[The Last of Us] subscribing to HBO Max can't be for nothing [Open show spoilers]

AlphaRomero

Bill putting the safety on the gun during dinner with Joel and Tess and taking the safety back off when Tess and Frank walk away was some great physical comedy. I think the aging was a bit weird, Bill didn't look any older than Joel pre infection, but he's aged 40 years in 20.

I'm a bit worried about the pacing as there are a lot of great things left to cover, but next episode looks like we're finally going to get into dealing with raiders and some Joellie combat.

EDIT: Also there are real world celebrities in this universe. It's weird that Downey Jr or Mark Hamill are potentially walking around as clickers.

Monwyn

I'll be that guy: on balance I didn't particularly like it? I mean, yes, that relationship was handled a lot better than it was in the show, and the relationship story itself was fine. But episode three is too early to devote to a side-story, and the final act of that side-story why on long enough that I just jumped ahead five minutes.

Call me cynical but it felt like a writer went "I'm never going to get an Emmy nod for this zombie show" at the same time a producer was screaming "holy shit we've got to write at least one episode we can shoot on a budget" and this was the result

syndalis

Beautiful, moving, and a snapshot of how people come together and deal with the magnitude of an event like this in the smallest and most personal of ways.

Also, the song that played during the dinner was composed by Max Richter, who also scored The Leftovers for HBO, and it felt absolutely appropriate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVN1B-tUpgs

Lucascraft

The aging felt real enough to me.

They were probably in their mid-40s at the start of the timeline. Barely any grey in their hair/beards. We see snapshots of them over a 20 year period and they gradually get a little more grey.

Frank also contracts some sort of physically debilitating disease. They don’t name it, but I’m guessing either MS or ALS.

In the current timeline of 2023 they would have been in their 60s and that felt about right to me.

Hahnsoo1

syndalis wrote: »

Beautiful, moving, and a snapshot of how people come together and deal with the magnitude of an event like this in the smallest and most personal of ways.

Also, the song that played during the dinner was composed by Max Richter, who also scored The Leftovers for HBO, and it felt absolutely appropriate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVN1B-tUpgs

This actually took me out of it a bit because it’s a famous piece that is used in a LOT of movies and TV shows. Arrival, The Handmaid’s Tale, Luck, Shutter Island, to name a few. It’s a lovely piece, and one of my faves, but it’s got the same status as the Agnus Dei/Adagio for Strings by Samuel Barber, and it’s a bit too recognizable for me.

When it started playing, I threw up my hands and said “Of COURSE, it’s On The Nature of Daylight.”

It didn’t detract that much from the episode (and was entirely appropriate), but I wish they had chosen a different Max Richter piece. Like one of the excerpts from Sleep.

Hedgethorn

Lucascraft wrote: »

The aging felt real enough to me.

They were probably in their mid-40s at the start of the timeline. Barely any grey in their hair/beards. We see snapshots of them over a 20 year period and they gradually get a little more grey.

Frank also contracts some sort of physically debilitating disease. They don’t name it, but I’m guessing either MS or ALS.

In the current timeline of 2023 they would have been in their 60s and that felt about right to me.

The 50s and 60s can be rough decades to age through with zero medical intervention (apart from a presumably well-stocked local pharmacy). A hale and hearty 50-year-old can easily become a quite feeble 70-year-old.

Tumin

It also probably wasnt the only time either of them got shot, lost a crop, etc

They didnt show us much of the bad times, props for that, but I assume it wasnt all whiskey and steak scraping out a living there

southwick

They also made mention that Bill was the bit older one in the relationship.

tinwhiskers

I didn't feel like they de-aged Nick Offerman much if at all for the opening flashback and he is 52 IRL.






Like yeah, that looks like a 50 year old man to me.

Aridhol

Offerman continues to be stellar in everything he does.

