Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Screw you, Rockstar... GTA V *SPOILERS*

769 replies to this topic
TaviColen123
  • TaviColen123

    North Koreer

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2013
  • North-Korea

#31

Posted 19 September 2013 - 04:57 PM Edited by TaviColen123, 19 September 2013 - 04:57 PM.

Rockstar should have never crossed the IV era and V era together. I'm not against the idea of killing off old characters but all the IV characters that returned seem like a gimmick. They didn't do anything to progess an important part of the storyline, just cameo appearances.

Huh, sorry to break it to you my friend but SA made the same thing . Did the Claude cameo really progress anything besides getting the garage in San Fierro ?


GtaIvFanboy
  • GtaIvFanboy

    I Have a Foot Fetish

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 17 Aug 2013

#32

Posted 19 September 2013 - 05:02 PM

I Have no problem with him killing johnny its just that it was
a wasted Opportunity it would of been an interesting war between
the two.

Ss4gogeta0
  • Ss4gogeta0

    I grips Banana Clips with my Gorilla Palms

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 May 2011
  • None

#33

Posted 19 September 2013 - 06:18 PM

people complain that johnny acted like a pussy on GTAV...

do you guys even know what meth does to you?

I know a few meth heads and its somewhat of an accurate visualization of em in V... it wasn't poorly written either, Rockstar was portraying a simple fact of life, nobody is invincible... even the hardest nigga can die like a bitch...

stop bitchin about it. who cares if he broke in and out of a prison... He isnt superman...
  • Jordan_LDN likes this

Majestic81
  • Majestic81

    =VP=

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jan 2012
  • None

#34

Posted 19 September 2013 - 07:28 PM Edited by Majestic81, 19 September 2013 - 07:35 PM.

Taking meth doesnt automatically make you a pussy. i know people who deal with it along with other stuff and their lives seems fine. but im going off topic.. like i said its a game, and its R* decision who they wanna kill off, but you cant say that it wasnt poor writing because it was. that small cutscene doesnt match with anything that happened in TLAD, and completely destroyed the point TLAD was trying to make. and on top of that it makes you even dislike Trevor a little. it served no real purpose other than make it harder for you to play those games. thats poor writing wouldnt you agree? the people who liked johnny felt pissed, the ones who didnt like him/ never knew him didnt care that much.

 

Im more interested in the reason as to why they did it than anything else too. but enough of this. obviously it wasnt the best move they could've done, no matter what point they were trying to make.

  • Choco Taco likes this

Drunken Cowboy
  • Drunken Cowboy

    CHEESY VAGINAS!

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2013
  • United-States

#35

Posted 19 September 2013 - 09:07 PM

Again, my issue isn't meth f*cked up Johnny. My issue is that he would probably have not tried meth after the events of TLaD, seeing as how he became an emotionally and physically sobered individual.

Also, there is NO WAY that he would have brought Ashley to LS, let alone give a f*ck about her once they're there.

R* brng jone bak 2 lyf pls
  • thekillerdonuts likes this

Eagleheart
  • Eagleheart

    U.S. Monsanto

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Apr 2005

#36

Posted 19 September 2013 - 09:21 PM

I absolutely loved how they ended Johnny's story and the fact that people are so upset just means Rockstar was successful at creating an emotional attachment to their characters. It was the Lost and DAMNED, not the Lost and happily ever after; after losing everything and being betrayed by his brothers in Liberty City is it really so far-feched to see Johnny using meth again and die at the hands of a psychotic drug dealer? I definitely didn't like Trevor after all that s*** went down but I was absolutely fascinated with his character and can't wait to see how his story unfolds.

  • KING2dor likes this

INEEDVNOW
  • INEEDVNOW

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2012

#37

Posted 19 September 2013 - 09:27 PM

It didnt piss me off because it showed how awesome and crazy trevor is.

He just didnt kill someone, he killed JOHNNY!

 

f*cking badass.

 

 

 

People complaining and want to get refunds for gta v because of the killing are f*cking idiots and need to grow up.

  • Jordan_LDN likes this

Scraker
  • Scraker

    The Don

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2013

#38

Posted 19 September 2013 - 09:29 PM

Everyone is 'really pissed off' with the death of Johnny...

Maybe this was Rockstar's plan? If it was, it's clearly working.


