Jump to content

Last of Us (HBO Spoilers) #2


Ser Scot A Ellison
 Share

Recommended Posts

Really, I'm pretty much absolutely sure there is no way they would've found a cure. It makes no scientific sense. There's no reason there's still some fungus in Ellie, specially not in her brain. Odds are, there barely ever was any bit of fungus and it was quickly wiped out. As I already said and as Pebble says as well, it's ridiculous: they're killing their only possible source of research, information and even cure on a wild guess that's most probably totally wrong - by doing this, they're basically ensuring mankind will never have a cure.

 

6 hours ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

The fundamental point is that Joel will save Ellie no matter what the cost is. Even if it means the cure is gone. Even if everyone in the world dies. The only cost he might not consider paying is Tommy. Everyone and everything else in the world has lesser value to him. 

For Joel, saving Ellie is giving him a second chance to save Sarah. It's redemption. And it's for him, not for her. 

Definitely. That last episode was quite clear on that point - he's pretty much admitting Ellie is his main reason to keep on living.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pebble thats Stubby said:

But Joel and Ellie are living in a very different world.

2 hours ago, Ran said:

And from the perspective of making sure no one knew about what happened so that they couldn't come after Ellie afterards, well, killing them all would seem necessary.

Well, yes, within the framework of their world, you could argue that killing every Firefly was necessary. By that token, this also means Joel should have killed the unarmed nurses (they know about Ellie and might tell others).
But that's adopting Joel's viewpoint and deciding everything is fucked beyond repair, and the only thing that matters is your relationship with Ellie.
I find it interesting that in the game, many players were reluctant to kill the doctor:

Quote

This ending, which is identical to that of the video game on which “The Last of Us” is based, has been divisive for more than a decade. Before the game’s release, in 2013, Neil Druckmann, its creator, found that play-testers were split; some wanted the choice to save the world, or simply had no interest in murdering innocent medics. When they reached the operating room, he said, about half waited or searched fruitlessly for another option: “They linger there for a while before they realize, ‘No, I’ve got to kill this doctor.’ ” (Parents, he noted, were far less likely to hesitate.) Many players were unnerved at being denied a conventionally heroic narrative—and at their forced complicity in an arguably villainous one.

Quote

The game’s creator, Neil Druckmann, has said that the end of the game is something of a Rorschach test. Some players don’t hesitate. They will do anything to save their surrogate child. Others are more reluctant to do so.

Quote

 

Ultimately, Druckmann – who also created the video game on which “The Last of Us” is based – sees Joel’s dark turn as sad.

“I think for the most part, viewers have been in alignment with Joel. As far as what he’s trying to do and protect Ellie, that’s such a noble cause,” he said. “And then how do we show this really sad thing? It’s sad more than anything else, to see the darkness he’s capable of.”

That theme of unconditional love was something Druckmann hit upon when making the game in the first place.

“That was the concept of the story, both the game and the show, which is it started with — for the game – how can we make the player feel the unconditional love parents feel for the child, and this worry and fear and love and joy that can come with it?” he said. “But then sometimes, when you love something unconditionally, logic goes out the window, and you will do really horrible things to protect the ones you love.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Clueless Northman said:

Really, I'm pretty much absolutely sure there is no way they would've found a cure. It makes no scientific sense. There's no reason there's still some fungus in Ellie, specially not in her brain. Odds are, there barely ever was any bit of fungus and it was quickly wiped out. As I already said and as Pebble says as well, it's ridiculous: they're killing their only possible source of research, information and even cure on a wild guess that's most probably totally wrong - by doing this, they're basically ensuring mankind will never have a cure.

 

This is where I stand and why saving her was the right thing to do. Her infection stopped while in her arm, meaning that her blood stopped it, therefor her blood likely carries the antibodies or whatever the correct term is for it, of course this is just my opinion and I am no doctor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dbunting said:

This is where I stand and why saving her was the right thing to do. Her infection stopped while in her arm, meaning that her blood stopped it, therefor her blood likely carries the antibodies or whatever the correct term is for it, of course this is just my opinion and I am no doctor.

This.

 

Although TV science is often very not real world science.  So in tv land despite it not making sence it could be the brain that stopped the infection.

 

Still need to gather as much data as possibke and check out the non leathal possible cure places first.  As if they are wrong and tv science is not on their side then its too late to check the other things cos she is now dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only just finished the finale, will probably have a more detailed post later but my initial reaction to the finale and penultimate episode was that *way* too many things happened way too quickly and it felt pretty rushed, even down to the Joel killing montage & the quasi resolution we had towards the end of the episode.