Casual Eddy

Monwyn wrote: »

I'll be that guy: on balance I didn't particularly like it? I mean, yes, that relationship was handled a lot better than it was in the show, and the relationship story itself was fine. But episode three is too early to devote to a side-story, and the final act of that side-story why on long enough that I just jumped ahead five minutes.

Call me cynical but it felt like a writer went "I'm never going to get an Emmy nod for this zombie show" at the same time a producer was screaming "holy shit we've got to write at least one episode we can shoot on a budget" and this was the result

Why is making a tender love story a cynical ploy for an Emmy : /

This was the least cynical the show will probably be!

Hedgethorn

The showrunners and a few media outlets, in talking about episode 3, have said a bit about episode 3 in the context of the rest of the series to come. Not a spoiler about anything specific that's coming up, but a spoiler about the way they're telling their story, if that makes sense.

Episode 3 apparently isn't the only "side story" they'll be telling. If anything, it sounds like episode 3 might be the template for a fair chunk of the rest of the series, with frequent long cutaways from Joel & Ellie that use flashbacks to show how the various side characters have dealt in their own unique ways with the twenty years since the collapse.

syndalis

Hedgethorn wrote: »

The showrunners and a few media outlets, in talking about episode 3, have said a bit about episode 3 in the context of the rest of the series to come. Not a spoiler about anything specific that's coming up, but a spoiler about the way they're telling their story, if that makes sense.

Episode 3 apparently isn't the only "side story" they'll be telling. If anything, it sounds like episode 3 might be the template for a fair chunk of the rest of the series, with frequent long cutaways from Joel & Ellie that use flashbacks to show how the various side characters have dealt in their own unique ways with the twenty years since the collapse.

Yes please. This is the show I want to watch.

Hedgethorn

syndalis wrote: »

Hedgethorn wrote: »

The showrunners and a few media outlets, in talking about episode 3, have said a bit about episode 3 in the context of the rest of the series to come. Not a spoiler about anything specific that's coming up, but a spoiler about the way they're telling their story, if that makes sense.

Episode 3 apparently isn't the only "side story" they'll be telling. If anything, it sounds like episode 3 might be the template for a fair chunk of the rest of the series, with frequent long cutaways from Joel & Ellie that use flashbacks to show how the various side characters have dealt in their own unique ways with the twenty years since the collapse.

Yes please. This is the show I want to watch.

I should be clear, this is me somewhat reading between the lines of what they're saying in interviews. But I think it's what is being hinted at.

Edit: If people want an example of what I mean, here's what one writer who's seen more of the show says in her review of episode 3:

"[Episode 3] isn’t the first—or last—time the show will do this. The Last of Us show takes the game’s story beats and loosely forms them into a series of vignettes about human connection: some involving Joel, some Ellie, many neither. . . . It’s rare for a show about two people to invest such attention, depth, and airtime into what are ultimately one-off side characters. . . . TV can’t make you walk in the characters’ shoes. So instead, the show takes all the feelings fighting it out in Joel’s head and fills the outside world with them. Each vignette represents a different approach to Ellie that Joel could take."

Hahnsoo1

Hedgethorn wrote: »

The showrunners and a few media outlets, in talking about episode 3, have said a bit about episode 3 in the context of the rest of the series to come. Not a spoiler about anything specific that's coming up, but a spoiler about the way they're telling their story, if that makes sense.

Episode 3 apparently isn't the only "side story" they'll be telling. If anything, it sounds like episode 3 might be the template for a fair chunk of the rest of the series, with frequent long cutaways from Joel & Ellie that use flashbacks to show how the various side characters have dealt in their own unique ways with the twenty years since the collapse.

I mean, that's in line with all three episodes so far. Episode 3 may be the longest "side" story, but all three of the episodes delved into non-Joel/Ellie characters or parts of the world far longer than the game did. Episode 1 had the 60s talk show and much more of the prologue from Sarah's perspective before Z day. Episode 2 had the Jakarta section in the opening.