Peachrocks
  • Peachrocks

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Jun 2013

#39

Posted 19 September 2013 - 10:23 PM Edited by Peachrocks, 19 September 2013 - 10:26 PM.

Most of you are missing the point...

 

It's not the fact Johnny died that pisses people off, that may be the instinctive reaction but it's not the cause. It's how and why. As said in the game itself, it's not the destination but it's the journey that counts.

 

It's the fact he died while hugging an obvious lunatic. The guy wouldn't hug Elizabeta Torres for the exact same reason that ended up killing him.

 

I think Johnny would bring Ashley to LS actually. As I've said before in that massive post, Johnny's main character feature and weakness is the fact he cares too much and puts the weight of the world on his shoulders. He might have said at the end of TLAD that it was over between him and Ashley but that's a 'rational' reaction he's giving because he knows that she is no good for him.

 

However considering everything he's been through his will weakens and he gives into his 'protective' instinct where he still cares for Ashley. It's the same reason he could easily turn to meth. His character and will may be far stronger than most people, even for GTA protagonist standards, but he faced far more adversity than any of them.

 

Trevor killed him in an incredibly cowardly way, appealing to Johnny's weakness, then killing him. There are two issues with this that people are having trouble digesting hence the outrage.

 

- Johnny would be unlikely to ever weaken to that level. He may be a broken man sure, but he wouldn't hug Elizabeta who while a psychopath, she's nothing compared to Trevor and to a point Johnny trusted her. There was a better way to show the damage done to Johnny.

 

- Johnny doesn't die while protecting his brothers. A much better way to both show how Johnny is a broken man and how dangerous Trevor is would be to have Johnny trying to save his brothers/Ashley and dying in the attempt, almost resigned to his death. Somewhat similar to how Niko supposedly kills Jim. We don't hate Niko for that, even after we know Jim.

 

The way it's done however results in people hating Trevor and hating being forced to play as him. I don't want to even bother with any of Trevor's extra side quest stranger stuff and what not because of this and I hated playing as him.

 

The point is the same destination could have been attained but the journey could have been different and the effect and taste in people's mouths could be better. Would we be still moved by Johnny's death in the same way? Yes but we wouldn't hate Trevor anywhere near as much in consequence.

 

 

 

Everyone is 'really pissed off' with the death of Johnny...

Maybe this was Rockstar's plan? If it was, it's clearly working.

 

The question is why though? Sure being sad/pissed off at Johnny's death might be a nice idea but the result in the way its done is that we also hate Trevor.

 

Why have the second part of that for a protagonist we have to play with? I cannot come up with a satisfying answer.

  • Duxfever, Deadly Target, Ermac. and 1 other like this

VercettiGroveRussian
  • VercettiGroveRussian

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2011

#40

Posted 19 September 2013 - 11:19 PM

Johnny was badass but also a reasoned and funny guy who had good friends in Jim Terry and Clay. All of them get f*cked over. Not cool.


Nameless Foot Soldier
  • Nameless Foot Soldier

    Libertonian

  • Members
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2012

#41

Posted 19 September 2013 - 11:43 PM Edited by Nameless Foot Soldier, 19 September 2013 - 11:54 PM.

I for one just saw they f*cking cutscene and I am truly outraged. So all those moments in the story in TLAD led up to this!? Holy sh*t I am annoyed. That's how TLAD ends?! I call bullsh*t, Johnny went back onto the meth and it drove him to this bitter end? sh*t dude. TLAD just got more sad for me knowing Johnny didn't ride off into the sunset, he just broke down and went to a bad place, f*ck that meth. Johnny's story just f*cking touches my heart now. Can a man get sh*t on so god damn much that he dies a sad and pathetic death.

 

Johnny truly was Lost and Damned. :(

  • UltraGizmo64 likes this

DarrinPA
  • DarrinPA

    Orange Grove Member

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2009
  • None

#42

Posted 20 September 2013 - 12:27 AM

 

Rockstar should have never crossed the IV era and V era together. I'm not against the idea of killing off old characters but all the IV characters that returned seem like a gimmick. They didn't do anything to progess an important part of the storyline, just cameo appearances.

Huh, sorry to break it to you my friend but SA made the same thing . Did the Claude cameo really progress anything besides getting the garage in San Fierro ?

 

It showed how Claude and Catalina got together and where they came from. The Mob families' backstories were explained better. Also, Ken Rosenburg and Kent Paul [or Paul from Kent] played a large part in the game. The two mechanics Dwayne and Jethro were more or less simple cameos that didn't progress the story along.

