Abby seems like a sane rational person who just saw her dad dead on the floor with his brains blown out. I'm sure she took the time to ask these insightful question. From the only 2 people still left alive who may not have even known the full details of what was going on.

I get it. It's a bit of a plot hole. But if you're really hung up on that I think this show is going to continue to disappoint you. This episode is probably about where this show peaks in terms of quality.

I don't really get the angst about the writing/coincidence. They are both obviously very active on patrols. Of all of the belief suspension required from movies and shows, this is a nothingburger. I also doubt they know anything about Ellie. The cure work - especially given they were killing a kid to do it - clearly had to be very need-to-know, and I'm sure the nurses (or anyone else that knew and lived) weren't exactly eager to offer up what they were really doing.

"We were helping this kid and this crazy guy (or dad) that was with her came in and shot us all." Gonna kill the kid over that?

Quote:

---

especially given they were killing a kid to do it

---

And not just any kid; the daughter of the Firefly Leader's best friend. This isn't something you put on a Militia recruiting poster.

I am rapidly approaching my end with this show. Not only have we lost our most compelling character, the two leads we have left (Abby and Ellie) both appear to be incredibly stupid. So this is not promising.

TCTTS said:

---

Again, my primary issue is with the massive coincidence of Abby randomly running into Joel in the first place. They make a whole deal about the lengths they've taken to hunt him down, and then about how fortified the town is, only for the one guy Abby has spent five years searching for to be found miraculously outside the walls, within eye sight of Abby, at the exact same moment she just so happens to be on watch.

It's bad writing no matter how you slice it. For a video game, and especially for a prestige, award-winning HBO drama - even one based a video game - given the praise season one received and given the relative leeway they have in adapting the source material. To that end, they could have at least taken another episode for the plot mechanics to unspool in slightly different fashion, and not feel so incredibly sudden/forced.

My only issue with the Ellie side of things is that it's yet another convenient coincidence on top of an already massive coincidence. It's putting a hat on a hat, something you're literally taught in screenwriting 101 not to do.

I'm not "fighting hard to hate" anything. In fact, I was one of the few people here last week to express how much I loved the first episode this season. My gut reaction to the Joel/Abby coincidence this episode, however, was natural, rational, and shared by others on this board/online. I admit that I was nitpicking the hell out of the Abby/Ellie side of things, but mainly as a second convenience in the same episode, not necessarily in a vacuum. Also, people are pushing back on me just as much as I'm pushing back on them, and that kind of back-and-forth is simply what happens sometimes on a message board like this with a week between episodes.

---

Also, and more importantly to me, WTF was Abby doing just wandering and falling down the mountain? That is a really stupid decision on par with Ellie taking her soon-to-be-girlfriend into the building for no reason.

It is so hard to watch a show where you are constantly saying "no, don't do that, you know not to do that."

I'd also like to point out that it kinda subverted expectations. At the end of the first episode I figured that the rest of the season would be them infiltrating and gaining the trust of JH before a showdown in the finale or penultimate episode.

If I hadn't gotten spoiled before the second episode it probably would have blown my mind. Like Ned in GoT.

20 year olds make dumb decisions.

FtWorthHorn said:

---

It is so hard to watch a show where you are constantly saying "no, don't do that, you know not to do that."

---

Well at least it matches real life

FtWorthHorn said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Again, my primary issue is with the massive coincidence of Abby randomly running into Joel in the first place. They make a whole deal about the lengths they've taken to hunt him down, and then about how fortified the town is, only for the one guy Abby has spent five years searching for to be found miraculously outside the walls, within eye sight of Abby, at the exact same moment she just so happens to be on watch.

It's bad writing no matter how you slice it. For a video game, and especially for a prestige, award-winning HBO drama - even one based a video game - given the praise season one received and given the relative leeway they have in adapting the source material. To that end, they could have at least taken another episode for the plot mechanics to unspool in slightly different fashion, and not feel so incredibly sudden/forced.

My only issue with the Ellie side of things is that it's yet another convenient coincidence on top of an already massive coincidence. It's putting a hat on a hat, something you're literally taught in screenwriting 101 not to do.

I'm not "fighting hard to hate" anything. In fact, I was one of the few people here last week to express how much I loved the first episode this season. My gut reaction to the Joel/Abby coincidence this episode, however, was natural, rational, and shared by others on this board/online. I admit that I was nitpicking the hell out of the Abby/Ellie side of things, but mainly as a second convenience in the same episode, not necessarily in a vacuum. Also, people are pushing back on me just as much as I'm pushing back on them, and that kind of back-and-forth is simply what happens sometimes on a message board like this with a week between episodes.