I dunno, I felt like the characters & the audience needed to breathe a little bit but the show didn't give us the space for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pebble thats Stubby said:

This.

 

Although TV science is often very not real world science.  So in tv land despite it not making sence it could be the brain that stopped the infection.

 

Still need to gather as much data as possibke and check out the non leathal possible cure places first.  As if they are wrong and tv science is not on their side then its too late to check the other things cos she is now dead.

Ohh, if you look up the science, the whole procedure is complete BS. I mean they're basically using "Blade" logic, to explain why Ellie is special, which is something Hollywood should really stop doing. Where something bad happens to a pregnant woman and therefore the child she gives birth to has special abilities. I mean if this BS was possible, the Fire Fly's would be infecting pregnant women left and right. Also the entire situation is completely contrived. The Fire Fly's are going to dissect Ellie's brain, but they're going to tell this to Joel, "BEFORE" the operation. I said this back in the day, but you can totally feel this was written by video game developers and not people who looked up the science; because like I said before you need a clean room to create a vaccine and don't even get me started on distribution.

Edited by sifth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the funniest thing about Craig Mazin's writing credits is that the man was like 'Well, let me create a write a bunch of terrible movies in Hollywood, earn a bunch of cash, and then a decade into my career I'll start writing the good stuff'

 

1997     RocketMan     
1998     Senseless     
2000     The Specials     
2003     Scary Movie 3     
2006     Scary Movie 4     
2008     Superhero Movie     
2011     The Hangover Part II     
2013     Identity Thief     
The Hangover Part III
2016     The Huntsman: Winter's War     
2019 Chernobyl
2023 The Last of Us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bioethics professor weighs in on the Last of Us finale
Is it ever justified to kill one person to save many others?

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2023/3/17/23641685/last-of-us-finale-hbo-fireflies-bioethics-joel-ellie-arthur-caplan-pedro-pascal

Quote

Yes, the IRB’s job is to interpret the chances of the science working; consent is not sufficient. Some of the early pioneers of artificial hearts did consent and said, “I’ll take my chances, I’m gonna die anyway,” but the IRB had to step in and challenge whether the scientific protocol was sound, whether the background information they had pointed in the direction that they were likely to get an answer. The IRB’s job is to ensure that consent is there, but also to make sure that the science is sound.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on current ethics, there's no debate that they way they treated Ellie was totally wrong. Then, the way Joel reacted and how far he went was totally wrong as well. As far as I'm concerned, I'd say specially how he shot the doctor in a heartbeat because he wanted to debate with him or didn't obey him fast enough - it's not just the killing, it's how quite ruthless and rushed it is.

I also agree with Raja: both episodes should've been longer. This might be the first time I see a finale which is by far the shortest episode of the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Raja said:

Only just finished the finale, will probably have a more detailed post later but my initial reaction to the finale and penultimate episode was that *way* too many things happened way too quickly and it felt pretty rushed, even down to the Joel killing montage & the quasi resolution we had towards the end of the episode.

I dunno, I felt like the characters & the audience needed to breathe a little bit but the show didn't give us the space for that.

Anyone know why this was only nine episodes? I agree it could have used another. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe it was intended to be 10 episodes before the first two were merged, which I think was the right call. But I do think it could have used another episode or two in the back half.

I honestly don't understand coming at this from the perspective of trying to analyze the science of the "cure". It just doesn't strike me as a conflict point that makes sense to look at with a watsonian lens, if the Fireflies are obviously wrong and chasing a pipe dream then it takes any tension and moral conflict out of it, Joel is clearly in the right to fight and protect Ellie from this deranged group. But if the hope for the cure is real, suddenly you've got that juicy conflict of picking family over the world - a conflict you have Druckmann explicitly talking about in the quotes provided by Ripp, and that they wanted to force players into the non heroic (ie selfish) choice.

So from the Doylist perspective it just seems black and white to me. The cure would have worked, Joel might rationalize it away as it wouldn't have but deep down he knows it would have and it doesn't actually matter for his decision, he made the only choice he ever could have made. Arguing over the efficacy of the cure just seems like engaging in exactly the same rationalizing Joel would be doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, karaddin said:

I believe it was intended to be 10 episodes before the first two were merged, which I think was the right call. But I do think it could have used another episode or two in the back half.