I dig it. All of the "side" content has been stellar, even beyond the novelty of seeing "bonus features" content that isn't the main Joel+Ellie story.

cckerberos

Hedgethorn wrote: »

The showrunners and a few media outlets, in talking about episode 3, have said a bit about episode 3 in the context of the rest of the series to come. Not a spoiler about anything specific that's coming up, but a spoiler about the way they're telling their story, if that makes sense.

Episode 3 apparently isn't the only "side story" they'll be telling. If anything, it sounds like episode 3 might be the template for a fair chunk of the rest of the series, with frequent long cutaways from Joel & Ellie that use flashbacks to show how the various side characters have dealt in their own unique ways with the twenty years since the collapse.

I'm not opposed to this, but it seems like they could have gotten more than one, nine-episode season out of the first game if that's the route they're taking.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

kime

syndalis wrote: »

Hedgethorn wrote: »

The showrunners and a few media outlets, in talking about episode 3, have said a bit about episode 3 in the context of the rest of the series to come. Not a spoiler about anything specific that's coming up, but a spoiler about the way they're telling their story, if that makes sense.

Episode 3 apparently isn't the only "side story" they'll be telling. If anything, it sounds like episode 3 might be the template for a fair chunk of the rest of the series, with frequent long cutaways from Joel & Ellie that use flashbacks to show how the various side characters have dealt in their own unique ways with the twenty years since the collapse.

Yes please. This is the show I want to watch.

Yeah, doing these side stories of how people cope with the world over time as a backdrop to the journey of Joel and Ellie seems fabulous so far. Never played TLoU so I don't know what I'm missing from the game, but Ep3 was really really good and I am eager for the show to continue in this vein.

Edit: Also if whoever's cutting onions here could stop a bit that'd be nice thanks

Loki

Overall Joel and Ellies story in isolation pretty simple. Without doing a deep dive into the side characters, there's not a whole lot for them to tell with just Joel and Ellie, especially over 9 hours, so I'm not surprised they're going this way.

They don't have the time padding luxury of a game putting to into a series of intense fights that need to be reloaded over and over as you keep dying.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Lucascraft

I need more “Nick Offerman as Bill” content. One episode was not enough.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Kipling217

That was knocking out of the park as you wouldn't believe.

Holy shit, this show is becoming this years Andor in how it gets you to care about small stories in a larger picture.

Beyond Normal

Kipling217 wrote: »

That was knocking out of the park as you wouldn't believe.

Holy shit, this show is becoming this years Andor in how it gets you to care about small stories in a larger picture.

That's kind of what I really like about the show. You have the grand tragedy of the Cordyceps Apocalypse, which is bad, but I think it's hard for some people (like me) to really care. So they tie in all these smaller, more intimate tragic stories, and how they impact the main character's lives, to really hammer it home.

It's good stuff.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Kipling217

Beyond Normal wrote: »

Kipling217 wrote: »

That was knocking out of the park as you wouldn't believe.

Holy shit, this show is becoming this years Andor in how it gets you to care about small stories in a larger picture.

That's kind of what I really like about the show. You have the grand tragedy of the Cordyceps Apocalypse, which is bad, but I think it's hard for some people (like me) to really care. So they tie in all these smaller, more intimate tragic stories, and how they impact the main character's lives, to really hammer it home.

It's good stuff.

What I liked about it was that it was a gay middle aged love story. It wasn't the safer Lesbian story, it wasn't a coming of age/coming out teenage story and it wasn't a "gays are just like us where one of them is the sissy girly type and the other is a manly man type"(for the most part). It certainly wasn't the "I used to be straight, but now I am gay" version of this, these two men knew they where gay before they met. Bill might have been in the closet, but it was obvious that he knew he was gay.

It was unflinching and gave the relationship the screen-time it deserved.

That an Ellie being awed by things like flying, playing arcade games and driving a car. Yeah, in an apocalypse those are going to be luxuries that only few will get to enjoy.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

kime

Kipling217 wrote: »

Beyond Normal wrote: »

Kipling217 wrote: »

That was knocking out of the park as you wouldn't believe.