---

Also, and more importantly to me, WTF was Abby doing just wandering and falling down the mountain? That is a really stupid decision on par with Ellie taking her soon-to-be-girlfriend into the building for no reason.

It is so hard to watch a show where you are constantly saying "no, don't do that, you know not to do that."

---

I thought it was pretty clear that she was trying to get down the mountain quickly so she could catch the patrol she saw (happened to be Joel). And she was probably desperate to make something happen because she could tell her group was going to try to get her to go back to Seattle.

DannyDuberstein said:

---

I don't really get the angst about the writing/coincidence. They are both obviously very active on patrols. Of all of the belief suspension required from movies and shows, this is a nothingburger. I also doubt they know anything about Ellie. The cure work - especially given they were killing a kid to do it - clearly had to be very need-to-know, and I'm sure the nurses (or anyone else that knew and lived) weren't exactly eager to offer up what they were really doing.

"We were helping this kid and this crazy guy (or dad) that was with her came in and shot us all." Gonna kill the kid over that?

---

I quickly evolved from "kill the kid" to "at least show some form of curiosity about her." I simply wanted Abby to not do the most cliche villain thing ever and leave the hero alive for what were so clearly plot purposes. I just wish the situation was acknowledged, explained, or expanded a *bit* more so as to not be *so* cliched/obvious in that sense. Obviously, Ellie has to live or there's no show. That it'd be done in a more inventive/less cliched manner was my only hope.

As for the coincidence aspect, there are "real life" coincidences, which can easily be explained (Joel was simply on patrol), but then there are writing coincidences, which aren't quite the same thing. Setting up a character (Abby) to achieve such a huge goal (kill Joel) comes with certain plot and pacing expectations. For any other show, setting up a character's primary goal in episode one of a season, rarely is that goal achieved in episode two. It's almost always a multi-episode arc, if not an entire season arc. Especially when the obstacle of it all was laid out in episode two, with the discovery of the fortification of the town. "Oh, wow, this is going to be much harder than they expected," I thought, which felt so perfectly/properly natural to me in terms of pacing, in terms of how the stakes had just been raised, etc. Now they have to pivot to a "plan B," thus adding to the multi-episode/season-long plight I and others were naturally expecting, re: Abby and her goal.

But then, minutes after having just raised the stakes/expectations, the game/filmmakers had Joel basically fall into Abby's lap. She didn't have *do* anything, or pivot to a plan B, or go through the steps of having to infiltrate the town, thus truly "earning" her kill. Instead, the raised stakes were essentially a fake out, the pacing/expectations were shot to hell, and this character we just met got her wish in the cheapest, most unearned fashion, resulting in the unexpected death of the beloved lead character. Granted, Mazin (the showrunner) & co CLEARLY wanted to subvert expectations in that regard, which is totally fine and obviously their prerogative. They seemingly valued the shock factor of Joel's early death over spending even an extra episode or two having Abby "earn" her kill in the audience's eyes. I'm just saying, personally, it didn't work for me, to the point of feeling cheap and far too coincidental.

Yeah, I think we got that message. Again and again and again

Don't add to the endless chorus posting about it if you don't want me to reply. I was simply explaining myself in a more detailed/nuanced way than I had previously, in attempt to address your specific way of raising the question.

Wow

A lot of shows have convenient or what I term it, "lazy writing". Do you always react this way. Because some have it over and over. Don't dare watch a Taylor Sheridan show if you hate lazy writing. This episode had it in just that one spot.

It's a message board thread about an insanely popular show.

One in which the main character was just shockingly/prematurely killed off in a fashion we haven't ever really seen before, making for one of the biggest zeitgeist TV moments in years.

That we can't have a discussion about it, wherein I can't respond to just some of the posts after posts after posts being just as redundant in their counter arguments as you guys claim I'm being in mine, is ridiculous.

What the hell else are we going to talk about for a week?

And sure, plenty of shows have lazy writing. But those shows aren't all prestige HBO shows, of which there are only a select few, where expectations are far higher.

Wait

Did you just try to justify all your rants.

I did not see that one coming.

Come on man. That's just "lazy responding"

I offered my take. I didn't tell you not to post (unlike you just did), but I did offer some feedback which is -> we got it. But thanks for the rant

This show I find ridiculous on many levels, but we're watching it and I expect to watch it to its conclusion. The questions I have are the following:

- is the "girl power" crammed down our throat at every turn a writer's creation or a video game reality?
- are the multiple homosexual relationships a writer's creation or a video game reality?

If they stem from a video game and the writers are simply trying to stay consistent, I can see it and have no problems with it. If it's not, maybe I'm the only one but the agenda on this show is so over the top it makes it hard for me to enjoy the show. We're to believe women have assumed leadership over all men in this apocalyptic world? In the case of Abby, we're to assume a ~20-year-old girl has assumed leadership over older men and she directs them without any pushback at all? It just seems so unrealistic, and, quite frankly, ridiculous.

