Vulture

Skip to content, or skip to search.

tv

New York Times Standing By Its Hilariously Wrong Interpretation of Last Night’s Killing Finale

Ginia Bellafante watched a different episode of The Killing than everyone else last night. Not only was her analysis in the New York Times titled "An Obsessive Killer Is Revealed in a Stylish Whodunit," but she's sticking to her guns and doubling down on her conclusion that Billy Campbell's Darren Richmond killed Rosie Larsen with a defense called "The Killing Finale: Clearer Than You Thought." "If we want to buy in to some idea that Richmond was framed then we have to believe that a lot of disparate people were involved, with no evidence of any motivation," she says. Which is exactly what the show is asking us to do! Motivations have not been this series' strong suit. Also, The Killing's showrunner has said the ending was a cliffhanger: "We never said you'll get closure ... We will not tie up this show in a bow," Veena Sud told HitFix. So the show's creator does not consider the investigation closed, but Bellafante is maintaining that Richmond is guilty because crazyguy Belko was about to go Jack Ruby on him in the episode's final moments. "It seemed crazy to me that the show would deploy the same plot point twice," Bellafante writes, even though the show has done that with: Linden's lingering trip to California (will she make it? how about this time? what about this time? how about now?); the people Rosie had some kind of illicit connection to (Jasper, Bennet); Linden's phone always ringing at inopportune moments; and Gwen standing by her man despite all logic telling her not to, among others. [NYT, ArtsBeat/NYT]