Holy shit, this show is becoming this years Andor in how it gets you to care about small stories in a larger picture.

That's kind of what I really like about the show. You have the grand tragedy of the Cordyceps Apocalypse, which is bad, but I think it's hard for some people (like me) to really care. So they tie in all these smaller, more intimate tragic stories, and how they impact the main character's lives, to really hammer it home.

It's good stuff.

What I liked about it was that it was a gay middle aged love story. It wasn't the safer Lesbian story, it wasn't a coming of age/coming out teenage story and it wasn't a "gays are just like us where one of them is the sissy girly type and the other is a manly man type"(for the most part). It certainly wasn't the "I used to be straight, but now I am gay" version of this, these two men knew they where gay before they met. Bill might have been in the closet, but it was obvious that he knew he was gay.

It was unflinching and gave the relationship the screen-time it deserved.

That an Ellie being awed by things like flying, playing arcade games and driving a car. Yeah, in an apocalypse those are going to be luxuries that only few will get to enjoy.

And I love the

sort of "what are you talking about" reaction when Joel asked her to buckle her seatbelt. Of course she has no idea what that means haha

Hahnsoo1

Kipling217 wrote: »

Beyond Normal wrote: »

Kipling217 wrote: »

That was knocking out of the park as you wouldn't believe.

Holy shit, this show is becoming this years Andor in how it gets you to care about small stories in a larger picture.

That's kind of what I really like about the show. You have the grand tragedy of the Cordyceps Apocalypse, which is bad, but I think it's hard for some people (like me) to really care. So they tie in all these smaller, more intimate tragic stories, and how they impact the main character's lives, to really hammer it home.

It's good stuff.

What I liked about it was that it was a gay middle aged love story. It wasn't the safer Lesbian story, it wasn't a coming of age/coming out teenage story and it wasn't a "gays are just like us where one of them is the sissy girly type and the other is a manly man type"(for the most part). It certainly wasn't the "I used to be straight, but now I am gay" version of this, these two men knew they where gay before they met. Bill might have been in the closet, but it was obvious that he knew he was gay.

It was unflinching and gave the relationship the screen-time it deserved.

I mean, if you've played the games:

The tragic teenage lesbian love story is coming, with Ellie and Riley. As well as the tragic young adult love story, in the events of the second game.

Loki

Aegeri wrote: »

Reading reactions to this episode on twitter and so forth, it really reminds me how valid the criticism of the Bill/Frank relationship in the game was. Where it really seems some are only okay with gay characters when you barely know or even realize that they are gay. Every "This is the gay agenda" complaint and even one guy arguing this wasn't in the game at all has been delightfully hilarious. I sometimes wonder if people claim to be fans of something without actually knowing anything about it just to have a contrary opinion on something they dislike.

The games haven't exactly hidden their LGBT characters. Bill was a bit harder to see if you just didn't pay attention at all, but there's plenty of details in the game that point it out. They just didn't make him a stereotypical gay character, he was just a person.

If someone says they're a fan of the games but then says something as stupid as 'this is the gay agenda' in response to this episode, they obviously aren't fans of the games and should be called out as such.

KoopahTroopah

Yeah, really loved that episode. I don't think game Bill would have played as well as what they did, so yeah. 3/3 here.

The Wolfman

kime wrote: »

Kipling217 wrote: »

Beyond Normal wrote: »

Kipling217 wrote: »

That was knocking out of the park as you wouldn't believe.

Holy shit, this show is becoming this years Andor in how it gets you to care about small stories in a larger picture.

That's kind of what I really like about the show. You have the grand tragedy of the Cordyceps Apocalypse, which is bad, but I think it's hard for some people (like me) to really care. So they tie in all these smaller, more intimate tragic stories, and how they impact the main character's lives, to really hammer it home.

It's good stuff.