I know, I know...maybe this show isn't for me.

I think it's pretty obvious this show isn't for you but you wanted to make sure we all knew it.

K bye.

I can't believe people are mad at TC wanting a lesbian to murdered on TV.

This show is bull***** I mean, zombies aren't real right? Right???

I love when someone posts that we're not supposed to offer opinions about TV shows on a message board that's designed to offer opinions about TV shows. Or maybe the problem is that the opinions being offered aren't superficial, but rather they actually dive into the quality of the show.

Oh, how silly!

Regarding the coincidences argument, maybe this comparison will help.... If you watch Andor, which is clearly one of the top TV shows produced right now, you'll see that they spent the entire Season One, twelve full episodes, showing the evolution of Cassian Andor from a common thief looking out for himself to a full-blown rebel willing to fight for something bigger than himself.

He didn't just commit to the rebellion after one run-in with the Empire. It took multiple run-ins between not only himself but friends and family. And people challenging his outlook on authority and personal responsibility. And being forced to become a teammate and work together while in prison rather than just remain a loner.

Season One of Andor was a beautifully realistic portrayal of how people and events can arrive at Point B when they started at Point A. But piling coincidence on top of coincidence on top of coincidence just so you can skip straight ahead to Point B for cheap thrills robs us of seeing all of that.

For TLOU videogame I was fine with it. Its just a videogame and those can't have 5 hr cut scenes. But for TLOU tv show it just feels cheap. And a so-called prestige show should not feel cheap.

And you're absolutely right, Taylor Sheridan tv shows are the absolute worst and why Yellowstone quickly became a joke.

I don't think most people care if somebody has a different opinion. I made it clear that I thought the season had dropped off from last year. Voiced my displeasure in a single post.

I just think that nobody wants to read a rehash of the same opinion in a wall of text 100 times. It's exhausting and I imagine 90% of folks skip over it.

TCTTS said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

I don't really get the angst about the writing/coincidence. They are both obviously very active on patrols. Of all of the belief suspension required from movies and shows, this is a nothingburger. I also doubt they know anything about Ellie. The cure work - especially given they were killing a kid to do it - clearly had to be very need-to-know, and I'm sure the nurses (or anyone else that knew and lived) weren't exactly eager to offer up what they were really doing.

"We were helping this kid and this crazy guy (or dad) that was with her came in and shot us all." Gonna kill the kid over that?

---

I quickly evolved from "kill the kid" to "at least show some form of curiosity about her." I simply wanted Abby to not do the most cliche villain thing ever and leave the hero alive for what were so clearly plot purposes. I just wish the situation was acknowledged, explained, or expanded a *bit* more so as to not be *so* cliched/obvious in that sense. Obviously, Ellie has to live or there's no show. That it'd be done in a more inventive/less cliched manner was my only hope.

As for the coincidence aspect, there are "real life" coincidences, which can easily be explained (Joel was simply on patrol), but then there are writing coincidences, which aren't quite the same thing. Setting up a character (Abby) to achieve such a huge goal (kill Joel) comes with certain plot and pacing expectations. For any other show, setting up a character's primary goal in episode one of a season, rarely is that goal achieved in episode two. It's almost always a multi-episode arc, if not an entire season arc. Especially when the obstacle of it all was laid out in episode two, with the discovery of the fortification of the town. "Oh, wow, this is going to be much harder than they expected," I thought, which felt so perfectly/properly natural to me in terms of pacing, in terms of how the stakes had just been raised, etc. Now they have to pivot to a "plan B," thus adding to the multi-episode/season-long plight I and others were naturally expecting, re: Abby and her goal.

But then, minutes after having just raised the stakes/expectations, the game/filmmakers had Joel basically fall into Abby's lap. She didn't have *do* anything, or pivot to a plan B, or go through the steps of having to infiltrate the town, thus truly "earning" her kill. Instead, the raised stakes were essentially a fake out, the pacing/expectations were shot to hell, and this character we just met got her wish in the cheapest, most unearned fashion, resulting in the unexpected death of the beloved lead character. Granted, Mazin (the showrunner) & co CLEARLY wanted to subvert expectations in that regard, which is totally fine and obviously their prerogative. They seemingly valued the shock factor of Joel's early death over spending even an extra episode or two having Abby "earn" her kill in the audience's eyes. I'm just saying, personally, it didn't work for me, to the point of feeling cheap and far too coincidental.

---

Another well reasoned post.

One thing I hadn't really considered until now, and I don't view this as a spoiler even though I've played the games, is I bet there will still be plenty of Joel the rest of the season via flashbacks and back story stuff between he and Ellie or other characters and events.

