The Last of US HBO Show

[Btvs fan]

Not sure what thread to put this on so put it here. The Last of US has premiered. So have people seen the episode. What do they think of it so far ? How close is it to the game which is fantastic and you should play if you've not played it yet

 

[Btvs fan]

Wow this got moved to the graveyard thread

 

[Mr Trick]

Episode 1 was fantastic! Its already looking like one of the best shows of the year. I've never played the games or have anything invested in them, but I loved it from the start. I'm into the character and the whole world. Its really tense at times also. I know fans of the games have also been impressed, so it seems to be working across the board.

 

[Btvs fan]

Episode 1 was fantastic! Its already looking like one of the best shows of the year. I've never played the games or have anything invested in them, but I loved it from the start. I'm into the character and the whole world. Its really tense at times also. I know fans of the games have also been impressed, so it seems to be working across the board.

I saw it was being done by the people who did Chernoybl which was a brilliant show so I was always pretty confident.

If you play Computer Games then I definitely recommend you give the Last of US a go. Its a fantastic game as its sequel (despite the haters)

 

[thrasherpix]

This is the rare game that almost (and may yet) get me into video games. I've loved some of the scenes and even pseudo-movies made from game play, and even enjoyed watching someone else play it.

I'm going to wait to see what the fans say, by that I mean of the game, not new viewers. If they like it, I'll likely actually spring for a subscription service (or arrange to see it elsewhere). This is one of the very few shows I'm interested in. But given the track record of the last few years, I'm going to wait awhile.

 

[TamsinValencia]

Looks good. I don't have that platform but I will have to try to find it somewhere else.

 

[Btvs fan]

This is the rare game that almost (and may yet) get me into video games. I've loved some of the scenes and even pseudo-movies made from game play, and even enjoyed watching someone else play it.

I'm going to wait to see what the fans say, by that I mean of the game, not new viewers. If they like it, I'll likely actually spring for a subscription service (or arrange to see it elsewhere). This is one of the very few shows I'm interested in. But given the track record of the last few years, I'm going to wait awhile.

The game has been around for years. Its considered one of the greatest games of all time for a reason and definitely worth playing regardless of the TV show (made by the people who did Chernoybl which is a flawless show) . There was a remake for the ps5 recently which does look fantastic and is probably the one you should get imo.

The story and characters are terrific. I'm going to be interested in Season 2 as when you play The second game you'll understand which is equally good.

 

[thetopher]

I saw the first episode and it was pretty darn good; well acted, well cast and really atmospheric. It stuck pretty closely to the source material when it made sense to and extrapolated/fleshed out where it could/should. I don't see a problem with using a different medium to tell the same story slightly differently. For example the TV clip at the start was necessary to prepare new viewers to the concept of 'global fungal infection extinction event' and did an excellent job, that sort of thing wasn't in the game.

What's so refreshing is that this is basically how you usually do faithful adaptations of things like LotR or the Handmaids Tale or whatever Dickens novel the Beeb is doing this year...but its been done about a video game; something outre and nerdy that, although critically acclaimed, is still a medium the mainstream largely ignores.
Maybe the mainstream is waking up to the fact that you have to take this kinda material with at least a degree of professionalism and respect, rather than churning out an adaptation that fits a 'message' fit for 'modern audiences'.


Anyway, I'll stick with it, at least for the adaptation of the first game. The second game was a massive disappointment and rightly regarded as systemically subpar; a game that valued theme and message over plot and character. It was a slog to playthrough. Pretty much killed the franchises' future.

 

[Mr Trick]

I saw the first episode and it was pretty darn good; well acted, well cast and really atmospheric. It stuck pretty closely to the source material when it made sense to and extrapolated/fleshed out where it could/should. I don't see a problem with using a different medium to tell the same story slightly differently. For example the TV clip at the start was necessary to prepare new viewers to the concept of 'global fungal infection extinction event' and did an excellent job, that sort of thing wasn't in the game.