What I liked about it was that it was a gay middle aged love story. It wasn't the safer Lesbian story, it wasn't a coming of age/coming out teenage story and it wasn't a "gays are just like us where one of them is the sissy girly type and the other is a manly man type"(for the most part). It certainly wasn't the "I used to be straight, but now I am gay" version of this, these two men knew they where gay before they met. Bill might have been in the closet, but it was obvious that he knew he was gay.

It was unflinching and gave the relationship the screen-time it deserved.

That an Ellie being awed by things like flying, playing arcade games and driving a car. Yeah, in an apocalypse those are going to be luxuries that only few will get to enjoy.

And I love the

sort of "what are you talking about" reaction when Joel asked her to buckle her seatbelt. Of course she has no idea what that means haha

I really hope they have the

ice cream truck

discussion in the show.

Casual Eddy

-Loki- wrote: »

Aegeri wrote: »

Reading reactions to this episode on twitter and so forth, it really reminds me how valid the criticism of the Bill/Frank relationship in the game was. Where it really seems some are only okay with gay characters when you barely know or even realize that they are gay. Every "This is the gay agenda" complaint and even one guy arguing this wasn't in the game at all has been delightfully hilarious. I sometimes wonder if people claim to be fans of something without actually knowing anything about it just to have a contrary opinion on something they dislike.

The games haven't exactly hidden their LGBT characters. Bill was a bit harder to see if you just didn't pay attention at all, but there's plenty of details in the game that point it out. They just didn't make him a stereotypical gay character, he was just a person.

If someone says they're a fan of the games but then says something as stupid as 'this is the gay agenda' in response to this episode, they obviously aren't fans of the games and should be called out as such.

I’m tired of queer representation that’s “hinted at” or only explored off screen or you have to figure it out by reading a collectible. They don’t do that with straight relationships they just outright state it. There’s no reason to make it subtextual and there hasn’t been for a long time

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Zilla360

Kipling217 wrote: »

Beyond Normal wrote: »

Kipling217 wrote: »

That was knocking out of the park as you wouldn't believe.

Holy shit, this show is becoming this years Andor in how it gets you to care about small stories in a larger picture.

That's kind of what I really like about the show. You have the grand tragedy of the Cordyceps Apocalypse, which is bad, but I think it's hard for some people (like me) to really care. So they tie in all these smaller, more intimate tragic stories, and how they impact the main character's lives, to really hammer it home.

It's good stuff.

What I liked about it was that it was a gay middle aged love story. It wasn't the safer Lesbian story, it wasn't a coming of age/coming out teenage story and it wasn't a "gays are just like us where one of them is the sissy girly type and the other is a manly man type"(for the most part). It certainly wasn't the "I used to be straight, but now I am gay" version of this, these two men knew they where gay before they met. Bill might have been in the closet, but it was obvious that he knew he was gay.

It was unflinching and gave the relationship the screen-time it deserved.

Yeah that was beautiful to watch. Probably one of the best and most heartfelt portrayals of a gay romance I've seen on TV.

Loki

Casual Eddy wrote: »

-Loki- wrote: »

Aegeri wrote: »

Reading reactions to this episode on twitter and so forth, it really reminds me how valid the criticism of the Bill/Frank relationship in the game was. Where it really seems some are only okay with gay characters when you barely know or even realize that they are gay. Every "This is the gay agenda" complaint and even one guy arguing this wasn't in the game at all has been delightfully hilarious. I sometimes wonder if people claim to be fans of something without actually knowing anything about it just to have a contrary opinion on something they dislike.

The games haven't exactly hidden their LGBT characters. Bill was a bit harder to see if you just didn't pay attention at all, but there's plenty of details in the game that point it out. They just didn't make him a stereotypical gay character, he was just a person.

If someone says they're a fan of the games but then says something as stupid as 'this is the gay agenda' in response to this episode, they obviously aren't fans of the games and should be called out as such.

