There's a difference between the kind of savage harrowingly unflinching violence a film like Irreversible's head crushing scene shows and then a sloppily cobbled together scene that is only shoehorned in to make Kenny look "rad" for exacting that kind of barbaric disfiguring he did
Am I just an uncultured swine who wouldn't know a good narrative if it came up and broke its foot off in my ass, or am I really not seeing a big difference here
I'm seeing a brutal scene of a man getting his head turned into a bowl of soup, and a brutal scene of a man getting his head turned into a bowl of soup
Firstly, I never stated I disliked Carver's death. Just that the choice to stay and watch was only there to fill a very structured checklist… more. There's a difference between the kind of savage harrowingly unflinching violence a film like Irreversible's head crushing scene shows and then a sloppily cobbled together scene that is only shoehorned in to make Kenny look "rad" for exacting that kind of barbaric disfiguring he did... with no impact to the later narrative, pulling away any and all sense of consequence from the scene is what I found gross.
He's won cause he iron-fucked Carver's face to an edible paste and no one looks at him or Clem (if she chooses to stay) the same way. I urge you look up Irreversible, cause the scene is nauseating, yet is less graphic than the schlock of a "badass" scene Kenny had. I don't take one scene, I study the effects and that's what'll determine how I think it was handled.
And as for Clem killing Kenny; w… [view original content]
I still don't think that justifies the fact that Ben took the hatchet-- the hatchet that he himself gave to Lee to begin with-- that was blocking a door covered in blood, or more specifically, the door they entered the building through, the door they were worried the walkers might have seen them go through
Maybe it's just me, but I simply don't see any good way to explain nor defend this scene
And I'm a guy that sticks up for quite a few scenes that most people give shit to, so I'd like to think that's saying something
I beg to differ, in all honesty.
It would not seem a bad idea in the moment to take the hatchet out and quickly deliver it to Kenny, sinc… moree nothing else was opening the door, and the walkers had already vanished due to requirements of the plot. Them coming back right after that was extremely unrealistic, but it is not Ben's fault. That was the writers'.
And even though I disagreed, I subconsciously liked your comment before realizing what was going on, because fuck it, that was one magnificient post.
No, I wouldn't say you're uncultured swine, you just don't understand the context. Something that's indicative of a good narrative and something his death went without.
It's not the murder that's so unflinching, it's that throughout the film the characters are actively searching for a rapist that recently damn near raped and beat a woman to death, and the scene was the conclusion of a very cumulatively building manhunt that ends not with violence being the center, but consequence. One thing the scene doesn't show is that the man they killed is not their rapist but rather another club goer who was planning on raping the rapist they were looking for.
No one person "wins," it's all morose nihilistic consequence. Something I felt Carver's death lacked severely.
There's a difference between the kind of savage harrowingly unflinching violence a film like Irreversible's head crushing scene shows and th… moreen a sloppily cobbled together scene that is only shoehorned in to make Kenny look "rad" for exacting that kind of barbaric disfiguring he did
Am I just an uncultured swine who wouldn't know a good narrative if it came up and broke its foot off in my ass, or am I really not seeing a big difference here
I'm seeing a brutal scene of a man getting his head turned into a bowl of soup, and a brutal scene of a man getting his head turned into a bowl of soup
Yes! But people theorically choose one over the other because of who they are as a character instead of their ages.
It usually happens th… moreat people are ageist in cases like this one, though. I am just pointing out that you are not morally obliged to be ageist.
In real life? I would save Clementine, of course, she's a kid!
In a videogme cuz all this story is a videogame an none of this character well maybe doug a little but evereyone else is not real? Lee, he's a better character. He only lacked of, you know, dark side (not determinant dark side) and character evolution (HE DIDN'T CHANGE THOUGH THE WHOLE GAME!)
