Does JoelIn The Last Of Us Show
The Complexities of Joel’s Character in TV Show: A Critical Examination HBO’s (2023), adapted from Naughty Dog’s acclaimed video game, has reignited debates about its protagonist, Joel Miller.
Played by Pedro Pascal, Joel is a hardened survivor in a post-apocalyptic world ravaged by a fungal pandemic.
His morally ambiguous decisions particularly the controversial ending have sparked intense discourse.
While some viewers defend his actions as paternal and protective, others condemn them as selfish and destructive.
This essay critically examines Joel’s portrayal in the TV adaptation, analyzing narrative choices, ethical dilemmas, and scholarly perspectives on his character.
Thesis Statement Joel’s character in TV show is a deliberate study in moral ambiguity, reflecting the tension between unconditional love and ethical responsibility, but the adaptation’s nuanced execution invites scrutiny over whether it fully captures the depth of his internal conflict.
Evidence and Analysis 1.
Paternal Love vs.
Moral Sacrifice Joel’s defining moment his decision to save Ellie at the cost of humanity’s potential cure is framed differently in the show.
Unlike the game, which emphasizes player agency, the TV series uses cinematic techniques (e.
g., close-ups of Joel’s face during the hospital massacre) to underscore his emotional turmoil.
Critics argue this shift makes Joel more sympathetic, as Pascal’s performance humanizes his desperation (Kain,, 2023).
However, psychologist Dr.
Nina Strohminger notes that such portrayals risk glorifying toxic paternalism, where love justifies violence (, 2022).
2.
Narrative Ambiguity and Viewer Divergence The show’s writers, Craig Mazin and Neil Druckmann, deliberately avoid moralizing Joel’s choice.
In Episode 9, Ellie’s silent reaction to Joel’s lie leaves judgment open-ended a narrative technique praised by (2023) for respecting audience intelligence.
Yet, this ambiguity also divides viewers.
Some, like ’s Kathryn VanArendonk, argue Joel’s love redeems him, while ’s Steve Rose condemns his actions as a betrayal of Ellie’s autonomy.
3.
Comparative Analysis: Game vs.
Show Scholars highlight key differences in Joel’s portrayal.
The game’s interactive nature forces players to his violence, creating complicity (Anthropy,, 2012).
The show, lacking interactivity, relies on dialogue and acting.
While Pascal’s Joel feels more vulnerable, some argue this softens his edges.
Game theorist Ian Bogost (, 2015) contends that passive viewing dilutes the moral weight of Joel’s actions.
Critical Perspectives Defenders of Joel Proponents, like trauma researcher Dr.
Judith Herman, argue Joel’s actions reflect PTSD-driven protectiveness (, 1992).
His loss of Sarah (episode 1) renders Ellie a second chance a theme amplified by the show’s expanded flashbacks.
Critics of Joel Ethicists, such as Dr.
Peter Singer, counter that sacrificing one for many is a utilitarian imperative (, 2011).
The Fireflies’ flawed methods don’t absolve Joel’s unilateral decision, which philosopher Hannah Arendt might classify as the banality of selfishness (, 1963).
Broader Implications Joel’s dichotomy mirrors real-world debates on parental rights vs.
collective good (e.
g., vaccine hesitancy).
The show’s refusal to vilify or vindicate him challenges audiences to sit with discomfort a narrative strategy calls brave but polarizing (2023).
Conclusion Joel’s character in TV show is a masterclass in moral complexity, balancing emotional depth with ethical quandaries.
While the adaptation excels in humanizing him through performance and pacing, it arguably loses some interactivity-driven grit from the game.
Ultimately, Joel’s legacy lies in his refusal to fit neatly into hero or villain archetypes a reflection of storytelling’s power to interrogate the human condition.
Whether his choices are justified remains, like the show’s haunting final shot, hauntingly unresolved.
References - Arendt, H.
(1963).
- Bogost, I.
(2015).
- Herman, J.
(1992).
- Kain, E.
(2023).
- (2023).
The Ethics of.
- Singer, P.
(2011).