That's just a complete guess on my end but will at least help make the show more enjoyable moving forward than with Pedro Pascal just completely gone from the series imo.

RightWingConspirator said:

---

This show I find ridiculous on many levels, but we're watching it and I expect to watch it to its conclusion. The questions I have are the following:

- is the "girl power" crammed down our throat at every turn a writer's creation or a video game reality?
- are the multiple homosexual relationships a writer's creation or a video game reality?

If they stem from a video game and the writers are simply trying to stay consistent, I can see it and have no problems with it. If it's not, maybe I'm the only one but the agenda on this show is so over the top it makes it hard for me to enjoy the show. We're to believe women have assumed leadership over all men in this apocalyptic world? In the case of Abby, we're to assume a ~20-year-old girl has assumed leadership over older men and she directs them without any pushback at all? It just seems so unrealistic, and, quite frankly, ridiculous.

I know, I know...maybe this show isn't for me.

---

Honestly... does it matter? If the writers of the show are trying to push a message, how does that differ from the developers of the game trying to push that message?

Diggity said:

---

I don't think most people care if somebody has a different opinion. I made it clear that I thought the season had dropped off from last year. Voiced my displeasure in a single post.

I just think that nobody wants to read a rehash of the same opinion in a wall of text 100 times. It's exhausting and I imagine 90% of folks skip over it.

---

I count six multi-paragraph posts of mine in this thread since Sunday. And only three of them could be defined as "walls of text."

But the 20+ other posts from everyone else, all expressing the same exact opinion opposite mine, over and over, some also using walls of text, you're totally fine with.

Got it.

No probably doesn't matter but I may find it less irritating if the writers were simply following the video game than taking liberties to inject girl power and homosexual non-sense into a show, but that's just me.

Yes, that was my objective to tell you that the show isn't for me. If I didn't know better, I'd think some of you are the creators of it because you appear to take critical opinions personally. Here I thought this was a message board where opinions could be shared. And, I already wrote that we intend to watch the show in its entirety - no matter how many times I roll my eyes.

Do we think Joel told Tommy about what happened at the hotel? Or anyone else for that matter? I'm not really sure what the point of Joel meeting with the psychologist was now since there never was a breakthrough there where Ellie could learn the truth from Catherine O'Hara's character. We know Tommy knows that Ellie is immune from S2:E1. I suppose it makes sense that Joel would also tell Tommy about the hospital attack and what the Fireflies were up to, so maybe Ellie learns it there.

What, exactly, about this show is injecting "girl power" other than featuring a girl as a co-lead who has an attitude and wrestled with a guy once in a scene? Especially seeing as none of that seems to come at the expense of the male characters. It doesn't shun them for being tough and manly nor does it depict them as being incompetent because of their manliness. Joel, Tommy, Nick Offerman's character and his partner last season, etc have all been mostly positive examples of strong, competent men, and maybe I'm misremembering, but I can't really recall any signifiant scenes of them being shunned by women for having toxic masculinity or whatever, or being told woman could do X, Y, or Z better. Yes, there are also strong, competent women on the show, but it all feels very natural and normal to me and like a pretty good balance.

Also, why is merely the depiction of a homosexual relationship "nonsense" or any different than depicting a heterosexual relationship? Why can't homosexual relationships be depicted in the same way heterosexual relationships are?

So far….shot for shot the lesbianism is pretty much exactly the same in the game and the show….going back to season 1 (well….ok bill was technically gay in the game but the show took a much different approach but ain't opening that can of worms….it was good and different)….

As far as the girl power stuff….which I mean it kinda is but kinda isn't….really she's just an ignorant overcompentent teenager/brat that looks too young for her role so that doesn't help…..but Ellie in the game was more mellow than the show is depicting and she was still tough as hell….

I might be done after that episode.
The relationship between her and him was the core of the show, and now that's gone. I don't need to see zombie attacks every week, constant bleak landscapes (though that could change), nor do I really care about an extended fight, with 2 women both avenging their "fathers". I also feel less and less for Ellie, there's just not a lot redeeming about her, especially now without him. And homosexual, straight whatever, there is almost zero feminine presence on the show to balance everything else out, including Ellie.

Seriously. Someone please confirm that zombies aren't real. I'm starting to get scared.

Not something I'm comfortable confirming.

Definitely not as excited for this show as I was when we started the episode. I thought it was a good episode, I get the coincidence gripe, but the death feels more than the GoT Ned Stark death. I'm sure that's how we felt at the time with Ned too, but Joel was the show for us. Hell his face is still front and center of the graphics for the show.

A little intrigued to see where they go from here since people in the know are saying to have patience, but Pascal was awesome and will be sorely missed in this household.