*** THE LAST OF US *** (Non-Gamer Thread)

214,709 Views | 2419 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by jokershady
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
WES2006AG said:

Looking forward to people bumping this thread every few months with their hot take on the gay stuff. Seeing how much it bothers people makes this show the gift that keeps on giving.


You can't deny that these groomers have an agenda to show gays in loving, caring, empathic relationships. How dare they depict homos as people too, who have every right to exist on screen in the same ways straight couples do. Remember, though, pee-pee/vajajay good, pee-pee/pee-pee bad. Yuck! It's a zombie show! On HBO! A network not at all known for featuring sexual, cultural, and political subtext - if not outright text - in nearly everything it makes. Sad!
DTP02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Goldie Wilson said:

Oooo also means we don't get smoked by Larry Fitzgerald at Kyle - that game happened Sept 27, 2003.

Starting to like this timeline


Fungi Fitzgerald would have been even more difficult to cover.
Cave Johnson, CEO
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:

WES2006AG said:

Looking forward to people bumping this thread every few months with their hot take on the gay stuff. Seeing how much it bothers people makes this show the gift that keeps on giving.


You can't deny that these groomers have an agenda to show gays in loving, caring, empathic relationships. How dare they depict homos as people too, who have every right to exist on screen in the same ways straight couples do. Remember, though, pee-pee/vajajay good, pee-pee/pee-pee bad. Yuck! It's a zombie show! On HBO! A network not at all known for featuring sexual, cultural, and political subtext - if not outright text - in nearly everything it makes. Sad!


It's almost as if maybe those scenes of PDA were an important tool in telling the story of a vulnerable man who had shut the whole world out, even prior to the outbreak, and hadn't accepted who he was. Maybe his "doomsday" prep and crazy security/paranoia also paralleled his emotional state of not wanting to be vulnerable and become close to someone.

Based on the responses sometimes, you would assume this show had game of thrones level nudity and sexual explicitness. Like the two character were just constantly butt****ing the whole episode. I'm still confused as to how relatively mild homosexual PDA is woke, as if there would the same complaints if it were two lesbians.
Rudyjax
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:

WES2006AG said:

Looking forward to people bumping this thread every few months with their hot take on the gay stuff. Seeing how much it bothers people makes this show the gift that keeps on giving.


You can't deny that these groomers have an agenda to show gays in loving, caring, empathic relationships. How dare they depict homos as people too, who have every right to exist on screen in the same ways straight couples do. Remember, though, pee-pee/vajajay good, pee-pee/pee-pee bad. Yuck! It's a zombie show! On HBO! A network not at all known for featuring sexual, cultural, and political subtext - if not outright text - in nearly everything it makes. Sad!
Saxsoon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Cave Johnson, CEO said:

TCTTS said:

WES2006AG said:

Looking forward to people bumping this thread every few months with their hot take on the gay stuff. Seeing how much it bothers people makes this show the gift that keeps on giving.


You can't deny that these groomers have an agenda to show gays in loving, caring, empathic relationships. How dare they depict homos as people too, who have every right to exist on screen in the same ways straight couples do. Remember, though, pee-pee/vajajay good, pee-pee/pee-pee bad. Yuck! It's a zombie show! On HBO! A network not at all known for featuring sexual, cultural, and political subtext - if not outright text - in nearly everything it makes. Sad!


It's almost as if maybe those scenes of PDA were an important tool in telling the story of a vulnerable man who had shut the whole world out, even prior to the outbreak, and hadn't accepted who he was. Maybe his "doomsday" prep and crazy security/paranoia also paralleled his emotional state of not wanting to be vulnerable and become close to someone.

Based on the responses sometimes, you would assume this show had game of thrones level nudity and sexual explicitness. Like the two character were just constantly butt****ing the whole episode. I'm still confused as to how relatively mild homosexual PDA is woke, as if there would the same complaints if it were two lesbians.


If they had a scene with Ana De Armas and Scar Jo going at it this would be declared the greatest show of all time
bluefire579
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
C@LAg said:

PC release of the game yesterday.

Bad, unoptimized port. Total ****show

Avoid for a few weeks until they can release patches to fix the major issues

How could Sony blow the release of THIS game like that?
Having seen it in person, I can tell you that someone on the Sony business side saw the excitement around the show, wanted to strike while the excitement was high to bring in a new audience, and wouldn't take no for an answer when told it wasn't ready.