  • thekillerdonuts likes this

tjbyrum1
  • tjbyrum1

    Punk-ass Bitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 May 2010

#43

Posted 20 September 2013 - 12:56 AM

I am with Peachrocks, I don't think some of you are getting the point.

 

We're not sitting here going "oh no, Johnny boy has died!", we're sitting her thinking "what the f*ck?"

 

Anyone who isn't pissed by that either hasn't played TLaD story, or didn't pay attention.  You spend the entire time in TLaD trying to keep your brothers together, trying to stay away from Ashley, and turning your back on the past.  It was a good tale, and one of the best storylines I ever played in a video game ever, I loved him.

 

And then in GTA V, for the sake of having a cameo, we see some bullsh*t way for him to die.  It just wasn't a well-thought-out process.  It could have been better.  I'm not mad that Trevor killed Johnny, nor am I mad that Johnny died; I'm mad because of how and why they did, like Peachrocks said.

 

You just don't kill off a good protagonist off like that.  You have to do it in a good way to make it actually work, and in GTA V - it certainly didn't work.

 

Maybe see them get in a fight, maybe see them trade blows, maybe see them in a war, but you don't see an awesome protag like Johnny get hit with a bottle and stomped to death.  You just... you just don't.

 

 

 

Let me put it in perspective.  Everyone seems to like Michael in GTA V.  He's a good character.  GTA VI comes rolling over the sunset and all of a sudden the new main character goes up to Michael, punches him in the nose and kills him instantly with that single punch.

 

You just don't f*ckin' do that.

  • Duxfever, Deadly Target, UltraGizmo64 and 1 other like this

Peachrocks
  • Peachrocks

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Jun 2013

#44

Posted 20 September 2013 - 02:31 AM


Let me put it in perspective.  Everyone seems to like Michael in GTA V.  He's a good character.  GTA VI comes rolling over the sunset and all of a sudden the new main character goes up to Michael, punches him in the nose and kills him instantly with that single punch.

 

You just don't f*ckin' do that.

 

 

I think if Trevor killed Niko like this there would be far more outrage and it's not out of the question that Niko could have died in a similar fashion regardless of the ending in 4 (especially if we stretch it to the same degrees as they stretched Johnny) because he concludes either way that people who he gets close to die. 

 

It's just so out of character for Johnny on the most part. Him being broken I understand but not to that degree, he wouldn't be in a fit state to care about Ashley before he went that far. Further what's the result of all this? Trevor gets unnecessary hate.

  • Duxfever likes this

DarkFalcon95
  • DarkFalcon95

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Sep 2013

#45

Posted 20 September 2013 - 03:12 AM Edited by DarkFalcon95, 20 September 2013 - 03:12 AM.

Meth is a hell of a drug, but I always knew that bitch Ashley would be the death of him.

  • im_stoned likes this

rgangsta
  • rgangsta

    THE OPERATOR

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2013

#46

Posted 20 September 2013 - 03:31 AM

Is anyone as f*cking PISSED off as I am that Johnny got killed? They didn't even give the man who broke into Alderny State Correctional a decent death.
Did it occur to Rockstar that the protagonist of a DLC purchased by millions was actually LIKED? And Clay and Terry, that was just bullsh*t overkill.
Why Johnny? There was nothing to be gained from killing him. If they are only going to have a reoccurring character on the screen for two minutes, their purpose is USUALLY to be an exciting homage to something the players loved, yet he, Terry, and Clay served no purpose other than being f*cking killed.
 
Why not kill Luis, anyway? I don't remember anyone liking the uptight, monotone, zombie douchebag.
 
f*ck you, Rockstar. That was a f*cking cheap move.


What pissed me off the most was the fact that Johnny was acting like a bitch the whole time. As a badass, you NEVER show fear. Such bull. That's why I don't like playing as Trevor much.

Nez Man
  • Nez Man

    Naean Howlett-Foster

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Jun 2008

#47

Posted 20 September 2013 - 03:41 AM Edited by Nez Man, 20 September 2013 - 03:44 AM.

While I am personally on the fence about how Johnny died, I feel that it is important to note that at least some of his personality from The Lost and Damned still shone through in Grand Theft Auto V.

 

For example, he stated "We all get high! We all get high! But that don't make it right." and "The crystal has got us, babe, but that don't make it right. Don't make nothin' right."

