Why I don't want Clem or Kenny back
The phrase "the lady or the tiger" comes from a famous allegorical short story of the same name. Wikipedia has a short synopsis of it here, which will make some of my points below clearer.
I think there are many the similarities between that story and TWD — particularly the ending. What does Clementine choose to do? Lee/the player have spent the entire game instructing her, either directly or by example, in how to behave in the harsh world she's now in.
Will she make the right choice? Is there a right choice? At this point between seasons, there isn't. Just as in TLoTT, it's up to the audience to determine what happens next. The same goes for Kenny, but in a less layered fashion.
And I think that's how it should stay.
Ambiguity is pretty unpopular with American audiences. For a good example consider the backlash over the last scene of "The Sopranos." Short version: (
So I think if TTG continues Clementine's story in S2 it will undermine S1 as a single complete work. Like TLoTT, the theme of TWD is choice in the face of uncertainty. To know what the outcome is ruins the work's ability to evoke that feeling of teetering on the edge of a precipice. The game worked so hard to create that feeling and to use it to manipulate audience emotions that I think releasing the tension of not knowing would be doing the story a disservice. As the central emotion, I think that's the one we should be left with.
To know who those figures on the hill are would be like knowing why the Mona Lisa smiles, or how a magic trick works. The answer might be clever, interesting, or even impressive, but it will never be as compelling as not knowing. It's the mystery and feeling of uncertainty which makes the ending so powerful.
Besides, there are only three things that can happen anyway.
So I hope the developers consider this as a serious option.
But if they do go this route, I hope they let the players know up front that that's what they're doing and why. I think modern audiences can understand things like that. People are increasingly genre savvy and comfortable with analyzing works while still enjoying them. Once the realm of creators, critics, and obsessive fans, I think more people can now take things like authorial intent into account when reflecting on works of art.
I think there are many the similarities between that story and TWD — particularly the ending. What does Clementine choose to do? Lee/the player have spent the entire game instructing her, either directly or by example, in how to behave in the harsh world she's now in.
Will she make the right choice? Is there a right choice? At this point between seasons, there isn't. Just as in TLoTT, it's up to the audience to determine what happens next. The same goes for Kenny, but in a less layered fashion.
And I think that's how it should stay.
Ambiguity is pretty unpopular with American audiences. For a good example consider the backlash over the last scene of "The Sopranos." Short version: (
Tony was killed in front of his family and never saw it coming, just like the audience didn't.
) Even though clues as to what definitively happened are all over the place, the fact that it wasn't explicitly stated and shown created a lot of confusion, anger and resentment amongst viewers immediately after it aired. Luckily many people eventually got over it and now recognize it for the courageous artistic choice it was.So I think if TTG continues Clementine's story in S2 it will undermine S1 as a single complete work. Like TLoTT, the theme of TWD is choice in the face of uncertainty. To know what the outcome is ruins the work's ability to evoke that feeling of teetering on the edge of a precipice. The game worked so hard to create that feeling and to use it to manipulate audience emotions that I think releasing the tension of not knowing would be doing the story a disservice. As the central emotion, I think that's the one we should be left with.
To know who those figures on the hill are would be like knowing why the Mona Lisa smiles, or how a magic trick works. The answer might be clever, interesting, or even impressive, but it will never be as compelling as not knowing. It's the mystery and feeling of uncertainty which makes the ending so powerful.
Besides, there are only three things that can happen anyway.
- She's rescued and survives. Not only is this counter to the property's standard of "no one is safe," it can't be conclusive because the story of that world doesn't skip ahead by decades.
- She dies. This one sucks for the obvious reason that it means that all the player's/Lee's effort was for nothing.
- The cycle starts all over again with another person guarding her. This sucks because: We've already played that story; It turns Lee into just her first surrogate parent; It basically turns Clem into a football that the player must carry to the end of the current narrative. As much as I loved that fictional little girl I want to play TWD, not "Babysitter vs. Zombies 2."
So I hope the developers consider this as a serious option.
But if they do go this route, I hope they let the players know up front that that's what they're doing and why. I think modern audiences can understand things like that. People are increasingly genre savvy and comfortable with analyzing works while still enjoying them. Once the realm of creators, critics, and obsessive fans, I think more people can now take things like authorial intent into account when reflecting on works of art.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
maybe even Clementine could have immortal child syndrome and become a bit annoying if it became the walking Clementine game, i don't know, but i think they should just do whatever they think is the best story they can do, and whether that involves Clementine or not is up to them
I think if they just leave the story its bad writing. Kirkmans comic was the pkint of whats next. Storys get stopped too soon in the Zombie drama. The Walking Dead is about a continuing syory not leaving till they die. Just leaving it is a cop out like makong Lee immune to walkers.
As I said Clem dieing to end S2 would be just heart breaking.