I also wonder about what kind of experience they brought in for porting a game to PC and how deep their compatibility testing was. It's a lot easier to develop an optimize a game when you know that every person who plays it is going to be doing so with the exact same specs as is the case with console exclusives.
DTP02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
WES2006AG said:

Looking forward to people bumping this thread every few months with their hot take on the gay stuff. Seeing how much it bothers people makes this show the gift that keeps on giving.


That's such a weird thing to take your joy from, but I'm about to make your week I guess:

I cringe just watching hetero kissing onscreen when the guy has a full beard. Two bearded guys mugging down with each other was exponentially worse.

I hope this knowledge sustains you thru the long offseason.

Also, this gave TCTTS an excuse for yet another simplistic, hypocritical rant evincing the trademark complete lack of self-awareness, which seems to be among his favorite things, so there's bonus joy being produced. Good stuff.
AggieArchitect04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
DTP02 said:

WES2006AG said:

Looking forward to people bumping this thread every few months with their hot take on the gay stuff. Seeing how much it bothers people makes this show the gift that keeps on giving.


That's such a weird thing to take your joy from, but I'm about to make your week I guess:

I cringe just watching hetero kissing onscreen when the guy has a full beard. Two bearded guys mugging down with each other was exponentially worse.

I hope this knowledge sustains you thru the long offseason.

rtpAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I did not like the gay sex being in that episode. it was gross to me. And guess what...thats OKAY.

just like gays love to say they didnt choose to be gay. I didnt choose to be grossed out by gay sex. its how god built me, right?




all that said...there shoulda been at least one nice set of boobs in there to counteract all the gay stuff, IMO!
Definitely Not A Cop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Only fitting we are still discussing this on page 69.
Goldie Wilson
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Nice
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
DTP02 said:

WES2006AG said:

Looking forward to people bumping this thread every few months with their hot take on the gay stuff. Seeing how much it bothers people makes this show the gift that keeps on giving.


That's such a weird thing to take your joy from, but I'm about to make your week I guess:

I cringe just watching hetero kissing onscreen when the guy has a full beard. Two bearded guys mugging down with each other was exponentially worse.

I hope this knowledge sustains you thru the long offseason.

Also, this gave TCTTS an excuse for yet another simplistic, hypocritical rant evincing the trademark complete lack of self-awareness, which seems to be among his favorite things, so there's bonus joy being produced. Good stuff.

It's always hilarious to me how I'm the one "ranting," yet you're totally cool with the people *actually* ranting, ad nauseam, day after day after day on this board, about the dumbest and most inconsequential sh*t known to man. Simply because you agree with them. In truth, there is nothing more "simplistic" than woke = bad, anti-woke = good, especially considering there are a thousand shades of nuance and subtlety between the two.
DTP02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You rant more than any three people on this board combined. That you somehow think what you do doesn't qualify as a rant is funny and almost too "on the nose" with my description.

You also regularly call out people for painting media/Hollywood with a broad brush but consistently do that with other posters who don't fit in your preferred categories or views (political, artistic, whatever).

The latest instance is what you just said to me:

Quote:

You're totally cool with the people *actually* ranting, ad nauseam, day after day after day on this board, about the dumbest and most inconsequential sh*t known to man.


You can cite some examples of this, surely, since it happens daily. Or I can save you the effort: that hasn't happened; I'm neither a ranter nor an outspoken supporter of people who rant about "the dumbest and most inconsequential stuff known to man." You assume otherwise because you paint with a broad and exaggerated brush anyone who finds themselves in opposition to your opinions.

You're clearly a fairly bright guy but you might be the least self-aware person on TexAgs, which is really saying something. I am not including the bots in that, at present, but with the pace of AI advancement…
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm sorry I take up so much space in your head.
Saxsoon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Guys stop fighting




DTP02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:

I'm sorry I take up so much space in your head.


You take up an inconsequential space in my head. I read your posts on here because I agree with some of what you say, some of what you say is interesting even if I don't agree, and for the rest, when you frequently go off the rails, it's an entertaining car crash even though a time-waster. If you don't want me to call you out for your blatant hypocrisy and simplistic rants don't "subtweet" at me and it's a whole lot less likely to happen.
AggieArchitect04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AgE2theBONE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
DTP02 said:



At the risk of reigniting a weeks-old debate, I think it's the sex scene and PDA more than the fact that the two were gay which clearly makes this woke and agenda-pushing. That's a conscious decision in the writers' room to be more aggressive and explicit in the depiction of gay relationships than hetero relationships.