 

To me, this shows that while all of his terrible past experiences drove his previous no-drugs attitude out of the window, he still had some of his old values/morals somewhat intact.

 

I have not really seen this referenced in this topic yet, and believe it should be verbosely pointed out.  :)

  • Platinum Card and Lil Jacob 27 like this

Tacymist
  • Tacymist

    Onward towards the light

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 01 Jul 2013
  • United-States

#48

Posted 20 September 2013 - 03:46 AM

I went from "Oh hey that's Johnny!" to "Oh hey that's Johnny's brains on Trevor's shoe...."

  • UltraGizmo64 likes this

DeafMetal
  • DeafMetal

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2012

#49

Posted 20 September 2013 - 05:48 AM

Right after watching the scene, I was pissed. Really pissed. And was completely disgusted with Trevor.

 

But then I thought about it a little more and saw what I THINK Rockstar was trying to say: if you spend your time playing with fire, you will get burned. Johnny wasn't a good man. Johnny was an honest, trustworthy man who loved the people that surrounded him. But he wasn't a good man; he killed people, helped corrupt suits, and engaged in who-knows-how-many other crimes/sins/whatever-you-wanna-call-them.

 

When he left Liberty City, he had two choices: abandon the brotherhood and start out a fresh, healthy new life, or roll with the brotherhood and continue the life of crime that involves intimidation, killing, and drugs. Johnny chose the latter. Because Johnny decided against leading a lawful, decent life, he ended up completely wrecking himself and dying a pathetic, lonely, sad death in the ass of the middle of nowhere, being stomped to death by an ugly, disgusting hollbilly who just finished f*cking his meth-addicted girlfriend.

 

That's the thing they're trying to tell us: people who spend their lives doing bad things will not die a peaceful death. Career criminals are doomed to rot in a cell, b confined to a miserable existence, or die a pathetic death.

  • Nameless Foot Soldier and UltraGizmo64 like this

Travís.
  • Travís.

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2013
  • Australia

#50

Posted 20 September 2013 - 06:05 AM

No, Johnny was a scumbag and he deserved it. Trevor.Is.Awesome.


cp1dell
  • cp1dell

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2008

#51

Posted 20 September 2013 - 06:18 AM Edited by cp1dell, 20 September 2013 - 06:18 AM.

Happy to see the V board and its whiny babies are leaking.

 

And because of that comment you're all just going to assume I didn't play TLAD or like Johnny. There's no point in trying to explain the cutscene, or anything to you idiots.

  • Jordan_LDN likes this

Nameless Foot Soldier
  • Nameless Foot Soldier

    Libertonian

  • Members
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2012

#52

Posted 20 September 2013 - 06:19 AM Edited by Nameless Foot Soldier, 20 September 2013 - 06:21 AM.

Right after watching the scene, I was pissed. Really pissed. And was completely disgusted with Trevor.

 

But then I thought about it a little more and saw what I THINK Rockstar was trying to say: if you spend your time playing with fire, you will get burned. Johnny wasn't a good man. Johnny was an honest, trustworthy man who loved the people that surrounded him. But he wasn't a good man; he killed people, helped corrupt suits, and engaged in who-knows-how-many other crimes/sins/whatever-you-wanna-call-them.

 

When he left Liberty City, he had two choices: abandon the brotherhood and start out a fresh, healthy new life, or roll with the brotherhood and continue the life of crime that involves intimidation, killing, and drugs. Johnny chose the latter. Because Johnny decided against leading a lawful, decent life, he ended up completely wrecking himself and dying a pathetic, lonely, sad death in the ass of the middle of nowhere, being stomped to death by an ugly, disgusting hollbilly who just finished f*cking his meth-addicted girlfriend.

 

That's the thing they're trying to tell us: people who spend their lives doing bad things will not die a peaceful death. Career criminals are doomed to rot in a cell, b confined to a miserable existence, or die a pathetic death.

Quite spot on, none of the GTA IV characters were good people. Niko got his, Johnny as well. Next, Luis, lets see what fate was bestowed onto him, Although I believe Luis would have lived clean after Tony gave him the rights to the clubs when he left town. Also, Luis was doing mostly bodyguarding work for Tony with some hitjobs here and there along with some drug wars. Lest we also forget that Luis was a murdering maniac with little to no care for the people he killed.


