#their backstory can be used as an explanation sure but it doesn't excuse their actions - they're still villains

[4getfulimaginator2022]

The season 3 finale of Big Sky was the most anticlimactic finale for a TV show that I've ever seen. Think of a balloon when the air is let out. It was the most jarring, disconnected mess.

I've been through many, many TV shows, including the BBC Merlin and Once Upon a Time. Those shows had some wacky finales, but they were still exciting, they brought a new element that left the story on a cliffhanger, and most of the plot threads from the current season were tied up neatly. They also made you want to keep watching the show.

I don't know what it was that I watched last night. I feel like the show didn't answer even half of the questions that it brought up during the entire season. I have a list of the questions I wanted answered and which are probably going to stay unanswered.

Why/how did Paige steal the money in the first place and why was Luke involved in the theft?

Buck is the Bleeding Heart killer but never explains why, not even to Sunny? He said he tried to do good but can't explain why he murdered innocent girls and put their hearts in jars? Wtf? Is he just a cold-blooded psychopath? What is his story or "excuse"?

Walter's murderous tendencies (hunting Luke, the backpacker) are just wiped away as if they never happened?

Why was Avery even in Montana in the first place?

Why/how did Avery agree to work with the syndicate to get part of the money?

How did Avery know about the money or Paige/Luke when he got into Sunny's camp?

Who the hell ARE Paige and Luke?

Was Walter holding Paige against her will? Did she have any real feelings for him or just manipulated him?

Why does Buck kidnap Denise and Emily? He doesn't bargain for his freedom and I'm not even sure he knew that Paige saw the heart jars. What was even the point of this? He acted like he had no clear motive?! He could have asked Sunny to come anyway?

Second, I think the show was unfair to a lot of people who were shipping the main couple because nothing happened. We're not asking for big dramatic gestures, but as far as I'm concerned, it seems like Jenny's interest in Beau was one-sided/unrequited and even if that interest was sort of returned, it was too weak to be noticeable. I would have preferred for them to just be good friends and partners instead of the writers teasing a building romantic relationship that they had no intention of pursuing. Maybe the season just wasn't long enough. At this point it seems like they are anticipating the show will not be renewed and they didn't want to upset anyone in particular, either those who don't like Jenny and Beau as a couple or those who wanted them to get together. When are writers going to learn that you can't make everyone happy and you shouldn't even try because that's bad storytelling? Pick a side, people!

I will admit I started watching Big Sky because of Jensen Ackles and his great performance in The Boys. I think the acting is good, but the scripts suck. Honestly, what even was this finale? It was action filled and yet it felt like nothing happened. There were no real stakes because nobody really got hurt except for Buck, and I even would have appreciated an ambiguous ending where we weren't sure whether the big baddie or the good guy survived.

I feel like parts of the story were taken for granted and the writers expected us to fill in the blanks ourselves without giving us any backstory or explanation. I'm afraid that just won't cut it for me. I'm not saying that I need everything to be handed to me on a platter - I can think and figure things out for myself - but I still need them to give me enough information to put together. Everything was so disconnected and motives were so unclear that the reason I should feel anxious or concerned for the characters didn't exist. Buck had no legitimate reason to kidnap those girls, and he didn't do anything with that action except ask for his wife, who wasn't in prison or under arrest. She was just under surveillance and that was it. Again, there were no real stakes here.

To me, the writers seemed tired of their own story and opted to create an ending that was the easiest for them to write. Do I sound disappointed? Good, because I wasted so much time on this show, expecting it to be thrilling and well written, and I got a season finale that was written worse than for a fantasy show. The plot threads were not tied up as they should have been, and there was only partial resolution for character arcs. The red herrings were ridiculous. Sunny was advertised as the villain of the season, and while she was involved in crimes, it didn't feel like true villainy at all. Most of the time, I thought she was boring and not fleshed out enough for me to hate or even dislike. She seemed as much of a player as any of the other characters in the story, not the villain that is supposed to stand directly opposite the hero or even anti-hero. Then Buck didn't even go to jail or do penance for all those girls and other people he killed. The serial killer tendencies are hinted at too late to make much of an impact. He was evil but not fleshed out enough to be a villain either! Why should I even care when he never said why he believed he could do what he did, knowing that it was wrong? Motivation is what makes characters evil or good. I even speculated that Buck was covering up for Cormac or they were both serial killers, a father and son duo. Anything?! You can't just say, "Oh, he's a serial killer!" and that's it. No explanation, no motivation, nothing. ALL CRIME HAS A MOTIVE. FREE WILL = MOTIVE.

Even if Big Sky gets renewed for a 4th season, I don't think I'll be watching it. Rant over.

#big sky #big sky spoilers #big sky season 3 finale #rant #big sky deadly trails #spoilers