You're kidding yourself if you won't admit to recognizing this or think this either coincidental or just about the story. It's absolutely an agenda.

In every movie or tv show/series, absolutely every single thing that happens on screen is a conscious decision made in the writer's room. And there's an "agenda" behind every one of those decisions. They don't just happen for no reason at all. That's just another way of saying there's a reason for every decision they make.

So of course they had a purpose for the characters being gay. I've seen several posts like yours that seem to suggest you've uncovered some sinister, ulterior plot, when all you're doing is stating the patently obvious.

There are millions of gay people and gay couples in America. There have been countless millions more who lived closeted lives and who struggled mightily as teens when they discovered they were attracted to the same sex, as opposed to most of us who are attracted to the opposite.

For most of our history they've been ostracized and persecuted, and the same has been in true in tv/films. So a lot of filmmakers today are just acknowledging the reality that's been deliberately avoided for a long time. Many of those tv shows/films go absolutely over the top with it to the point that it has the opposite of the intended effect.

This show treated it really well, I thought. I saw absolutely nothing unrealistic or over the top about it.

TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DTP02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AgE2theBONE said:

DTP02 said:



At the risk of reigniting a weeks-old debate, I think it's the sex scene and PDA more than the fact that the two were gay which clearly makes this woke and agenda-pushing. That's a conscious decision in the writers' room to be more aggressive and explicit in the depiction of gay relationships than hetero relationships.



You're kidding yourself if you won't admit to recognizing this or think this either coincidental or just about the story. It's absolutely an agenda.

In every movie or tv show/series, absolutely every single thing that happens on screen is a conscious decision made in the writer's room. And there's an "agenda" behind every one of those decisions. They don't just happen for no reason at all. That's just another way of saying there's a reason for every decision they make.

So of course they had a purpose for the characters being gay. I've seen several posts like yours that seem to suggest you've uncovered some sinister, ulterior plot, when all you're doing is stating the patently obvious.

There are millions of gay people and gay couples in America. There have been countless millions more who lived closeted lives and who struggled mightily as teens when they discovered they were attracted to the same sex, as opposed to most of us who are attracted to the opposite.

For most of our history they've been ostracized and persecuted, and the same has been in true in tv/films. So a lot of filmmakers today are just acknowledging the reality that's been deliberately avoided for a long time. Many of those tv shows/films go absolutely over the top with it to the point that it has the opposite of the intended effect.

This show treated it really well, I thought. I saw absolutely nothing unrealistic or over the top about it.




You should probably take note of the fact that the post I was responding to, from very early in the season, stated that there was no agenda in that episode. And that was the general tenor early from many on this thread (including the SOP of ridiculing those who believed otherwise), until the weight of the evidence, including the director's own comments, made that position untenable, at which point the goalposts were moved by some (without any acknowledgment or recognition that, oops, I guess we were wrong to be arguing that point and criticizing those who disagreed with us).

So you're agreeing with me on the point of my post and disagreeing with the guy I disagreed with, while presenting your opinion as if you disagree with me.

We apparently do disagree as to the visceral reaction to two bearded guys mugging down, which is fine by me as you're as entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. If there are people on this thread (and it's evident there are, based on some of their comments) who can't handle that sort of disagreement, that says a lot about their issues.
cr0wbar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Rudyjax
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
DTP02 said:

AgE2theBONE said:

DTP02 said:



At the risk of reigniting a weeks-old debate, I think it's the sex scene and PDA more than the fact that the two were gay which clearly makes this woke and agenda-pushing. That's a conscious decision in the writers' room to be more aggressive and explicit in the depiction of gay relationships than hetero relationships.



You're kidding yourself if you won't admit to recognizing this or think this either coincidental or just about the story. It's absolutely an agenda.

In every movie or tv show/series, absolutely every single thing that happens on screen is a conscious decision made in the writer's room. And there's an "agenda" behind every one of those decisions. They don't just happen for no reason at all. That's just another way of saying there's a reason for every decision they make.

So of course they had a purpose for the characters being gay. I've seen several posts like yours that seem to suggest you've uncovered some sinister, ulterior plot, when all you're doing is stating the patently obvious.