And as for Clem killing Kenny; well yeah, I thought it was fucking hype that she finally after all the pussy footing she and everyone did, murdered a man who wasn't above sneering a child for attempting to step in and rescue a weak (albeit shit character),
I'll say it again, and please know i am TRYING to understand you here but how does that make you any better than Kenny? How does the horrible things you say of him make you nicer than some of the things he's said? You condone her killing him for what he did to Jane which i can understand given what had happened, however, you DON'T condone what he did to Larry (which is also not ok before you bite my head off), but in reality, it's someone killing another person which makes both death's the same. Both are wrong and unnacceptable. So please tell me your logic as to why you think Clem killing is acceptable, but Kenny killing is not???? Both had reasons to do it. I know you'll always hate him which is fine but i wish you weren't so damn hateful and biased sometimes. Not because it's Kenny or over a fictional character but it just doesn't give a good impression of you as a person sometimes.
Firstly, I never stated I disliked Carver's death. Just that the choice to stay and watch was only there to fill a very structured checklist… more. There's a difference between the kind of savage harrowingly unflinching violence a film like Irreversible's head crushing scene shows and then a sloppily cobbled together scene that is only shoehorned in to make Kenny look "rad" for exacting that kind of barbaric disfiguring he did... with no impact to the later narrative, pulling away any and all sense of consequence from the scene is what I found gross.
He's won cause he iron-fucked Carver's face to an edible paste and no one looks at him or Clem (if she chooses to stay) the same way. I urge you look up Irreversible, cause the scene is nauseating, yet is less graphic than the schlock of a "badass" scene Kenny had. I don't take one scene, I study the effects and that's what'll determine how I think it was handled.
And as for Clem killing Kenny; w… [view original content]
obviously Lee, unlike clementine... he is the protagonist we need and deserve, he is strong, brave, smart, a men with potential and charisma… more, he can be a real badass and a potential leader, clementine is nothing compared to him, she lacks everything Lee has, clementine receives more credit than she deserves, she didn't accomplish anything worthy and everyone treats her like a "heroine", a "badass", a "great survivor" puff....! Arya from GoT is a badass! Ellie from TLOU is badass, clementine's character in comparison is bullshit! If i were in the apocalypse, i'd rather have Lee in my group than a useless little girl like clementine, after all.... what use does she has? the only use i can think is: selling me and my entire group to a stranger on a radio and get everyone killed
i play the game more than once, so eventually i'd go over both options.
It's a game, i do what i want, if killing a bunch of Cops and innoncent civilians in GTA isn't seen as "immoral" or most gamers don't care about it, why can't i choose Lee?
People do the same things in the Mafia games, and be honest, if you've played Halo, you know you've attacked the Marines on purpose to be funny.
who cares.
i've never seen people take games so seriously. honestly it's kinda annoying.
Yes! But people theorically choose one over the other because of who they are as a character instead of their ages.
It usually happens th… moreat people are ageist in cases like this one, though. I am just pointing out that you are not morally obliged to be ageist.
He says is better to let a man being tortured and murdered than letting a woman being tortured or murdered. As if there was any difference between us and them. Why can't a woman be as strong as a man? Why can't a man be as graceful as a woman?
obviously Lee, unlike clementine... he is the protagonist we need and deserve, he is strong, brave, smart, a men with potential and charisma… more, he can be a real badass and a potential leader, clementine is nothing compared to him, she lacks everything Lee has, clementine receives more credit than she deserves, she didn't accomplish anything worthy and everyone treats her like a "heroine", a "badass", a "great survivor" puff....! Arya from GoT is a badass! Ellie from TLOU is badass, clementine's character in comparison is bullshit! If i were in the apocalypse, i'd rather have Lee in my group than a useless little girl like clementine, after all.... what use does she has? the only use i can think is: selling me and my entire group to a stranger on a radio and get everyone killed
i play the game more than once, so eventually i'd go over both options.
It's a game, i do what i want, if killing a bunch of Cops and inn… moreoncent civilians in GTA isn't seen as "immoral" or most gamers don't care about it, why can't i choose Lee?
