) last shot, the militia forces of KC are pretty much decimated and you can infer that the rest of human life in KC is doomed that night.

Though I'll agree that the other action sequences you mention make for more compelling storytelling. I just happen to think there's nothing necessarily wrong with a bigger and less nuanced action fest in a zombie apocalypse show.

As for dictating action sequences with random violence in a stylized way or the John Wick comparison. I mean..I don't know I feel like that's an inherently contradictory opinion. The more stylized you make "random violence", to me, the more that's like a video game than reality. And especially with the John Wick comparison, the action is so cartoonishly over the top and his persistent survival and success is so rationally implausible that other than the movie not being in first person, it might as well be a video game. Or maybe I'm just not understanding your point.

And that's more than fair. As I've gotten older I've learned that you're rarely going to change anyone's opinion on anything no matter how well reasoned your points are. I'm not trying to change your line of thinking either. Just find it engaging to try to understand and discuss differences in opinion. Also with the older I've gotten, for whatever reason it's become like a hobby to me. Which is why I'm so prone to massive text dumps like this one.

 

[Kcb12345]

I agree with the previous poster. The chaos scene to me was by far the weakest of the episode. It stretched the bonds of 'suspension of belief' beyond its limits. The sniping of infected when they get close to Ellie. The 3 kids and Kathleen getting out of the chaos to have a faceoff in the yard only to be saved by the singular infected. It's like the LOTR eagles to me. And I get the why, there's no realistic way to save that scene I don't think.

Sorry the show about zombies isn't realistic enough for you. Lol what even are these complaints. That scene was awesome, just enjoy it for what it was. The point was to show how nervous Joel was and to show how the world lost this fight. Insane nitpicking

 

[Hivemind]

This is some of the worst part about fandom in the age of the internet. The ridiculous levels to which people dissect things.

 

[Pink Mist]

The moment it started I was like "Oh this is the 'protect Natalia' sequence of TLoU." You can just envision the Joel character in the perch sniping random infected around Ellie in the game until she finds safety (whether this type of segment actually happened in the game, I don't know. If it didn't, that's a huge miss of an add).

You hit it right on the nose. This is exactly how it was in the game

 

[Osprey]

Norrisnick has a point. At least the "sniping of infected when they get close to Ellie" part of that scene did feel a bit like a videogame. Of course, this is based on one, so that's not surprising.

You keep thinking I'm trying to shut down criticism but just because I offer a competing opinion doesn't mean I think anything in an artistic medium is above criticism. I think such a scenario is possible if not plausible. You don't. Others don't too; not that deep. My first sentence wasn't well stated, I'll admit to that. But I never said the casting/character concept decisions were beyond reproach.

What I said is that you're defending against criticism, which I think was fair because you've responded to it twice by arguing that the things being criticized were intentional and what the filmmakers were going for. You seem to think that that matters. I don't.

This is some of the worst part about fandom in the age of the internet. The ridiculous levels to which people dissect things.

I'd say that online bullying, gatekeeping, other toxic behavior and openly judging other fans (as you're doing, to be honest) are all worse aspects of fandom than fans dissecting the actual product.

 

[Hivemind]

I'd say that online bullying, gatekeeping, hyperbolic ranting and judging other fans (as you're doing) are all worse aspects of fandom than fans dissecting things.

I mean, that's a rather intentionally obtuse way to read my post. A lot of those things are rooted in fans hyper-obsessing and hyper-analyzing elements of shows online, and then being empowered to share those thoughts. Attempting to read my post as a defense of any of that type of toxicity is cringe worthy.

As for the "judging other fans" - pot meet kettle.

 

[HanSolo]

Norrisnick has a point. At least the "sniping of infected when they get close to Ellie" part of that scene did feel a bit like a videogame. Of course, this is based on one, so that's not surprising.

What I said is that you're defending against criticism, which I think was fair because you've responded to it twice by arguing that the things being criticized were intentional and what the filmmakers were going for. You seem to think that that matters. I don't.

I'd say that online bullying, gatekeeping, other toxic behavior and openly judging other fans (as you're doing, to be honest) are all worse aspects of fandom than fans dissecting the actual product.

Not exactly what I meant. I meant more that I accepted it for what it was more than others. I think the way I phrased it is just based on people's indication that there's no way someone like her could ever be in her position and I disagree. I agree it's not likely but I don't think it's impossible. Either way, the dispute is over semantics at this point.

 

[Osprey]

I mean, that's a rather intentionally obtuse way to read my post. A lot of those things are rooted in fans hyper-obsessing and hyper-analyzing elements of shows online, and then being empowered to share those thoughts. Attempting to read my post as a defense of any of that type of toxicity is cringe worthy.

