Bill, who lived alone, sits down at the table with Frank. The two share music. They cultivate the home together.
A world collapsed due to an infection that turned people aggressive. However, what the third episode focuses on more than the monsters is the lives of the two characters. Bill, who was accustomed to surviving alone, is now taking care of a home and sharing meals with someone.
Even if the world ends, household chores will not cease. I believe this dining table more accurately represents the purpose of the artwork than a scene of fighting against infected individuals. It shows that even even after one’s life is saved, there must be someone one wants to live with, and that person also has their own desired life.
The journeys of Joel, a smuggler who has lost his daughter, and Ellie, a girl who is immune to the infection, should also be viewed through this lens. If one simply follows the feeling of not wanting to lose someone, one risks missing the desires of the person being protected. I appreciate that this drama helps viewers understand the feelings of wanting to protect loved ones. However, it does not grant anyone the right to make decisions for those they love.
Love sets the table before it stops the monster
I appreciate that episode 3 distinguishes between saving lives and preserving life. The time Bill and Frank spend together provides a tangible reason to survive.
For Bill, who had been living alone, the most important thing was to protect himself from external threats. However, when he started living with Frank, things inside the home also became important. The story of the two men doesn’t end with securing a safe home.
Having something to eat and sharing a meal with someone are two different experiences. The former helps you get through the day, while the latter makes you want to return to that place again tomorrow. The drama repeatedly depicts these meals, illustrating the difference without explicit explanation.
Sharing music also serves the same purpose. While it may not be an action directly related to survival, it allows one to understand the other person. Bill doesn’t treat Frank solely as someone to be protected from danger; he accepts him as someone to spend time with.
I found myself wanting to see the two people sitting at the table for longer. I was more curious about how long this life would last than about what the next danger might be. This means that the disaster drama has successfully created what it should protect.
When taking care of a home together, one must consider the other person’s preferences. If one lives alone, they can decide everything according to their own will, but when living together, one must also take into account the wishes of others. Love becomes a more complex matter than simply saying “I like it” in this context.
This difference is important. While the feeling of protecting the other person can be held by one person, the way to live together cannot be decided by one person alone. If Frank’s desires are removed, Bill’s home may be safe, but it cannot be a home for both of them.
Therefore, this shared living experience serves as my benchmark for understanding Joel and Ellie. Joel has lost a daughter, and he is afraid of losing someone again. However, the life Ellie wants cannot be solely explained by that fear.
The mere fact that someone values another person does not guarantee that they truly understand that person. The person being protected may speak, choose, and sometimes desire things that differ from the expectations of the protector. Episode 3 builds upon this obvious truth through meals, music, and moments within the home.
After seeing the lives of Bill and Frank, it becomes difficult to judge a person solely based on the size of their feelings. Even after developing feelings and wanting to live together, it is necessary to ask whether one can accept the other person’s desired life.
The two actors do not erase the feelings of the protected party
Pedro Pascal and Bella Ramsey bring to life both the fear of the person trying to protect and the desire of the person being protected. As a result, the relationship does not become a story in which Joel alone is desperate.
In the sixth episode, Pascal’s portrayal of Joel becomes even more evident. When he confesses his fear of losing someone again in front of his younger sibling, the underlying fear that he had been suppressing beneath his tough exterior is revealed. There is a difference between someone who knows how to protect others and someone who is confident in their ability to protect someone until the very end.
Before I confronted Joel about this, I felt my resolve weakening. It was painful to realize that his closeness to Ellie wasn’t bringing him only joy. The more precious a relationship becomes, the more one must be prepared to face the possibility of loss.
Pascal places that fear beneath Joel’s words. Therefore, it is difficult to interpret his stoic demeanor as mere coldness. However, understanding his fear does not mean condoning all of his decisions.
Ramsey, who plays Ellie, maintains that balance. In episode 7, the time she spends with her friend Riley brings out both rough jokes and childlike curiosity. Even before becoming someone’s ward, Ellie had joys and relationships of her own.
After experiencing the threat in episode 8, the difference is even more painful. Because I remember the child who was joking before, I cannot simply summarize the shock on their face as “they survived.” Surviving physically does not necessarily mean that one’s feelings return to their original state.
I appreciate that Ramsey doesn’t simply portray Ellie as a pitiable child. Ellie is someone who hopes that her own survival will be of benefit to others. It is important to understand not only what Joel fears, but also what Ellie desires.
The argument between the two actors is also necessary. It is because people with different ideas clash and then come to rely on each other. Because one person’s desire does not disappear simply because they have become closer, I trust this relationship more.
Nick Offerman, who plays Bill, gradually lowers his guard as he eats and sits at the piano. The change in his demeanor is evident as he begins to accept the intruder not as someone to be stopped, but as someone to be kept close.