What's so refreshing is that this is basically how you usually do faithful adaptations of things like LotR or the Handmaids Tale or whatever Dickens novel the Beeb is doing this year...but its been done about a video game; something outre and nerdy that, although critically acclaimed, is still a medium the mainstream largely ignores.
Maybe the mainstream is waking up to the fact that you have to take this kinda material with at least a degree of professionalism and respect, rather than churning out an adaptation that fits a 'message' fit for 'modern audiences'.


Anyway, I'll stick with it, at least for the adaptation of the first game. The second game was a massive disappointment and rightly regarded as systemically subpar; a game that valued theme and message over plot and character. It was a slog to playthrough. Pretty much killed the franchises' future.

I agree with pretty much everything you said except the message for a modern audience part. Storytelling should always have a message for a modern audience otherwise what’s the point? They may as well have I stopped making media in the 90s by that logic. Storytelling has always responded to the time it’s set in this is nothing new. I think this does too but it’s wrapped up in a very faithful adaptation of the source.
Those other examples are a bit different because they tend to be reboots or sequels etc. Their not really adapting the source material their telling a different story set in the same universe or based on some it. LOTR is a good example of that. Middle Earth is a big place it makes sense to tell different stories not just do another version of the original source. If it’s bad it’s bad, but it makes sense to do it that way.

 

[thetopher]

Storytelling should always have a message for a modern audience otherwise what’s the point?

I'll counter but I'll just stick to the adaptation argument; stories should probably tell the message of the story they're adapting otherwise what is the point? Why adapt that particular story in the first place if you're not going to tell it's particular message?
Instead why not just do something completely original with the message that the writers want to give their audience?

I have an answer but its not a particularly flattering one, but it does explain why a lot of modern adaptations of certain genre's of media are incredibly poorly received.

Storytelling has always responded to the time it’s set in this is nothing new. I think this does too but it’s wrapped up in a very faithful adaptation of the source.

I mean, no that simply isn't true. There are plenty of timeless message films/stories that do not necessarily represent the time in which the story was made, sometimes the story represents the time in which the story was set.

Take one example Star Trek; was Star Trek reflective of the 60's Cold War era is was it aspiration and had a message about some far-off utopia time where things would be better.

Stories can be truly escapist, immersive, aspirational, they do not have to always be delivering some kind of modern messaging, they just have to engage and entertain.

Post automatically merged: Jan 18, 2023

LOTR is a good example of that. Middle Earth is a big place it makes sense to tell different stories not just do another version of the original source. If it’s bad it’s bad, but it makes sense to do it that way.

I suppose many Tolkien fans wouldn't care much about the Rings Of Power if it had all original characters and plot and set in some distant corner of Middle Earth; but instead the whole thing bastardized a potentially good story, diminished the setting and damaged the well received established good characters by poor adaptation, lazy writing and modern messaging.

 

[Plasma]

I'm going to wait to see what the fans say, by that I mean of the game, not new viewers. If they like it, I'll likely actually spring for a subscription service (or arrange to see it elsewhere). This is one of the very few shows I'm interested in. But given the track record of the last few years, I'm going to wait awhile.

I will have to give this a watch and post my thoughts. TLoU is one of my favorite game experiences of all time and will always stick out to me. (The second one is also fantastic but super depressing and hard to get through because of that)

Maybe the mainstream is waking up to the fact that you have to take this kinda material with at least a degree of professionalism and respect, rather than churning out an adaptation that fits a 'message' fit for 'modern audiences'.

The problem isn’t that adaptations try to fit some mold for “modern audiences”. The problem is that they hire people that don’t care to even adapt the source material.

Halo was a disaster because the people who made it didn’t even play the game, and boy does it show when Master Chief removes his armor to reveal his bootycheeks and has…relations…with an enemy POW (war crime btw). Rings of Power was just boring and failed to capture the adventurous wonder of the movies or books. The new Witcher thing that everyone hates made the cardinal sin of just being generic fantasy with a Witcher branding slapped on it.

I would agree that there are plenty of issues with adaptations, but bringing in social messages and themes is not really a bad thing. Making a property relevant to when it is released is important. The problems lie almost exclusively with the incompetence of the writers in actually adapting material beyond “yeah that looks like whatever we’re adapting”. Ascribing the issues to attempts to innovate and diversify the material isn’t really fair.

