ViewAskewbian

Mods, feel free to delete if this is repetitive but I think, with this show, we're in a unique spot when it comes to discussion. I just went to write a post in the current episode thread and realized I couldn't really write it without spoilers for the game. I imagine some watching the show HAVEN'T played the game and may want to, not wanting to know changes the series has done.

So, I figured I'd create a thread that could cover both games and the coming second season (based on Game 2), where those of us who have played can pop in some game spoilers as it relates to show discussion without our entire posts being under spoiler tags.

There's already been some subtle things in the threads that may give things away if you think about it so I figure this thread can be a catch all for spoilers while the episodes can stand on their own.

Again, if it's too much, ditch this thread and we can pop tags in the main episode threads.

ViewAskewbian

For example:

Last night's episode had some interesting changes from the game:

-The removal of FEDRA from the story and the part they play in the game during the museum scene
-Ellie being bitten, again, as opposed to the game scene of her breathing in spores being the moment Joel believes her story

I listened to the after show podcast where they explained some of this. They don't plan to have spores on the show (at least not as much as the game, anyway). I suppose I get that. You spend a lot of time in the game in a gas mask which isn't a good look to showcase your stars on a tv show.

Still, IMO, Ellie being bitten AGAIN was redundant and kind of took away a bit from Tess being bitten. I guess there wasn't another way to have that moment where Joel finally believes her immunity if not the spores scene.

The creators said the FEDRA change came because they felt they had no reason for them to be on patrol at the museum. If I recall, in the game, they are enforcing curfew.

The connected infected is an interesting change, too, as is them being able to sense others like them.

bunkaroo

This should be a helpful thread - I know in the early Game of Thrones days the book readers were not usually as accommodating.

ViewAskewbian

I also liked the foreshadowing of Ellie and Riley though I believe they changed up how she was found by Marlene. In the show Ellie says that she was found AFTER she was bitten but in the add on to the game, if I recall correctly, Marlene was already present and mentioned.

Deftones

Refresh my memory since it has been a minute. In the game, was it a thing where if you touched the cordyceps tentacles they sensed it and transmitted it to the infected? It seems vaguely familiar but I don't exactly remember that.

ViewAskewbian

In the podcast, they said that was a new addition to the show and not part of the game.
In Part 2 more infected bust out of fungus in the walls but touching them never did anything in the game.
Marginally stepping on a small piece of glass, however...

bunkaroo

Another significant change is them not using airborne spores for infection but rather the “tendrils” from an infected person’s mouth (which reminds me a bit of The Strain).

The cynic in me is thinking Pascal was not willing to wear a respirator mask after spending so much time in a helmet in the Manadalorian.

ViewAskewbian

Yeah, I mentioned they talked about removing the spores in the podcast. They didn't say, why, though, but I also assumed it was to not have the leads in gas masks for most of the episodes.

Abob Teff

The tendrils are a cool addition. I don't think the tendrils are what necessarily spreads the fungus though ... or maybe those come out during the bite? In Tess's case, I believe the clicker sensed she was infected but not connected to the rest of them. It was trying to "connect" her.

Abob Teff

They actually did ... spores do not stay "localized" as portrayed in the game. They float all over as the air currents carry them. They didn't think that suspension of belief would hold up for the show.

ViewAskewbian

I'll have to go back and relisten to the podcast. I just remember them saying that there will be no spores. I mean, I would've bought into that notion but I guess I understand the rational for not including something that was airborne.

Though they did touch on the masks in an interview with Polygon:

“The show [is] taking a more realistic approach to the story and the world,” The Last of Us writer and co-creator Neil Druckmann told Polygon. “If we wanted to treat it realistically, and there are spores near, characters would wear gas masks all the time. Then we lose so much, which is maybe the most important part of the journey is what’s going on inside behind their eyes, in their soul, in their beings. For that logistical reason, we were like, Let’s find a different vector.”

“[We wanted] to feel like these things are interconnected. They can come out against us as a mass,” Druckmann said. “But also how they pass it from one person to the other, it just became this really disturbing thing, which was like, Oh, this is delicious. We have to use this.”