I'm fine with playing a new protagonist in season 2, but only if Clem lives. Why? Because I spent so much time on making the right choices, and keeping her safe. Clem is the legacy of Lee, she's the light in a dark world.
And if they killed both Clem and Kenny, it would feel like playing a different game. Then all the characters from the earlier episodes in season 1 would be dead, and that would be really bad storytelling.
Look at Mass Effect for example. Some of the squad members in Mass Effect 1&2 are not part of your crew in Mass Effect 3. But they make cameos in missions or a dialogue option, and it ties it all togheter. So if they kill Clem, it will feel like TT don't care about my choices at all. Lee may the protagonist in the first season, but Clem is the most important person.
Clementine wouldn't have to die to not be in season 2, she could just be out there somewhere living the life lee taught her to live, or as you said about mass effect she could have a cameo, but i think telltale will do a good job i would accept any story they gave us as long as it was good
Ambiguity at Season's 1 end is a great cliffhanger, but just leaving it with Clem's scared little face - I think that's unfair. It's not like the end of the "Sopranos" because Clem pretty much WAS able to see something was coming up over the hill. We should, too!
There are plenty of situations(some may even say too many) where fates are left ambiguous that we can think over: Lilly(if you follow the Woodbury book), Molly, Kenny, Omid & Christa. All of these people can retain their unknown fates and that would be fine, but at least Clem needs to return, so we can see if everything we've done for her was worth it. Just as well, there are plenty of different scenarios for her to be involved other than just gaining another guardian.
It becomes quickly apparent that she's one of the main focus points in the game, and if the character of Clementine is thrown in the trash with the 1 minute cliffhanger at the end of season 1, then all the time we've spent with her in those first 5 episodes were a complete waste.
I'd still like to see a "Lee" figure for Clem in season 2.
I mean, TTG "did" have the balls to stick with the Lee dies at the end storyline.
I feel they know how not to crap up their storyline.....
.....on the other hand, they have gotten a taste of high end success... that can cloud creative clarity at times....
i don't think Clementine would react to a character as a "Lee" figure, it will be different, maybe if it was a woman she may see her as a role model, but I don't think there would be the same "Lee" relationship with anybody
A series is called a series because it follows the events of a person or group of people.
If Clem is left out what is the purpose of Season 1?
I feel it is Clementine who makes TWD game so great. There woudlnt be half the emotional toll on the audience without her. Sure there would be some "Holy Frick" moments, and some sad moments, But nothing like they are with Clem.
When the writers can make people cry, and feel angry and depressed over a situation, They know what they are doing. And Im sure we wouldnt be hearing, witnessing, or expressing those feelings if Lee just died, alone at the end of Season 1 without Clementine or her impact on him.
So Clem is a must for season 2.
Final Fantasy, Far Cry, and Elder Scrolls would disagree with you.
nay, walkie-talkie!
Kenny was by boy.
Same with Clem and Kenny, I just hope Season 2 will be as great as Season 1. I just want confirmation on both of them, also Christa and Omid, I need closure .____.
I'm very interested in how TTG carry this on, but personally I wouldn't want to be Clem's keeper. Don't get me wrong, I cared more for Clem than some people in the real world, but Lee trained her to fend for herself, seems like a step back to then put her in someone else's hands all over again. Connecting her with someone else would weaken the relationship gained between her and Lee in my eyes
Clem back or we riot... no pressure Telltale
I loved him too. And it would be awesome if he somehow made it out of there alive. But I don't see that happening.
Where there's a will, there's a way! He is shown running off after shooting Ben, and i highly doubt that a room was built without any doors!
At the very least, a walker Kenny would be a pleasant(and depressing) surprise as well!
If he is dead he probably won't come back as he was most likely eaten.
They don't eat brains, from what we've seen at least. Here's a line from Doug in ep 1:
"They eat you, and whatever's left comes back as one of them." I think they just eat your intestines and other organs then wander off.
They don't care what they eat. They just slam their teeth into the body and eat until its not worth their interest anymore. In EP1 we see a bunch of them eating a headless corpse.
The story has to have Clem to create some kind of emotional attachment, though should we really have much to do with her? Certainly not, atleast not in the same way as Season 1. I do agree with the OP though, however it is done in season 2 it would be better if season 2 gives us ambiguity about Clem's safety and her future.
I'd love to see them do something like a Michonne (her time with the governor) from the comics but with Christa leading her to have a miscarriage, eventually leading to her death and leaving the "weaker" one of that awesome couple on his own maybe with Clem. It would def create some impact.
As for Kenny, it's so easy to see him pull a Tyresse that I think he will be seen in season 2. Also given his personality I wouldn't be surprised if while defending Ben (if you took that choice) he didn't use that last bullet to end Ben's life but rather to shoot a walker to either cover himself with or to get out of there. There have been so many times I thought I knew what he would do only to have his actions betray him (But alot of how he behaves is choice related, so maybe my choices weren't all pro Kenny).