 

[Spanky]

Ascribing the issues to attempts to innovate and diversify the material isn’t really fair.

But often than not the message trumps quality writing. Like, if you have the message you don't need to worry about how well it's been written. Or acted. Or directed. But I agree with you in principle.

 

[Hunga Munga]

The Last Of Us was a truly great game . Bit easy though . Not as challenging on replay as I would like. I'd argue Resident Evil 4 and Metal Gear Solid 3 were objectively finer games of its type .

But there is just something about 'The Last of Us' that sticks in the mind .

 

[Angelkiss]

I saw the preview of this it looks really good. Something I will have to binge watch.

 

[Btvs fan]

But often than not the message trumps quality writing. Like, if you have the message you don't need to worry about how well it's been written. Or acted. Or directed. But I agree with you in principle.

I agree with @Plasma

Arcane has a message yet its writing is still quality. You can have a message , George Orwells books 1984 and Animal Farm were obvious messages, but still have good writing.

 

[thrasherpix]

Messages are very common (they make for great conflicts and temptations, when done right), always have been, but not necessary, and sometimes tiresome even to those who agree with the MESSAGE. It's just that usually (*) the writing and characters came first, whereas say some after school special with MESSAGE over characters and stories were dismissed and mostly forgotten today, the few remembered (like Reefer Madness) being laughed at.

(* But then how many movies and shows have been forgotten? It does seem unfair to compare the media that has stood the test of time against random media coming out now. It's not like plenty weren't quickly forgotten from previous decades...though then some initially did poorly to become cult classics. One day most of the media today will be forgotten while LOL: Arcane and Stranger Things are being compared to whatever is being churned out like it's fair.)

LOL: Arcane is a VERY RARE (in my opinion) exception of a reboot (along with dime a dozen/common as muck tropes) being very different, and yet actually better (in this specific case, it's not only better than what the game shows, it's good enough to be art, and if there's a MESSAGE to it, then it's a lot more complex and nuanced than what dominates other media). It's not the only one. But I'm surprised whenever it happens.

Now if only more ORIGINAL content could could be made rather than grafting something that once did well over a generic product. It's the original stuff that stood the test of time anyway that's now being exploited, rather than making new original content that is brave and artistic.

And if those saying that a "modern appeal" is appropriate and fair would stop crapping on older shows. I especially hate it when someone who reboots something says outright that he or she hated the original (even more so if they say things that are untrue about it to promote the new version, especially when the old version was actually closer to the MESSAGE they claim they're trying to promote in the new one, as opposed to the rare clever deconstruction or parody). Among other things I could add (but haven't seen in a while, but then I've lost a lot of interest in media today so could've easily missed it).

 

[Btvs fan]

Messages are very common (they make for great conflicts and temptations, when done right), always have been, but not necessary, and sometimes tiresome even to those who agree with the MESSAGE. It's just that usually (*) the writing and characters came first, whereas say some after school special with MESSAGE over characters and stories were dismissed and mostly forgotten today, the few remembered (like Reefer Madness) being laughed at.

(* But then how many movies and shows have been forgotten? It does seem unfair to compare the media that has stood the test of time against random media coming out now. It's not like plenty weren't quickly forgotten from previous decades...though then some initially did poorly to become cult classics. One day most of the media today will be forgotten while LOL: Arcane and Stranger Things are being compared to whatever is being churned out like it's fair.)

LOL: Arcane is a VERY RARE (in my opinion) exception of a reboot (along with dime a dozen/common as muck tropes) being very different, and yet actually better (in this specific case, it's not only better than what the game shows, it's good enough to be art, and if there's a MESSAGE to it, then it's a lot more complex and nuanced than what dominates other media). It's not the only one. But I'm surprised whenever it happens.

Now if only more ORIGINAL content could could be made rather than grafting something that once did well over a generic product. It's the original stuff that stood the test of time anyway that's now being exploited, rather than making new original content that is brave and artistic.

