When the first episode of HBO’s The Last of Us premiered, GameSpot posted a video showing how closely a particular scene matched a cutscene from the game, dialogue, camera angles, and all. Some fans reacted by saying it wasn’t exact enough a copy (some people felt it necessary to highlight the actors didn’t look and act exactly the same as the video game characters), while others, like myself, had the opposite reaction – what’s the point?What would the point of a shot-for-for replication of the game be? As it is now, the show draws from the game while adding characters and plot points in, as it should. Catching shots and scenes copied wholesale from the source material is a cool easter egg for fans of the game, and it doesn’t detract from the experience of those who haven’t played it. The writing was already good, so it’s not bad television! But what exactly is the purpose of an adaptation if not to adapt?
Here’s the thing about adaptations – all mediums are different, and all mediums have their own affordances. Video games have player agency and gameplay to fill the time between cutscenes. TV audiences don’t control the characters in a show, it’s a fundamentally different kind of experience. And that’s okay, actually. The removal of these aspects is a natural consequence of adaptation, so the showrunners should be tweaking and changing things, otherwise, the story wouldn’t be as effective.
We should trust them to make those changes; they’ve done a great job so far. The timeline has been adjusted to excellent effect, they’ve played with the worldbuilding, and they’ve fleshed out characters and tweaked plot points. Episode three is the most obvious example of this, with the expansion of Bill and Frank’s relationship into an entire episode. Some accused the showrunners of turning what was, in the grand scheme of the game’s story, a glancing interaction, into a “filler episode”, but I have a major issue with this assertion.
My problem with this statement is, not least, the misunderstanding of what a “filler episode” is, but more importantly, it seems like a willful denial of what television is meant to be. The Last of Us is, at its core, a game about relationships and reasons to live, acceptance, and so much more. Of course the show focuses on relationships between people, it’s about people. It’s not filler, it’s storytelling.
The showrunners also added Kathleen into the show, despite her not existing in the game at all. There’s some theorising that it’s to prepare the viewers for Abby’s appearance in later seasons, since there seem to be many parallels between her character and Kathleen’s. Whether or not this is true, it still serves an explicit immediate purpose: adding conflict and pressure. Giving characters motivation to do something is good. If it’s possibly breadcrumbing for future events? That’s also good.
Adaptations, from any source material, don’t always have the best reputation, I know. Game of Thrones flopped in the end, The Witcher is suffering a huge overhaul, there’s a lot of mid Resident Evil movies, and countless downright awful book adaptations. But video game adaptations are having a resurgence, and the showrunners of The Last of Us deserve to create a television show that stands on its own. If you want to watch something that replicates the game exactly, go watch a playthrough. Let the writers write.