TJGM
  • TJGM

    for science.

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2011
  • Ireland

#53

Posted 20 September 2013 - 06:42 AM

 

I think that killing off Johnny was actually a rather clever move by the writers. The purposes of doing so were to provide some shock value and a talking point, both of which have been fulfilled. Whether you agree with their decision or the execution or not, they've gotten people talking.

The GTA V has no motorcycle gangs is unrealistic, this game does not go forward.

 

As for the DLC, Kurt Sutter could write the script. It should unscrew death of Terry, or Clay, either make an alternative version of events.

 

Your reason is pretty stupid..


Peachrocks
  • Peachrocks

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Jun 2013

#54

Posted 20 September 2013 - 07:34 AM Edited by Peachrocks, 20 September 2013 - 07:40 AM.

Right after watching the scene, I was pissed. Really pissed. And was completely disgusted with Trevor.

 

But then I thought about it a little more and saw what I THINK Rockstar was trying to say: if you spend your time playing with fire, you will get burned. Johnny wasn't a good man. Johnny was an honest, trustworthy man who loved the people that surrounded him. But he wasn't a good man; he killed people, helped corrupt suits, and engaged in who-knows-how-many other crimes/sins/whatever-you-wanna-call-them.

 

When he left Liberty City, he had two choices: abandon the brotherhood and start out a fresh, healthy new life, or roll with the brotherhood and continue the life of crime that involves intimidation, killing, and drugs. Johnny chose the latter. Because Johnny decided against leading a lawful, decent life, he ended up completely wrecking himself and dying a pathetic, lonely, sad death in the ass of the middle of nowhere, being stomped to death by an ugly, disgusting hollbilly who just finished f*cking his meth-addicted girlfriend.

 

That's the thing they're trying to tell us: people who spend their lives doing bad things will not die a peaceful death. Career criminals are doomed to rot in a cell, b confined to a miserable existence, or die a pathetic death.

 

Again with the missed point. However I think it's pretty redundant to repeat myself and its this sort of thing why I don't post on forums.

 

I don't mean to single you out it's more aimed at one line wonders. Your post is a good one and actually thought out and thus its the easiest to respond to and has higher chances of actually being y'know understood. However it still overlooks the key point being made. Still I'll do this one more time.

 

It's not that Johnny died, it's HOW. It's the fact Trevor killed him in a VERY cowardly fashion. Johnny dying isn't the main issue here.

 

Also if you look through TLAD it's pretty clear why Johnny doesn't view 'lawful' living as an option. He wanted to join the army, but didn't because it was corrupt and was about protecting the 'fat cats' interest rather than his country.

 

Considering his poor upbringing as well, in addition to the need he feels for protecting his brothers Terry, Clay and Angus (and in a way Ashley as well he feels a strong responsibility for) living a 'normal/lawful life' would be very hard if not impossible for him. Take Michael (De Santa, not Johnny's brother) he had a lot of money to disappear on and still found life really difficult. He only had a family to look out for, not a bunch of hardships, lost friends and discontent to carry around and he still found his existence miserable.

 

I'm not saying Johnny shouldn't have died but the lesson here is that 'life isn't fair', not if you play with fire you get burned. Ultimately every 'bad' thing Johnny does is because he cares for his brothers. Luis and Niko's intentions aren't usually quite so noble.

 

Further even if he had gone legit Trevor could have killed him anyway.

Spoiler


DeafMetal
  • DeafMetal

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2012

#55

Posted 20 September 2013 - 07:41 AM

 

Right after watching the scene, I was pissed. Really pissed. And was completely disgusted with Trevor.

 

But then I thought about it a little more and saw what I THINK Rockstar was trying to say: if you spend your time playing with fire, you will get burned. Johnny wasn't a good man. Johnny was an honest, trustworthy man who loved the people that surrounded him. But he wasn't a good man; he killed people, helped corrupt suits, and engaged in who-knows-how-many other crimes/sins/whatever-you-wanna-call-them.

 

When he left Liberty City, he had two choices: abandon the brotherhood and start out a fresh, healthy new life, or roll with the brotherhood and continue the life of crime that involves intimidation, killing, and drugs. Johnny chose the latter. Because Johnny decided against leading a lawful, decent life, he ended up completely wrecking himself and dying a pathetic, lonely, sad death in the ass of the middle of nowhere, being stomped to death by an ugly, disgusting hollbilly who just finished f*cking his meth-addicted girlfriend.