There are millions of gay people and gay couples in America. There have been countless millions more who lived closeted lives and who struggled mightily as teens when they discovered they were attracted to the same sex, as opposed to most of us who are attracted to the opposite.

For most of our history they've been ostracized and persecuted, and the same has been in true in tv/films. So a lot of filmmakers today are just acknowledging the reality that's been deliberately avoided for a long time. Many of those tv shows/films go absolutely over the top with it to the point that it has the opposite of the intended effect.

This show treated it really well, I thought. I saw absolutely nothing unrealistic or over the top about it.




You should probably take note of the fact that the post I was responding to, from very early in the season, stated that there was no agenda in that episode. And that was the general tenor early from many on this thread (including the SOP of ridiculing those who believed otherwise), until the weight of the evidence, including the director's own comments, made that position untenable, at which point the goalposts were moved by some (without any acknowledgment or recognition that, oops, I guess we were wrong to be arguing that point and criticizing those who disagreed with us).

So you're agreeing with me on the point of my post and disagreeing with the guy I disagreed with, while presenting your opinion as if you disagree with me.

We apparently do disagree as to the visceral reaction to two bearded guys mugging down, which is fine by me as you're as entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. If there are people on this thread (and it's evident there are, based on some of their comments) who can't handle that sort of disagreement, that says a lot about their issues.


No goal posts were moved. I said from the beginning that it was all about depiction. i.e. showing a gay couple as normal/caring/empathetic. That was Mazin's only "agenda." That's what he was trying to "trick" people into seeing.

You're the ones who, for some insane reason, ascribe malicious intent to those actions. You're the ones who act as if the intent is to make your kids gay or promote "sin" or satanism or pedophilia or whatever other nonsense, and that's what we push back on. When, in reality, it's simply to show that these people are no different than you or me. It's no one's fault but your own that you find that to be an "agenda" and so offensive.
Engine10
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Lathspell
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Madmarttigan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Me - Hmmm what's going on in here


Immediate regret. This thread should have been nuked after page one. It is the worst thread since the little mermaid, possibly the worst ever.

cupcakesprinkles
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It was an okay show. Not bad but not great.

I wish they had more flashbacks because the little they had were extremely interesting.

My favorite part was when that sweet old little lady scientist told the general to bomb the whole city (her included) to stop the outbreak. Then she politely asked to be taken home because she knew the life she had was over

I wish they had shown the "bad things" that Joel did to make him so feared.

The show needed more episodes to flesh things out because they chose 2-3 episodes to focus on a very narrow arc which hamstrung the overall progress of the storyline.
jokershady
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ill just leave this here....

Lathspell
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Wow... I didn't even think about the fact that no one in this universe got to see Return of the King...

No wonder everyone is so angry.
Phrasing
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That was hilarious. "Nick Offers a Man a Home" had me rolling. And "This is the Body of Christ - And this is the Body of George". And the F Bomb sequence. Dying.
Seven Costanza
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't actually care about the possible inconsistency of this, but were there any malls that had arcade games from the 80s in 2003?
Swarely
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There certainly were in the valley!
jokershady
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Seven Costanza said:

I don't actually care about the possible inconsistency of this, but were there any malls that had arcade games from the 80s in 2003?
I forget the mall but there was a mall in Houston that had a huge arcade in it when I was in high school….I believe it was Memorial City mall
Urban Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
My ultra hot take (that's sarcasm by the way, seems we must overstate literally everything on this board) was that if you're still arguing or complaining about the episode where they got the gay on, you probably were too hung up on it to appreciate that single episode was some of the best television produced in a long time. No, I am not comfortable watching gay men do gay men stuff. But I was 100% dialed in well before it became apparent that was going to be a part of that back story.

A mini movie about a serious Ron Swanson in the post apocalypse, with amazing writing, humor, and endearing relatability (for long together couples). "Currently nothing" may be the funniest thing I've heard in years. The spat could have easily been me and my wife of 23 years. Humor. Relatability. So well done.

Overall, the season kind of dragged for me but finished pretty strong.
swc93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Seven Costanza said:

I don't actually care about the possible inconsistency of this, but were there any malls that had arcade games from the 80s in 2003?


Terre Haute, Indiana had a mall arcade until at least 2006. Indiana, like most of the midwest, is 15-20 years behind.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.