And if those saying that a "modern appeal" is appropriate and fair would stop crapping on older shows. I especially hate it when someone who reboots something says outright that he or she hated the original (even more so if they say things that are untrue about it to promote the new version, especially when the old version was actually closer to the MESSAGE they claim they're trying to promote in the new one, as opposed to the rare clever deconstruction or parody). Among other things I could add (but haven't seen in a while, but then I've lost a lot of interest in media today so could've easily missed it).

Like I said you should try the Last of Us game. Its considered 1 of the greatest games of all time for a reason

 

[TamsinValencia]

Need to check this show out. Looks really good

 

[Tome]

Episode 1 was fantastic! Its already looking like one of the best shows of the year. I've never played the games or have anything invested in them, but I loved it from the start. I'm into the character and the whole world. Its really tense at times also. I know fans of the games have also been impressed, so it seems to be working across the board.

The whole first thirty minutes of the episode were awesome. They've somehow made that part of the story more interesting, as they built up the dread tenfold and expended upon a couple not-so-small details. That and some of the scenes and lines were taken straight out from the cutscenes in the game. You don't know how refreshing it was for me to finally see people adapt a game into another medium while respecting and staying faithful to the original work. WHY HAS IT BEEN SO HARD TO DO for 20+ years? All you need is to be respectful toward what you adapt, jesus! You can expand on an original story, but you got to show that you care about what came before.

That being said, what I was worried about concerning the adaptation was the choice of actors for Joel and Ellie. After the pilot, let me just say that I have no more doubts about Pedro Pascal. I wasn't sure he could play a dramatic character like Joel, but so far he's knocking it out of the ballpark. That... erm scene... damn! He really outdid himself. I think this is going to be the most demanding role he's had to play so far in his career. As for Bella Ramsey, there are times when she sounds almost the same as the original Ellie, but there's still something missing for me. I will obviously wait to see the rest of the season before I fully judge her performance, but this is where I stand for now. She's got the attitude and swearing down, but I'm not bought on her sweeter side yet. I guess it's going to be a process for me, because I can't help but see Lyanna Mormont when I look at her, and I can't fathom that character being anything but stoic and badass. 😂

I saw the first episode and it was pretty darn good; well acted, well cast and really atmospheric. It stuck pretty closely to the source material when it made sense to and extrapolated/fleshed out where it could/should. I don't see a problem with using a different medium to tell the same story slightly differently. For example the TV clip at the start was necessary to prepare new viewers to the concept of 'global fungal infection extinction event' and did an excellent job, that sort of thing wasn't in the game.

What's so refreshing is that this is basically how you usually do faithful adaptations of things like LotR or the Handmaids Tale or whatever Dickens novel the Beeb is doing this year...but its been done about a video game; something outre and nerdy that, although critically acclaimed, is still a medium the mainstream largely ignores.
Maybe the mainstream is waking up to the fact that you have to take this kinda material with at least a degree of professionalism and respect, rather than churning out an adaptation that fits a 'message' fit for 'modern audiences'.


Anyway, I'll stick with it, at least for the adaptation of the first game. The second game was a massive disappointment and rightly regarded as systemically subpar; a game that valued theme and message over plot and character. It was a slog to playthrough. Pretty much killed the franchises' future.

Dude, I was fully aboard with your post until I got to the end.

I totally disagree about the second game being a "massive disappointment". It was as big of a masterpiece as the original. In parts, it was even better because it attempted difficult things that the first game did not. Also, it is not "regarded as systemically subpar". The vast majority of critics and fans loved the game. It even won Game of the Year, jesus! There's just been this, as usual, vocal minority who made it their job to shit on the game. And their reasoning is incredibly poor and lack introspection.

For those here who are unaware of the controversy surrounding The Last of Us: Part II, the second game's story was leaked weeks ahead of time, and many people spoiled themselves. From that point on, a good amount of these individuals made up their mind about the game before even playing it. As a result, they had a totally truncated experience with the game upon release as they did not experience it the way it was intended (mostly blind). They were angry at certain events/characters in the game and had had time to justify why the story didn't make sense in their head and they were in no way interested in being taken on a difficult, demanding emotional journey.

