Glad you liked it. I liked Emma Stone’s description—that it’s a romcom where the main character falls in love with the world.

The world of MAN. While watching it struck me she never really traveled or experienced anything natural; everything was built by people. Cities. Boats. Houses and laboratories. Nothing in the state of nature so to speak. The park at the start was the closest, but this is curated nature.

I assume you are using MAN to mean mankind here? I find that criticism odd, in that it doesn't really fit the story.

It's a criticism of her description of the story.

Glad you liked it. I liked Emma Stone’s description—that it’s a romcom where the main character falls in love with the world.

The world of MAN. While watching it struck me she never really traveled or experienced anything natural; everything was built by people. Cities. Boats. Houses and laboratories. Nothing in the state of nature so to speak. The park at the start was the closest, but this is curated nature.

I assume you are using MAN to mean mankind here? I find that criticism odd, in that it doesn't really fit the story. Would we criticize You've Got Mail because it never shows any of New York's two million rats? I think the movie is more or less a comedy of manners, which by definition occurs in the curated world. Bella is the natural thing, bouncing off the guard rails. And aren't some of those guard rails part of the structure that protects mankind from the predations of the natural world? I could imagine a scene where she reacts to the preternatural beauty of the ocean and sky (in this fictional world), but does serve the theme? Everything has to fit. But maybe we're coming up against the limits of Emma Stone's description.

Cool, so what about the others?

I honestly have no idea what you're even saying. What, you want some women to walk around in dresses or something? What use is a dress when your hiking across the country?

I feel like everyone is getting hung up on that example. It is an indicator of the game's contempt for the feminine. I am not saying every woman should wear a dress all the time. Don't be ridiculous. You wouldn't wear a dress while hiking, but you might want to wear one at dance. And yet, no women do. I looked. There are zero in the dance scene.

I'm not saying some women can't behave, dress, or act like men. I'm saying it's a problem when all of them have to. That is not progress or empowerment.

I honestly have no idea what you're even saying. What, you want some women to walk around in dresses or something? What use is a dress when your hiking across the country?

Women aren't embracing alternative forms of femininity; they are just becoming men. And those that don't, suffer in the narrative disproportionately to male characters.

Your argument hinges on this point, but I don’t see that you’ve actually proven it.

PSVita lady dies quick. Tommy loses his marriage and an eye. Joel gets beaten to death. Lev gets tortured along with Abby.

I find Lev's case interesting, because Lev is a trans boy. The game presents Lev as having gender dysphoria, and the last straw that spurred his transition was his arranged marriage as a child bride. So he shaved his head and fled. Lev discarded the feminine altogether. The implication being that had he not done so, he would not have escaped oppression.

I don’t know what you’re trying to argue at this point. Who defines “feminine expression”? Is that something you are well-suited to judge as a man? Are you saying that The Last of Us Part II is misogynistic because it does not feature the types of gender expressions you would prefer to see?

No. The issue is that in the world of the game, every woman must conform to the same masculine gender ideals. There is a homogeny rather than a diversity. I would prefer to see a wide range of expressions from men, women, and those who identify as neither, without judgement. It is misogynistic because it has a contempt for femininity.

(I assume that you do have a preference because you are using the term “feminine expressions” to describe things like wearing a dress, which implies that those expressions are feminine while others are not.)

That is an example as a traditional, easy to spot display. The fact that both sexes exclusively wear masculine clothing is only one supporting piece of evidence to suggest the erasure of the feminine in the world of the game.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems like you are basically saying that femininity is a fixed concept which does not (or should not?) change and evolve over time or in response to shifting circumstances. To me, this is a pretty weak argument. Then again, I’m the guy who defended the soldiers at Fallujah.

No, it's not fixed at all. You are correct! However this is an example of it being erased, not changed. Women aren't embracing alternative forms of femininity; they are just becoming men. And those that don't, suffer in the narrative disproportionately to male characters.

(I assume that you do have a preference because you are using the term “feminine expressions” to describe things like wearing a dress, which implies that those expressions are feminine while others are not.)

Correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems like you are basically saying that femininity is a fixed concept which does not (or should not?) change and evolve over time or in response to shifting circumstances. To me, this is a pretty weak argument. Then again, I’m the guy who defended the soldiers at Fallujah.

Glad you liked it. I liked Emma Stone’s description—that it’s a romcom where the main character falls in love with the world.

The world of MAN. While watching it struck me she never really traveled or experienced anything natural; everything was built by people. Cities. Boats. Houses and laboratories. Nothing in the state of nature so to speak. The park at the start was the closest, but this is curated nature.

Female empowerment, or male fantasy about female empowerment?

Neither?

It didn't seem to be about that, but rather the examination of oppressive structures and customs through the eyes of someone naive to it all. I don't think at any point would I have called her character empowered.

That was just a prompt, based on common interpretations. I’m still getting my head around what the movie means. That said, if you think at NO moment was the main character empowered, that makes me wonder if we saw the same movie. Mainly, I just want to know what you thought about generally, as a movie. Did you enjoy it?

Yes, it was completely hilarious.

As for what it means, I think it's arguing for a balanced approach to life. At first it seems to skewer the way contemporary society looks at poverty and sex. Why not just have rich people give poor people money? Why not just have sex any time you want if it feels good?

But as the cynic pointed out, this ignores the wickedness in the world which is unfixable. Someone will always take advantage. You can't eliminate it entirely. Someone like the Sailors will always steal the money. Someone like Duncan or Alfie will always try to trap women. Or even other women, as in the case of the Madam.

In the end, she inflicts a little cruelty of her own by killing the frog for amusement, and later turning Alfie into a goat (and seems to enjoy it). So sin is always in the world and within ourselves. Thus, we must balance the life of the Id and SuperEgo.

Also the garden of Eden metaphor bothered me, since "God" was not spiritual at all, but rather coldly scientific. So it doesn't make much sense to have his house be the garden, and her first discovery of self pleasure be with the forbidden fruit (a literal apple). If anything, he was supportive of her leaving and he did not inflict upon her original sin. Note she killed the frog BEFORE she used the apple.

Female empowerment, or male fantasy about female empowerment?

Neither?

It didn't seem to be about that, but rather the examination of oppressive structures and customs through the eyes of someone naive to it all. I don't think at any point would I have called her character empowered.

That was just a prompt, based on common interpretations. I’m still getting my head around what the movie means. That said, if you think at NO moment was the main character empowered, that makes me wonder if we saw the same movie. Mainly, I just want to know what you thought about generally, as a movie. Did you enjoy it?

Joel: Shot, restrained, and beaten to death in front of Ellie with a golf club. Agonizing death.

Joel is a woman?

Sort of. They fridged him!

Or maybe he deserved it? Who can say.

Joel is a woman?

Female empowerment, or male fantasy about female empowerment?

Neither?

It didn't seem to be about that, but rather the examination of oppressive structures and customs through the eyes of someone naive to it all. I don't think at any point would I have called her character empowered.

No it doesn't -- it treats all its characters like shit.

Disagree.

Owen: Dies instantly.
Jessie: Dies instantly.
Manny: Dies instantly.
Isaac: Dies instantly.

Mel: Slowly stabbed, agonizing death
Yara: Arm brutally mutilated, severed, then riddled with bullets. Agonizing death.
Nora: Tortured by Ellie then bludgeoned. Agonizing death
Abby, Ellie, Dina: Do not die, but are horribly abused and tortured throughout.

Weird how all the men who die seem to get off easy, no?