Perhaps, in order to strengthen the relationships that Joel and Ellie built through words and facial expressions, they needed more events and combat experiences.
I do not agree with the statement that something is weak because there is little combat
The decision to reduce the combat sequences was the right one. However, it is regrettable that the time Joel and Ellie spend together feels too short.
I agree with the criticism that the events and relationships progress too quickly within the total of 9 episodes. While I understand that the two characters become closer, there are moments when I wish I could see more of their daily interactions. I would have preferred to see more of the process of their relationship changing, rather than just the results of that change.
However, I do not agree with the idea that that time should be filled with a struggle against infected individuals. When people overcome risks together, reasons for mutual trust arise. That being said, it does not automatically mean that one will understand the other person’s desired way of life.
Simply using more ammunition does not automatically qualify someone for a guardian certification.
The original game allows the player to directly control movement and combat. Because the player moves and overcomes dangers, they also directly participate in protecting others. The player’s feelings about Joel’s actions are intertwined with the experience of actively contributing in this way.
The drama reduces the repetition and focuses on the characters’ facial expressions and decisions. I believe this difference is important. Instead of fighting to help Joel, the viewers observe what he fears and what choices he makes.
What is important here is not the outcome of the fight. It is about how the fear of losing someone can transform into an attitude of not listening to the other person. Increasing the amount of combat does not make this boundary any clearer.
What I desired most was the time for Joel and Ellie to exchange words. Even the way they responded to jokes and reacted after arguments helped their relationship grow. I wanted to experience those moments for longer, recognizing the truth that while they cared for each other, their desires were different.
Therefore, the regret lies not in the small number of combats, but in the brevity of the companionship. I want to see more about how the experiences they shared have affected the two individuals, rather than simply adding more events to the story. It is easy to miss the nuances when one event immediately follows another.
The time saved by reducing combat scenes is undoubtedly valuable. However, the true value of that time is realized when it is used to develop relationships. So, where did this drama make the best use of that time?
Episode 3 does not deviate from the main storyline, but rather establishes a standard
The stories of Bill and Frank do not hinder Joel’s journey. Instead, they demonstrate a love that accepts the other person’s wishes, and they provide a standard against which to evaluate Joel’s actions.
The decision to expand the short side story from the original work into a longer narrative, through a period of prolonged cohabitation, was the correct one. If only Joel and Ellie were present, the story could easily be interpreted as one driven solely by the fear of losing someone and the feelings associated with love. However, the inclusion of these other characters provides a balanced perspective, showing the joys of love with the same weight as the pain of potential loss.
Here, eating meals and managing a home go beyond the value of everyday life. They demonstrate how the desires of one person can alter the plans of another. What was once useful stubbornness when living alone is not always the correct approach when living with someone else.
Being a homeowner does not make one the owner of a cohabitant’s life.
For Bill, Frank is both someone who needs protection and someone who is changing the way they live together. It is not enough to simply provide security; it is also necessary to listen to what the other person wants.
Therefore, I do not agree with the criticism that the third episode slows down the main plot. While the action may stop, the questions posed to Joel become clearer. Does the strength of one’s desire to protect justify pushing away the desires of others?
This question is not intended to suggest that Bill should be considered the ideal example. Bill, too, was someone who was accustomed to surviving on his own. Because a person who has lived independently must go through a process of sharing life with others, the change is more profound than words can express.
Simply stating that the two people lived together for a long time would have been insufficient. By showing the table settings, the music, and the time spent caring for the home, one can understand what they created together. This reveals the essence of a life worth preserving.
When placed side by side with Joel’s fear, the difference becomes clear. Love involves taking the risk of loss, but it also means listening to the other person’s wishes. If one only focuses on the former, the pain of the protector can overshadow the desires of the person being protected.
I have not fallen out of love with Joel because of this comparison. While understanding his desperation, I was able to ask Ellie about her feelings separately. The strength of this drama lies in its willingness to ask such questions, even of those close to us.
Therefore, when making the final decision based on this criterion, how far does the drama extend its portrayal of forgiveness in matters of love?
The final question is sharp, but it sets the stage too hastily
The ending is powerful because it does not turn love into a get-out-of-jail card, but the build-up to the conflict feels rushed. The ending contains spoilers, so skip it if you don’t want to know.
I understood Joel’s fear until the very end. The fear of losing someone again had been built up sufficiently through his previous confessions and experiences. If he had been suddenly asked to abandon those feelings, it would have made the character seem unbelievable.
However, the drama does not simply allow the viewer to accept the feelings being expressed. It forces Joel to ask Ellie directly whether what is important to him is also what she wants. The conviction of the person who wants to protect and the desires of the person being protected are not always the same.