Even among those who did not spoil themselves, including one dear friend of mine (😆), some had issues with the story for pretty much the same reason as the ones who spoiled themselves. The crux of the problem is that many people could not get over a certain event in the game. I personally had a hard time with it too, so I totally understand why it was difficult for many people. However, it being tough was literally the point. The story of TLoU 2 asked a lot from its players because it actually valued their emotional intelligence. But I think most of us gamers are not used to being challenged by a video game in the way that TLoU 2 challenged us. The game forced us to put ourselves in the shoes of people we didn't want to understand and care for. It forced us to reconsider our entire perception of the events that had unfolded in both the first and the second game. It showed in unapologetic ways how people are capable of dehumanizing others at a moment notice when strong, powerful emotions affect them. And the irony is that the reactions of a lot of gamers who disliked the game literally proved the point of the writers. But these gamers seem to have been oblivious to that fact.

There's also some people who talk about how the second game was disrespectful toward its main characters, and I vehemently disagree. The amount of love and respect put into the story for the two leads was unbelievable. The writers honored Ellie and Joel, and their relationship, so much with constant throwbacks to big events from the first game, and even small, minute, but precious exchanges between the two characters. The way they incorporated Ellie's journal into the game to allow us an interactive and deeper look into her thoughts and state-of-mind as the story progressed... was genius and masterful. I teared up reading some of the passages from her journal as they felt so real. It was beautiful. It's unconceivable for me to think that some people seriously believe that the writers showed anything but respect for these characters.

As a final note on the "criticism" toward the second game, there's also a part of the 'hate crowd' that targeted it with much more nefarious intentions, but I think it's not worth spending any time on that ilk.

I agree with pretty much everything you said except the message for a modern audience part. Storytelling should always have a message for a modern audience otherwise what’s the point? They may as well have I stopped making media in the 90s by that logic. Storytelling has always responded to the time it’s set in this is nothing new. I think this does too but it’s wrapped up in a very faithful adaptation of the source.
Those other examples are a bit different because they tend to be reboots or sequels etc. Their not really adapting the source material their telling a different story set in the same universe or based on some it. LOTR is a good example of that. Middle Earth is a big place it makes sense to tell different stories not just do another version of the original source. If it’s bad it’s bad, but it makes sense to do it that way.

Exactly. Stories, in whatever form (book, film, play, video game, etc.), have always carried, and will always carry, with them messages. And, most of the time, these messages are inherently connected to the era during which the story was written. Although, of course, some messages can be timeless.

Some people tend to harp on this nowadays as if this is something new. But it's always been like this. The difference is that there's less of a consensus on what "messages" people want to see in the modern world. I don't think that it is a bad thing. I just get frustrated when certain individuals talk as if there were no "forced messages" in older storytelling. How oblivious can you be?

I'll counter but I'll just stick to the adaptation argument; stories should probably tell the message of the story they're adapting otherwise what is the point? Why adapt that particular story in the first place if you're not going to tell it's particular message?
Instead why not just do something completely original with the message that the writers want to give their audience?

I have an answer but its not a particularly flattering one, but it does explain why a lot of modern adaptations of certain genre's of media are incredibly poorly received.




I mean, no that simply isn't true. There are plenty of timeless message films/stories that do not necessarily represent the time in which the story was made, sometimes the story represents the time in which the story was set.

Take one example Star Trek; was Star Trek reflective of the 60's Cold War era is was it aspiration and had a message about some far-off utopia time where things would be better.

Stories can be truly escapist, immersive, aspirational, they do not have to always be delivering some kind of modern messaging, they just have to engage and entertain.

Post automatically merged: Jan 18, 2023

I suppose many Tolkien fans wouldn't care much about the Rings Of Power if it had all original characters and plot and set in some distant corner of Middle Earth; but instead the whole thing bastardized a potentially good story, diminished the setting and damaged the well received established good characters by poor adaptation, lazy writing and modern messaging.

I agree that there's currently too many writers taking already-existing stories/franchises to adjust and modify as they wish. I also think that more of these writers should focus on writing their own, brand new stories. But the explanation behind what is happening is simple. These writers are using already-known franchises because these brands already have tons of followers and fans. It's pretty much guaranteed return on investment, and usually guaranteed profit.