 

That's the thing they're trying to tell us: people who spend their lives doing bad things will not die a peaceful death. Career criminals are doomed to rot in a cell, b confined to a miserable existence, or die a pathetic death.

 

Again with the missed point. However I think it's pretty redundant to repeat myself and its this sort of thing why I don't post on forums. I don't mean to single you out, your post is a good one and actually thought out and thus its the easiest to respond to but it still overlooks the key point being made. Still I'll do this one more time.

 

It's not that Johnny died, it's HOW. It's the fact Trevor killed him in a VERY cowardly fashion. Johnny dying isn't the main issue here.

 

Also if you look through TLAD it's pretty clear why Johnny doesn't view 'lawful' living as an option. He wanted to join the army, but didn't because it was corrupt and was about protecting the 'fat cats' interest rather than his country.

 

Considering his poor upbringing as well, in addition to the need he feels for protecting his brothers Terry, Clay and Angus (and in a way Ashley as well he feels a strong responsibility for) living a 'normal/lawful life' would be very hard if not impossible for him. Take Michael (De Santa, not Johnny's brother) he had a lot of money to disappear on and still found life really difficult. He only had a family to look out for, not a bunch of hardships, lost friends and discontent to carry around and he still found his existence miserable.

 

I'm not saying Johnny shouldn't have died but the lesson here is that 'life isn't fair', not if you play with fire you get burned. Ultimately every 'bad' thing Johnny does is because he cares for his brothers. Luis and Niko's intentions aren't usually quite so noble.

 

Further even if he had gone legit Trevor could have killed him anyway.

Spoiler

 

You seemed not have read my post lol I covered the"HOW." i.e., you lead a violent life, you will not die a peaceful, respectful death.


Peachrocks
  • Peachrocks

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Jun 2013

#56

Posted 20 September 2013 - 08:46 AM Edited by Peachrocks, 20 September 2013 - 08:49 AM.

You seemed not have read my post lol I covered the"HOW." i.e., you lead a violent life, you will not die a peaceful, respectful death.

That's not how, that's why... How is being cowardly murdered at close range while doing something extremely out of character. He still had enough of his former self until that moment.

Dying in a "me or him" situation would have generated nowhere near the amount of outrage and hate for Trevor, while still not being a 'peaceful, respectful death'

LordWieslaw
  • LordWieslaw

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2013

#57

Posted 20 September 2013 - 10:45 AM

Maybe Rockstar will do game for Sons of Anarchy, but such a climate will never be more in the GTA. ;/

02fishera
  • 02fishera

    PSN ID: TeamTango91

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 27 Nov 2009
  • England

#58

Posted 20 September 2013 - 01:14 PM

 

You seemed not have read my post lol I covered the"HOW." i.e., you lead a violent life, you will not die a peaceful, respectful death.

That's not how, that's why... How is being cowardly murdered at close range while doing something extremely out of character. He still had enough of his former self until that moment.

Dying in a "me or him" situation would have generated nowhere near the amount of outrage and hate for Trevor, while still not being a 'peaceful, respectful death'

 

It's all well and good saying that Johnny's actions prior to his death were cowardly and completely out of character, but having read a lot of the posts, it's pretty clear that people have shown little to know regard to the fact that we don't know what happened to Johnny during the five years between the two stories.

 

It's all very well and good saying that Johnny was this, that or the other in TLaD, but you've got to be downright naive to believe that the events that occurred throughout the story wouldn't have left any form of emotional scar on the man. Fighting a losing battle to keep the woman he loved clean, finding out that his best friend had murdered and killing a man that he once considered to be his brother would have left him broken. When you've hit rock bottom, it's easy to abandon your morals and beliefs.

 

While Johnny is among my favourite protagonists, when taking into account just how easy it to fall, the manner in which he died feels "right" to me.


Stig
  • Stig

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 11 Apr 2008

#59

Posted 20 September 2013 - 06:03 PM

Who gives a f*ck? You're all crying about nothing. Trevor made Johnny his bitch, just like Billy did.


Jameson312
  • Jameson312

    Founder and Lead Curler: LS Curling Association

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Sep 2013

#60

Posted 20 September 2013 - 07:05 PM

Who gives a f*ck? You're all crying about nothing. Trevor made Johnny his bitch, just like Billy did.

 

He dead. He a dead man.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users