Here, it is important to remember what Ellie hoped for in her own survival. For the child who wanted her survival to be of help to someone, safety is not the only wish. Without that wish, only Joel’s feelings remain, and Ellie’s life is erased.
However, this question applies equally to those who are promoting treatment. “Firefly” is an organization that resists military control and seeks a cure for the infection. It does not have the right to disregard the wishes of the individuals involved, even with the objective of saving many lives.
The drama does not adequately explain the process to Ellie and obtain her consent. Therefore, while I felt the weight of the final conflict, I also sensed that the events leading up to it were rushed. The drama should have spent more time showing what Ellie needed to know and what choices she could make.
The discussion is not about whether treatment is possible. If those seeking treatment have expressed a willingness to save a life, then they must listen to what the person before them wants. There is no reason to exempt them from the same questions that were asked of Joel.
This omission quickly adds reasons to understand Joel, but it limits the space for hearing what Ellie has to say. While the two sides struggle to determine who is more desperate, the character in question is pushed to the background. Because the story directly addresses this issue, I find this rushed pacing to be more regrettable.
Despite this, the ending does not resolve everything solely through Joel’s love. Even as one’s understanding of Joel grows, the discomfort remains that Ellie’s wishes must be considered separately. It is a positive aspect that the ending ensures Ellie’s wishes are not forgotten. However, the fact that the ending was rushed, starting from a situation where Ellie’s opinion was not sought, is a point of criticism.
In particular, the scene in the hospital where Joel kills people does not end with the satisfaction of rescue. While I wanted to bring Ellie back, I could not ignore the people he was killing. The choice to reduce the previous combat scenes gains power here. The phrase “saving a loved one” does not erase the consequences of violence.
Love is understood, but the right to make decisions is not granted
I like that “The Last of Us” helps the audience understand Joel, but doesn’t exclusively take his side. The feeling of fearing the loss of someone is very real. However, that doesn’t mean the desires of the person being protected are any less important.
Bill and Frank’s cohabitation embodies the principles of a life well-lived. Pascal and Ramsey demonstrate that even when two people desire the same life, they may harbor different fears and aspirations. They uphold to the end the judgment that feelings of love and actions of respect towards each other do not automatically align.
My rating is 4 out of 5 stars. Every time Joel’s fear influences the narrative, it prompts a re-evaluation of Ellie’s desires. However, I deduct points for briefly skipping over certain sections of their companionship and for hastily resolving the final conflict, preventing a proper opportunity to hear the perspectives of all parties involved. The questions posed are accurate, but the process of raising those questions could have been more thorough.
If you are interested in the process of people becoming a family in the face of disaster, then the ninth episode is worth writing about. It is especially recommended for those who want a story that questions even the actions of their favorite characters. However, if you are looking for frequent combat scenes with infected individuals or the satisfaction of comfortably supporting the protagonist, then this episode may not be for you.
When watching, let’s not just count who is saving whom. The relationship becomes clearer by observing the moments when someone asks the other what they want, and the moments when they don’t. In episode 3, the meals and home decorating are not just breaks, but serve as a benchmark for this journey.
Next, I recommend the original game, “The Last of Us” (2013). It is a good way to compare how your feelings about Joel change when you move and fight through the same journey yourself. At that time, it is important not to use the same words for “understanding” and “permission.”
I understand Joel’s fear. However, I cannot allow him to answer for Ellie.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Can you understand the drama even if you haven’t played the game?
Even if you are not familiar with the game, you can follow the characters and the setting of the infected world. First, instead of looking for the game’s plot, it is better to focus on how Joel and Ellie interact with each other.
How many episodes are in Season 1 of 2023?
Season 1 consists of a total of 9 episodes. This review covers the entire first season of 2023 and does not include actors or storylines from subsequent seasons.
What is the biggest difference from the original game?
The series focuses on the characters’ facial expressions and decisions, minimizing repetitive travel and combat. In particular, the story of Bill and Frank, expanded through their long cohabitation, is juxtaposed with Joel’s journey, highlighting a love that accepts the other’s desires.
Is it a drama with many scenes depicting fights against infected individuals?
This work does not primarily focus on frequent combat. While violence and threats are intense, the core theme revolves around the process of people growing closer and trying to protect each other, leading to conflicts. Those expecting continuous action may be disappointed.
Can the third episode be skipped because it is separate from the main storyline?
It is recommended not to skip it. Bill and Frank’s lives illustrate the difference between protecting one’s own life and respecting the life that the other person desires. Remembering this principle will allow for a more accurate understanding of the relationship between Joel and Ellie.