People do the same things in the Mafia games, and be honest, if you've played Halo, you know you've attacked the Marines on purpose to be funny.
who cares.
i've never seen people take games so seriously. honestly it's kinda annoying.
I don't know if he's "a good lad". He's a total stranger at the other side of the screen. I don't know him. If you want to know if I was insulting you, then no. I wasn't insulting you.
I mean, of course it would be perfectly fine, but not for the reason that they are a "man," a "woman," an "adult," or a "child." Either of those four would be either sexist or ageist.
I wouldn't apply courtesy to a post-apocalyptic life and death situation, to be honest.
I mean, saving a child over an adult is an acceptable behavior, and it isn't morally inferior to saving the adult, but if there isn't any reason to save the child over the adult other than just because the kid is younger, then your actions were sexist. Not immoral.
I think Ben might have been "too far gone" by this point. He never even wanted to go to Crawford, was getting more and more guilt ridden about Kenny's family and all the terrifying stuff he had already been through was likely taking it's toll. He saw a weapon lying around and grabbed it without thinking clearly at all. The fact that he asked to be killed soon after supports this.
I'm not sure if my post is a good or valid explanation but it's an explanation anyhow... and yeah the scene came across as a little ridiculous.
I still don't think that justifies the fact that Ben took the hatchet-- the hatchet that he himself gave to Lee to begin with-- that was blo… morecking a door covered in blood, or more specifically, the door they entered the building through, the door they were worried the walkers might have seen them go through
Maybe it's just me, but I simply don't see any good way to explain nor defend this scene
And I'm a guy that sticks up for quite a few scenes that most people give shit to, so I'd like to think that's saying something
Lee hasn't got a real personality, he was only the projection of my personality. How could I like somebody who is a part of me? I know it sounds foolish, but that's the way I feel. The tought to save myself is very weird.
By the way, I like my little Clem so much. Like all of us.
i don't exactly think that jane set off any alarms that she had killed the baby. in the past, she mentioned how the baby would be hard to take care of and most likely would be a huge liability. when kenny accused her of killing AJ, she even yelled back that she didn't kill him. i believe that kenny's decisions in S1 were a bit more forgivable than S2.
i personally believe that ben pulling the hatchet from the door was more the writer's fault and less a choice that his character would do. he's a lot smarter than that and i believe that was just implemented to cause some sort of conflict to move the story along.
back on the topic of kenny, he's definitely mentally damaged. there's no doubt that he's gone through a lot. his rash decisions end up getting people killed though.
(sorry for the late reply, i didn't notice that you responded to me.)
Oh i know, and i never said his reasons were good but they certainly weren't all bad either. With Jane, she was someone he never trusted or … moreliked, what he did was an assumption because she made it seem like she had killed the baby after previously implying she never wanted the baby around. Again it wasn't right what he did and neither was what she did. Point is, in his mind he always had a reason to do what he did, just not always great decisions.
I mentioned Ben as an example and called him dumb given the fact he was stupid enough to remove an object stuck in a door handle keeping walkers out. Common sense would tell you why it was there in the first place. Anyway it was only an example. Believe it or not i liked Ben, i took pity on the guy.
Technically it is true, whether we like it or not, saving someone only based on age and nothing else. But at the end of the day, what characteristics does one need to have to be rightfully saved by us? Both choices are wrong, both choices are right. We are just humans who want to 'judge', measure others' worth, other humans. That should be done by someone perfectly objective, someone that's not biased.
I'd personally (most likely, I hope it never ever happens irl) save a child over someone who's quite old (that's why I said granny, since there is a contrast between their ages) because I feel like I am giving them some kind of a wild chance to truly experience life, where the old man/woman/person have already done a lot of things. It is, of course, not right of me to cut that old person's life because each day matters and each days makes life.
I wouldn't apply courtesy to a post-apocalyptic life and death situation, to be honest.
I mean, saving a child over an adult is an accept… moreable behavior, and it isn't morally inferior to saving the adult, but if there isn't any reason to save the child over the adult other than just because the kid is younger, then your actions were sexist. Not immoral.