Dan

Yeah, I'm glad they changed the method of how the infection spreads. The TV version is more compelling and provides for some additional lore if they want to explore that stuff, which it sounds like they do.

I'm enjoying this much more than I expected I would, but I'm really looking forward to how they tackle Part 2. The storytelling convention used in the game works because it's a game. I'm not sure the same thing would work for the show, because I could see a LOT of people dropping off at certain points.

ViewAskewbian

I'm going to assume they crosscut between Abby and Ellie after the main confrontation at the start as opposed doing one season with Ellie and one as Abby with things converging at the end as it is in the game.

Abob Teff

It may have been on the TV segment that airs after the show ... The podcast seems like an expanded version of that, covering the same topics.

ViewAskewbian

Interesting article:
Zombie fungus: Could 'The Last of Us' happen in real life? | CNN

outcastja

Just finished Part 2, I don't know how they are going to adapt that in only one season.

I also feel the show will lose like half the audience next season. That Abby scene was very Negan-like, and that's the point when a lot of people were turned off by The Walking Dead.

Abob Teff

I've been trying to keep the viewing experience as close to the game experience as possible. I watch 5-7 minutes at a time, then back it up 2-3 minutes.

bunkaroo

I’m pretty sure they’ve said they intend to break up Part 2 into 2 seasons.

New Lurker

I'm a little surprised they structured season 1 as the whole first game. I think it should have been 2 seasons at minimum. I almost think game two can be stretched out to a season per act. You end season 2 with Joel's death. You end season 3 with Abby & Elle's confrontation where she lets Elle live. You end season 4 with their second confrontation where Elle lets Abby go.

It's a fine line to walk because I think by the end of this season everyone watching is going to love the Elle - Joel dynamic and want to see what comes next. But with Joel dying almost right away in the second game I feel like that will hurt this show's longevity. Viewers only getting like 12 episodes of Joel before he's dead might be an easy point for people to jump off of the show.

dsa_shea

They really need about 6 episodes or so to flesh out the story of them travelling to their new home in Wyoming and some new adventures to fill in the years that both Ellie and Joel aged until we see them again in Part 2. This needs to be done before they even think about making that series jarring move in the upcoming season(s). I couldn't simply accept a "fast travel" option in a show.

New Lurker

We call that Game of Thrones Season 8 lol.

Mike86

Picked up a copy of the game on PS3 but haven’t started it yet. Eventually hopefully I’ll upgrade to a newer console but I have a PS3 that I still use on occasion and it was available relatively cheap on eBay.

ViewAskewbian

Though not a major spoiler from the game in Episode 3, I loved the little nod to the game's title screen in the final shot of this episode...that window with the curtain blowing.

As for a bigger spoiler:

Though it seems more obvious in retrospect, two playthroughs of The Last of Us 1 and I never realized Bill was gay so much so that I thought it was a major change in the show. In the after show podcast, one of the creators mentions Bill being gay in the game and the implied relationship with Frank. Thinking about it, I remembered Joel calling Frank Bill's partner (which I had initially just figured meant they worked together in protecting the town) and, of course, there's the adult magazine Ellie takes with her. Just not something I paused to think about while escaping infected hoards.

This episode was a wonderful example of adding to the source material while still honouring it.

bunkaroo

I agree with the above. As I mentioned in the episode thread though, I thought it was an odd pacing choice to basically pause for a bottle episode so soon in a new series. It may very well have served to show motivation for Joel, but the majority of an 80 minute episode devoted to it seems like a lot to accomplish that. I think had they spent 10-20 mins on it, it would have had roughly the same impact. I guess it couldn’t really have been done later in the season either.

Emmy bait for sure though.

ViewAskewbian

Considering where Bill takes place in the game story, I can't think of where else they could have dropped this in the show narrative. Wrapping Ellie and Joel around Bill and Frank's story was fine with me and, personally, I liked veering off seeing more of how others dealt with the outbreak considering this episode also didn't have a pre-credits outbreak setup like the last two had.

The only thing I missed with how the show told the story, was the interaction between Ellie and Bill from the game. But, considering the wonderful story told, I'll take that trade.