As for the "judging other fans" - pot meet kettle.

I said that there are worse things than what you were accusing. That wasn't accusing you of defending those worse things. You misread my post.

I was just making a point that there's a difference between critiquing the TV show and critiquing the fans. All that's been going on recently in this thread is critiquing the show, which is harmless.

 

[Tasty Biscuits]

As for dictating action sequences with random violence in a stylized way or the John Wick comparison. I mean..I don't know I feel like that's an inherently contradictory opinion. The more stylized you make "random violence", to me, the more that's like a video game than reality. And especially with the John Wick comparison, the action is so cartoonishly over the top and his persistent survival and success is so rationally implausible that other than the movie not being in first person, it might as well be a video game. Or maybe I'm just not understanding your point.

Yeah, it's nothing to do with "realism." Stuff like Wick and, say, good Jackie Chan movies are appealing to me for the choreography. It's a visual art. It's not the people being killed or beat up, it's how where the appeal is found. Any regular sequence in TLoU game where you're moving through cities (or any general sequences in a FPS), the appeal is mapping out your own trail and having the skill of accomplishing it yourself. There's really nothing visually interesting or unique about them. It's user-driven -- that's where the appeal comes from. For me, I found myself very engaged in this episode, and then all of sudden I was briefly taken out of it as it felt like I was watching someone play a game, and that's where my interest momentarily waned.

And that's more than fair. As I've gotten older I've learned that you're rarely going to change anyone's opinion on anything no matter how well reasoned your points are. I'm not trying to change your line of thinking either. Just find it engaging to try to understand and discuss differences in opinion. Also with the older I've gotten, for whatever reason it's become like a hobby to me. Which is why I'm so prone to massive text dumps like this one.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

At this point I'm just going to assume when they introduce someone new they'll just die by the end of the episode or whenever they move on.

well they are all suppose to die except for Bill.

 

[CupofOil]

God damn that ending hit me hard.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

God damn that ending hit me hard.

Get use to that because It's not going to stop

 

[Karterthadon]

The Bloater should have remained in the videogame or gotten somekind of makeover for the show. While the Clickers look great, the Bloater looked like a cartoon character.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

LMAO come on seriously? Part II was really good. I wouldn't change a thing if I could.
keep in mind if you reply not to give any major spoilers, alot of people in here haven't played the game

Part 2 is FILLED with plot holes and stupidity that i can't get into because it will spoil the show.

But no It's not just that,in fact that has very little to do with it for me.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

For those of you that haven't played the game, THAT boys and girls is what The Last of Us is supposed to be, granted Sam is not supposed to be a deaf mute, but that's a change I actually liked a lot, I liked the fact that he shows Ellie the bite in this version, and she tries to save him that doesn't happen either.

Most, if not all of the changes in this episode were very good.

For as much as I hated episode 3 for turning Bill into whatever that was, because it sure as hell was not Bill.

Episodes 4 and 5 were very strong, with episode 5 being a home run.

I do wish this season were longer because there are parts that are being rushed and Sam and Henry were rushed.

 

[RandV]

I thought Kathleen was fine. Like I feel like I'm getting what they were going for where others aren't. Her performance didn't blow me away and I won't remember the character long after this show is over or anything but I felt like they were going for a kind of "what if an ordinary soccer mom type that sounds meek became a psychopathic leader of a resistance force that overthrows a totalitarian regime in an apocalypse?" Like I don't expect a character like that to sound like some convincing hard ass. Saying the right words and having the right information network doesn't have to translate to sounding like a leader, like Marlene from episode 1. She struck me as someone who became what she did because she was, like others, fed up. It's fine if it didn't land with people, but I thought she served the role fine. Nothing special, but not terrible either..just for me.

I wasn't sure after episode 4 but after 5 Kathleen makes perfect sense to me. Her brother was the charismatic leader who built the resistance. He died and then it's a matter of succession, and throughout human history without a strong culture/tradition on how to do this things can turn to shit real fast. Kathleen being his sister and likely his #2 would have made her the ideal candidate, and at this point having someone firmly in charge is more probably important than her being some uncharismatic soccer mom.

Like if Kathleen's #2 decided she was nuts and shot her putting himself in charge, the most likely outcome is someone shoots him and then the resistance splinters into a bunch of factions with a lot of violence. Unless maybe he's ruthless enough to 'purge' anyone who could challenge him. And now you're not exactly in a better situation.

And while Kathleen had a single minded focus on getting revenge for her brother, considering the guy was their former charismatic leader it's not hard to see why everyone else goes along with it. Maybe not with the same single minded focus, but they're going to want to kill the guy too.