I’m tired of queer representation that’s “hinted at” or only explored off screen or you have to figure it out by reading a collectible. They don’t do that with straight relationships they just outright state it. There’s no reason to make it subtextual and there hasn’t been for a long time

Not going to get into defending the games prtrayal, just saying, it's there, and not just in hidden collectibles. Hell, one of the big deatils is in a main cutscene between Ellie and Joel.

If people didn't see it, it's because they were either not paying attention at all, or just wanted it to not be what it was so they ignored it.

burbo

Hahnsoo1 wrote: »

syndalis wrote: »

Beautiful, moving, and a snapshot of how people come together and deal with the magnitude of an event like this in the smallest and most personal of ways.

Also, the song that played during the dinner was composed by Max Richter, who also scored The Leftovers for HBO, and it felt absolutely appropriate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVN1B-tUpgs

This actually took me out of it a bit because it’s a famous piece that is used in a LOT of movies and TV shows. Arrival, The Handmaid’s Tale, Luck, Shutter Island, to name a few. It’s a lovely piece, and one of my faves, but it’s got the same status as the Agnus Dei/Adagio for Strings by Samuel Barber, and it’s a bit too recognizable for me.

When it started playing, I threw up my hands and said “Of COURSE, it’s On The Nature of Daylight.”

It didn’t detract that much from the episode (and was entirely appropriate), but I wish they had chosen a different Max Richter piece. Like one of the excerpts from Sleep.

I agree with this. It was gorgeous when they used it in The Leftovers, since i wasn't familiar with it yet, but its one of those songs that is just so beautiful/powerful and heartbreaking that a lot of baggage attaches to it and its hard to stay in the moment when it's used in another context.

Another song that I think of that way, Lux Aeterna, the song that was first used (to my knowledge) for Requiem for a Dream. I remember they then used it for the trailer for the LOTR middle movie, and then a bunch of other stuff later. It's a beautiful piece of music, but anytime I hear it, I'm just reminded of Requiem for a Dream (which was my all time favorite movie for a time).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc3Cq89P97Y

ouchies

Aegeri wrote: »

Reading reactions to this episode on twitter and so forth, it really reminds me how valid the criticism of the Bill/Frank relationship in the game was. Where it really seems some are only okay with gay characters when you barely know or even realize that they are gay. Every "This is the gay agenda" complaint and even one guy arguing this wasn't in the game at all has been delightfully hilarious. I sometimes wonder if people claim to be fans of something without actually knowing anything about it just to have a contrary opinion on something they dislike.

Racists and homophobes think Wolverine is badass because he shreds dudes to pieces with his awesome metal claws. That’s it, that’s where it stops for them.

Beyond Normal

Racists and homophobes think Homelander is a good guy because he's dressed in the American flag, tall, blonde with blue eyes, and believes in Jesus. I doubt they really delve too far past the surface on most things.

syndalis

Casual Eddy wrote: »

-Loki- wrote: »

Aegeri wrote: »

Reading reactions to this episode on twitter and so forth, it really reminds me how valid the criticism of the Bill/Frank relationship in the game was. Where it really seems some are only okay with gay characters when you barely know or even realize that they are gay. Every "This is the gay agenda" complaint and even one guy arguing this wasn't in the game at all has been delightfully hilarious. I sometimes wonder if people claim to be fans of something without actually knowing anything about it just to have a contrary opinion on something they dislike.

The games haven't exactly hidden their LGBT characters. Bill was a bit harder to see if you just didn't pay attention at all, but there's plenty of details in the game that point it out. They just didn't make him a stereotypical gay character, he was just a person.

If someone says they're a fan of the games but then says something as stupid as 'this is the gay agenda' in response to this episode, they obviously aren't fans of the games and should be called out as such.

I’m tired of queer representation that’s “hinted at” or only explored off screen or you have to figure it out by reading a collectible. They don’t do that with straight relationships they just outright state it. There’s no reason to make it subtextual and there hasn’t been for a long time

I ugly cried in my office this morning over this story.

Love is love, let this shit ring loudly.