I am tagging @MarijaaNo7.
Of course there are no real rules or laws in the half-destroyed world. But everyone has their own view of right and wrong, or rather right and a bit less right in this case.
Of course there are no real rules or laws in the half-destroyed world. But everyone has their own view of right and wrong, or rather right and a bit less right in this case.
Tell me about your lucid dreams so I can inaccurately analyze you with the help of a messy dream meaning website that you have to pay to use! [insert evil laugh here]
Comments
Am I just an uncultured swine who wouldn't know a good narrative if it came up and broke its foot off in my ass, or am I really not seeing a big difference here
I'm seeing a brutal scene of a man getting his head turned into a bowl of soup, and a brutal scene of a man getting his head turned into a bowl of soup
I still don't think that justifies the fact that Ben took the hatchet-- the hatchet that he himself gave to Lee to begin with-- that was blocking a door covered in blood, or more specifically, the door they entered the building through, the door they were worried the walkers might have seen them go through
Maybe it's just me, but I simply don't see any good way to explain nor defend this scene
And I'm a guy that sticks up for quite a few scenes that most people give shit to, so I'd like to think that's saying something
No, I wouldn't say you're uncultured swine, you just don't understand the context. Something that's indicative of a good narrative and something his death went without.
It's not the murder that's so unflinching, it's that throughout the film the characters are actively searching for a rapist that recently damn near raped and beat a woman to death, and the scene was the conclusion of a very cumulatively building manhunt that ends not with violence being the center, but consequence. One thing the scene doesn't show is that the man they killed is not their rapist but rather another club goer who was planning on raping the rapist they were looking for.
No one person "wins," it's all morose nihilistic consequence. Something I felt Carver's death lacked severely.
I think clementine Season 2 was a very interesting character.
Yes! But people theorically choose one over the other because of who they are as a character instead of their ages.
It usually happens that people are ageist in cases like this one, though. I am just pointing out that you are not morally obliged to be ageist.
Its not ageism its more like courtesy, move along and let others get a crack at life you already lived
In real life? I would save Clementine, of course, she's a kid!
In a videogme cuz all this story is a videogame an none of this character well maybe doug a little but evereyone else is not real? Lee, he's a better character. He only lacked of, you know, dark side (not determinant dark side) and character evolution (HE DIDN'T CHANGE THOUGH THE WHOLE GAME!)
I'll say it again, and please know i am TRYING to understand you here but how does that make you any better than Kenny? How does the horrible things you say of him make you nicer than some of the things he's said? You condone her killing him for what he did to Jane which i can understand given what had happened, however, you DON'T condone what he did to Larry (which is also not ok before you bite my head off), but in reality, it's someone killing another person which makes both death's the same. Both are wrong and unnacceptable. So please tell me your logic as to why you think Clem killing is acceptable, but Kenny killing is not???? Both had reasons to do it. I know you'll always hate him which is fine but i wish you weren't so damn hateful and biased sometimes. Not because it's Kenny or over a fictional character but it just doesn't give a good impression of you as a person sometimes.
You are starting to sound like @InstantShippingIsStupid
You again ... stop hate this kid.
even she's 13 now?
This is the most beautiful thing I have ever seen unfold. And shame on @AronDracula for uttering my name. You know the storm it raises.
i play the game more than once, so eventually i'd go over both options.
It's a game, i do what i want, if killing a bunch of Cops and innoncent civilians in GTA isn't seen as "immoral" or most gamers don't care about it, why can't i choose Lee?
People do the same things in the Mafia games, and be honest, if you've played Halo, you know you've attacked the Marines on purpose to be funny.
who cares.
i've never seen people take games so seriously. honestly it's kinda annoying.
Interesting. But I believe I'd somehow rather save a kid who has just started living.
rules don't apply in the apocalypse.
if some people are okay with choosing Shawn Greene over Duck, why do people argue about Lee over Clem?