I honestly don't understand coming at this from the perspective of trying to analyze the science of the "cure". It just doesn't strike me as a conflict point that makes sense to look at with a watsonian lens, if the Fireflies are obviously wrong and chasing a pipe dream then it takes any tension and moral conflict out of it, Joel is clearly in the right to fight and protect Ellie from this deranged group. But if the hope for the cure is real, suddenly you've got that juicy conflict of picking family over the world - a conflict you have Druckmann explicitly talking about in the quotes provided by Ripp, and that they wanted to force players into the non heroic (ie selfish) choice.

So from the Doylist perspective it just seems black and white to me. The cure would have worked, Joel might rationalize it away as it wouldn't have but deep down he knows it would have and it doesn't actually matter for his decision, he made the only choice he ever could have made. Arguing over the efficacy of the cure just seems like engaging in exactly the same rationalizing Joel would be doing.

That might have been thier intention, but the show did a very poor job of showing this cure with these people in this setting had even the slightest chance to work.  

 

If the show actually set up the dilemma as they intended.  Then yes Joels actions where not correct.  He was still totally right in rescing Ellie, and killing most of the guards.  But should not have killed the doctor.  If possible wait for ellie to wake up, wait a day or two and talk it through.  Then preform the surgery with Ellies informed consent.  If Ellie said no, then no surgery.  No cure.  Fine.  

 

In the situation actually presented, maybe Joel couod have just shpt the doctor in the leg to get the others moving.  But every person their he left alive was a threat to future Ellie, and Joel needed to move fast. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Pebble thats Stubby said:

That might have been thier intention, but the show did a very poor job of showing this cure with these people in this setting had even the slightest chance to work.  

I actually did mean to concede that whether the show did an effective job of communicating the situation is certainly a fair argument, I'm just talking about what I think was meant to be the question at the end - stand-in daughter or humanity. Like many, I'm also viewing it with the context of already knowing the story from the game which is going to colour my interpretation of that scene in the show and Joel's subsequent lie about it. My view is that murdering the Fireflies is subjectively correct, but objectively wrong whereas the lie is wrong from both perspectives

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, karaddin said:

I believe it was intended to be 10 episodes before the first two were merged, which I think was the right call. But I do think it could have used another episode or two in the back half.

I honestly don't understand coming at this from the perspective of trying to analyze the science of the "cure". It just doesn't strike me as a conflict point that makes sense to look at with a watsonian lens, if the Fireflies are obviously wrong and chasing a pipe dream then it takes any tension and moral conflict out of it, Joel is clearly in the right to fight and protect Ellie from this deranged group. But if the hope for the cure is real, suddenly you've got that juicy conflict of picking family over the world - a conflict you have Druckmann explicitly talking about in the quotes provided by Ripp, and that they wanted to force players into the non heroic (ie selfish) choice.

So from the Doylist perspective it just seems black and white to me. The cure would have worked, Joel might rationalize it away as it wouldn't have but deep down he knows it would have and it doesn't actually matter for his decision, he made the only choice he ever could have made. Arguing over the efficacy of the cure just seems like engaging in exactly the same rationalizing Joel would be doing.

Watsonian?  Doylist?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Watsonian?  Doylist?  

Sorry I'm still half asleep so this is going to be a terrible explanation but...

Watsonian = looking at the writing choices etc from inside the story, things like "the character could never have done anything else given who they have been established as". This perspective works for looking at Joel's decision to kill them all and save Ellie

Doylist = looking at the writing choices from the meta story perspective, so in this case knowing the author wanted to create maximum conflict for the player then the cure would have worked even if the science looks a little flimsy from inside the story

In an ideal world the author manages to align these perspectives perfectly, the pursuit of this is one of the things that's really bogged Martin down over the last few books, but judging things from one perspective can really hamper enjoyment when the author makes a decision that skews heavily to the other one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, karaddin said:

Sorry I'm still half asleep so this is going to be a terrible explanation but...

Watsonian = looking at the writing choices etc from inside the story, things like "the character could never have done anything else given who they have been established as". This perspective works for looking at Joel's decision to kill them all and save Ellie

Doylist = looking at the writing choices from the meta story perspective, so in this case knowing the author wanted to create maximum conflict for the player then the cure would have worked even if the science looks a little flimsy from inside the story

In an ideal world the author manages to align these perspectives perfectly, the pursuit of this is one of the things that's really bogged Martin down over the last few books, but judging things from one perspective can really hamper enjoyment when the author makes a decision that skews heavily to the other one.

Thank you.  Interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watched episodes 7 and 8 just now. One left. Show is aces. - Says a joker (-_- )

 

Regarding Messieurs Benioff and Weiss' (let's just say it) complete chuckle-fucking of their jobs-then-careers while in custody of Mr. Martin's work...

 

(Bella Ramsey's) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...