As HBO works to adapt The Last of Us games into a TV series, they’re going to have to avoid one big problem common in apocalyptic shows: overusing character deaths. It is a common trope in shows and movies set in apocalyptic worlds to kill major and beloved characters to demonstrate the danger and to add an element of shock value. While this can be bad for movies, it is often a larger problem for long-running TV series where fans develop attachments to characters and the narrative is more drawn-out.
Set in a post-apocalyptic landscape, The Last of Us games center on small groups struggling to survive against groups of zombies and hostile human factions alike. Unsurprisingly, the death of major characters becomes a part of building this dark vision of the future, but that does not mean that a major character dies in every chapter, or that when they do, it is for no reason. In the first game, Tess dies pushing for something that she believes in and spurring Joel to continue their mission against his own judgment. Henry and Sam die to show the toll this world can take on people and to present a compelling parallel, and an alternate outcome, for Joel and Ellie.
The deaths of major characters in The Last of Us games are meaningful, and this trait needs to be repeated in the HBO adaptation. The problem with killing major characters for shock value, to raise the stakes, or to elicit an emotional response from audiences is that it can come across as cheap and actually alienate audiences. This trope is clear in shows like The Walking Dead, with the horrifically violent and drawn-out death of Glenn and Carl’s death being motivated by off-screen dealings, or shows like The 100 which drew outrage for the final season killing of Bellamy Blake. The Last of Us show needs to be wary of this to avoid alienating viewers or muddying the important messages touted by the original games.
When the killing of characters appears senseless it has multiple negative effects. It reduces the overall effect of major characters dying as it becomes almost expected. It drives away viewers who cannot trust that their favorite characters will continue to appear in the show. And finally, it pushes a message that the world is dark and hopeless, and it is not worth trying. All of this cheats both the story and the viewer. A major character's death can (and should) be used to add depth to the narrative, leading audiences to question what that character represented and what their death and the circumstances of that death will mean for the remaining characters and the larger narrative.
HBO’s adaptation can avoid this by learning from the source material and keeping the cast small and character-focused. While the series will likely deviate from the plot of the games to some degree, keeping elements like Tess’ self-sacrifice, and using more minor character deaths to up the ante, would help avoid this trope. The original game writer Neil Druckman noted the Last of Us movie plan fell through largely because his team wanted keep a small indie feel to the production; this hints that he will avoid the trappings of more mainstream apocalyptic TV series like The Walking Dead.
On face value, it might seem that The Last of Us Part II killed a major character senselessly with many fans upset and outraged by Joel’s traumatic death scene. However, this scene is a prime example of a death that was necessary and justified by the narrative. The plot of the game needed to show Ellie developing as her own individual, something that would have been hard to do if Joel was still in the picture. This led to a narrative where his death was honored in the plot through Ellie’s reaction to it, driving the game’s narrative and giving her space to learn to deal with that trauma and ultimately find some form of peace without violent revenge. His death also helped to give closure to his morally questionable actions at the end of The Last of Us and highlighted that he had existed in this world as a force of terror for so many others.