INEEDANSWERS
my guess if Clem dies in this scenario, i'm guessing we'll play as Lee.
if so, it's up to the gamer to choose who he becomes.
He says is better to let a man being tortured and murdered than letting a woman being tortured or murdered. As if there was any difference between us and them. Why can't a woman be as strong as a man? Why can't a man be as graceful as a woman?
Anything positive about Clem you like or any redeeming qualities?
I say that because in S3 she's 13 and "you save kids first." so Jav or Clem?
I don't know if he's "a good lad". He's a total stranger at the other side of the screen. I don't know him. If you want to know if I was insulting you, then no. I wasn't insulting you.
Oh, 'kin 'ell, that's a tough one. I'll probably go with Clem.
I'm the only one who isn't alright with either.
I mean, of course it would be perfectly fine, but not for the reason that they are a "man," a "woman," an "adult," or a "child." Either of those four would be either sexist or ageist.
I wouldn't apply courtesy to a post-apocalyptic life and death situation, to be honest.
I mean, saving a child over an adult is an acceptable behavior, and it isn't morally inferior to saving the adult, but if there isn't any reason to save the child over the adult other than just because the kid is younger, then your actions were sexist. Not immoral.
I am tagging @MarijaaNo7.
i don't even know Javier yet, so Clem.
I think Ben might have been "too far gone" by this point. He never even wanted to go to Crawford, was getting more and more guilt ridden about Kenny's family and all the terrifying stuff he had already been through was likely taking it's toll. He saw a weapon lying around and grabbed it without thinking clearly at all. The fact that he asked to be killed soon after supports this.
I'm not sure if my post is a good or valid explanation but it's an explanation anyhow... and yeah the scene came across as a little ridiculous.
Clementine.
Lee hasn't got a real personality, he was only the projection of my personality. How could I like somebody who is a part of me? I know it sounds foolish, but that's the way I feel. The tought to save myself is very weird.
By the way, I like my little Clem so much. Like all of us.
13 is still a kid :P
i don't exactly think that jane set off any alarms that she had killed the baby. in the past, she mentioned how the baby would be hard to take care of and most likely would be a huge liability. when kenny accused her of killing AJ, she even yelled back that she didn't kill him. i believe that kenny's decisions in S1 were a bit more forgivable than S2.
i personally believe that ben pulling the hatchet from the door was more the writer's fault and less a choice that his character would do. he's a lot smarter than that and i believe that was just implemented to cause some sort of conflict to move the story along.
back on the topic of kenny, he's definitely mentally damaged. there's no doubt that he's gone through a lot. his rash decisions end up getting people killed though.
(sorry for the late reply, i didn't notice that you responded to me.)
I'd save KELSIER!
rest in peace, Kell.
AND IF HE LIVES PLEASE NO SPOILER
I know ... she's kid.
Here I come.
Technically it is true, whether we like it or not, saving someone only based on age and nothing else. But at the end of the day, what characteristics does one need to have to be rightfully saved by us? Both choices are wrong, both choices are right. We are just humans who want to 'judge', measure others' worth, other humans. That should be done by someone perfectly objective, someone that's not biased.
I'd personally (most likely, I hope it never ever happens irl) save a child over someone who's quite old (that's why I said granny, since there is a contrast between their ages) because I feel like I am giving them some kind of a wild chance to truly experience life, where the old man/woman/person have already done a lot of things. It is, of course, not right of me to cut that old person's life because each day matters and each days makes life.
Of course there are no real rules or laws in the half-destroyed world. But everyone has their own view of right and wrong, or rather right and a bit less right in this case.
He kinda has nothing to do with Clementine and Lee.
Or does he?
tell me something i don't know lol
I've had 5 lucid dreams. Only thing I ever have for breakfast is chocolate cereal. I always wear my hand clock.
No.
I'm just shocked. I didn't espect him to die D':
Tell me about your lucid dreams so I can inaccurately analyze you with the help of a messy dream meaning website that you have to pay to use! [insert evil laugh here]