When people complain about this, though, I usually ask them how many new, original movies they go watch, how many indie games they play, how many burgeoning writers they support. If you complain about a lack of new stories, but you only put your money toward the same recycled blockbusters and Assassin's Creed clones, then what the hell do you expect?

Concerning Star Trek, yea there are timeless messages, but there's also plenty of "messaging" that is straight out of the mentality of the 60s *cough* *cough*. It's going to be the same thing with modern TV shows and movies. Sounds to me like the latter only bothers some people because it's not the "messaging" they like.

I will have to give this a watch and post my thoughts. TLoU is one of my favorite game experiences of all time and will always stick out to me. (The second one is also fantastic but super depressing and hard to get through because of that)



The problem isn’t that adaptations try to fit some mold for “modern audiences”. The problem is that they hire people that don’t care to even adapt the source material.

Halo was a disaster because the people who made it didn’t even play the game, and boy does it show when Master Chief removes his armor to reveal his bootycheeks and has…relations…with an enemy POW (war crime btw). Rings of Power was just boring and failed to capture the adventurous wonder of the movies or books. The new Witcher thing that everyone hates made the cardinal sin of just being generic fantasy with a Witcher branding slapped on it.

I would agree that there are plenty of issues with adaptations, but bringing in social messages and themes is not really a bad thing. Making a property relevant to when it is released is important. The problems lie almost exclusively with the incompetence of the writers in actually adapting material beyond “yeah that looks like whatever we’re adapting”. Ascribing the issues to attempts to innovate and diversify the material isn’t really fair.

I fully agree with what you said in relation to hiring people who don't give a crap about the source material. For too long this has been the case. Halo and Rings of Power are good examples of this.

And 100% your final point.

But often than not the message trumps quality writing. Like, if you have the message you don't need to worry about how well it's been written. Or acted. Or directed. But I agree with you in principle.

I agree with this, although I'll add that sometimes people immediately decide that a work that focuses "on a message" will have bad writing, bad directing, and bad acting. Which is not always the case.

I get that being cautious/wary of these projects is usually sound, but you gotta do your part and not judge a work before you have even seen it. Give it its fair shot, and if it's bad, well it's bad!

The Last Of Us was a truly great game . Bit easy though . Not as challenging on replay as I would like. I'd argue Resident Evil 4 and Metal Gear Solid 3 were objectively finer games of its type .

But there is just something about 'The Last of Us' that sticks in the mind .

Sounds to me like you haven't played it on the hardest difficulty. 😂

Anyway, hopefully the rest of the season is just as great as the pilot. I want a long-running series.

 

[Plasma]

I totally disagree about the second game being a "massive disappointment". It was as big of a masterpiece as the original. In parts, it was even better because it attempted difficult things that the first game did not. Also, it is not "regarded as systemically subpar". The vast majority of critics and fans loved the game. It even won Game of the Year, jesus! There's just been this, as usual, vocal minority who made it their job to shit on the game. And their reasoning is incredibly poor and lack introspection.

I think a lot of issues with the reception towards the second game lie with two things.

1) The game’s theme, which works very well for me but I understand why it doesn’t for others. To prevent potential spoilers, the theme of the second game revolves around the cycle of violence and when to remove yourself from it. Certain people choose not to and it causes major problems for them. I think a lot of people dislike the game because it dirties motivations and characters quite a bit, but I really enjoy it.

2) The leak and some completely inaccurate information. To cut it short, like Tome said, the game was leaked several weeks before it released and most of the hatred was levied at one character in particular. A rather loud minority of individuals hated the fact that this was a strong woman character, going so far as to say she used to be a man (which this minority portrays as an negative) and whatever else.

It’s a fantastic game, and I will give fair credit to people who didn’t like it because of point #1. That’s a taste thing and that’s totally okay! Point #2 is just hateful and has no place in today’s society.

On that note, since the second game is highly controversial in subject matter and material, I would just remind everyone to please keep it civil and respectful.