The sad, depressing realization is that there was no grand conspiracy behind the murder of Rosie Larsen. There wasn’t a sex scandal. There wasn’t a real political motivation. The truth is, Rosie was at the wrong place at the wrong time. She overheard a conversation about a backroom deal that Jamie (Darren Richmond’s campaign manager) was making behind Richmond’s back to further his campaign, and Jamie — who found her hiding in a room under construction — accidentally knocked her unconscious trying to shut her up. He thought she was dead, so he took her out to the island, where she escaped his trunk. He chased her down and beat her AGAIN, and AGAIN, he thought she was dead. (She was not).
This much Holder and Linden figured out. How much foreshadowing was there that Jamie was behind the death of Rosie? Very little. In fact, Jamie’s involvement didn’t really come into focus until the final minutes of the penultimate episode. He was never really a suspect. However, Holden and Linden decided to check out his alibi again, found out he was at the casino the night that Rosie was murdered, made some deductions based on a missing key card, and fingered Jamie for the murder. By the time they tracked him down, however, Richmond had won the election, and Jamie was giving him a crazed, comical, overly-acted left-field confession to Richmond that he’d killed Rosie by accident. Richmond was shocked. At that point, Holder and Linden arrive with Gwen, and Jamie says he needs to do what is best for Richmond’s political future. So, he pointed his gun toward Gwen, goading Holder to return fire and kill Jamie.
Murder solved, murderer dead, right? No. Not quite.
![[avatar]](http://p.uproxxcdn.com/photo/4006/thumb)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/06/waltergun-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/06/tumblr_m8zf4po7iV1rzipspo1_400-150x150.gif)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/06/the-killing-season-3-6001-e1370448845310-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/laundry-lori-150x150.gif)
Actually, Jamie’s gun was never loaded.
Right. Yes. That makes more sense and explains why no one was shot (noted and corrected. Thanks).
Mireille Enos and Joel Kinnaman are fantastic.
No, they most definitely are not. Unless you like extreme frump and horrendous lessons in ebonics which I assume that no one does.
“…that he’d killed Rosie on accident.”
BY ACCIDENT DAMN YOU.
/grammar rage
I wonder if the show was as boring as this article?
I fell asleep halfway through your comment.
SEXY HATER UPDATE: The ratings for season 2 of The Killing aren’t much lower than the ratings for season 4 of Breaking Bad.
Now that I’ve shit on your day, I’m going to go catch up on the past few episodes of “The Pitch.”
Thanks.
So the killer was water? With all the rain in the episodes we should have figure out this clever twist.
I’m so, so glad I didn’t watch the second season, but I do appreciate knowing who the killers are even though it’s ridiculously dumb.
Reading this article vindicated my quitting the show halfway through S1. Good to know that I saved hours of my life…which I subsequently spent mocking The Killing. Dammit.
I quit watching this show after the 1st season didn’t reveal the killer. They took what could have been a good 1 season mini series & stretched into a boring show. Good to know who the killer was, but then again I really didn’t care.
I haven’t watched a single episode of this show, but am I reading this correctly? The killer was caught because she didn’t fix her broken taillight anytime during two seasons’ worth of time elapsing?
Yes. Exactly.
That sounds completely ridiculous.
Come on, when would someone, whose brother-in-law owns a moving and storage company with its own garage, have an opportunity to have some minor car repair done?
It all took place over 22 days.
I’d say I was disappointed, but my expectations where already low. They clearly decided who the killer(s) would be about halfway through season 2.
I’m not reading this in detail since I haven’t watched it yet (and I want the inevitable ridiculous twist to be a slight surprise).
That said, I’ve now decided I hope it was Jesse Pinkman, thrown into a jealous rage by the presence of another blonde-haired white boy with a history of meth use who calls people “yo” on his network.
+ I hate this frigging show.
And now a confession: I actually watched both seasons.
Why? I’m not sure. I think it became, to some degree, trainwreck television. You see, I’m not the kind of person who watches bad movies because they’re bad or watches reality tv because it’s bad. However, the fact that something that could have been so good turned quickly so bad actually captivated me. I had to see what they did.
The answer in a concise summary is this:
1) They established some interesting primary characters
2) They established some stereotypes as secondary characters. No need to make them interesting, eh?
3) They put it in any-city USA. Having a character live on a boat, therefore showing pictures of the harbor, does not make a city interesting or unique.
4) They F’d with the audience by changing the primary suspect every single episode.
5) Once they circled through the cast members they went through them again.
6) They included subplots (The cop’s son) that did nothing but drag down the pace.
7) They settled on not one but two murderers and a dozen accessories to murder, none of whom COULD POSSIBLY BE PREDICTED WITH ANY LOGIC.
It’s like having 18 characters, laying out evidence for 16 of them, and then in the last page of the book explaining why it was #17 and #18 who did it and showing you why. That’s great.
Do I think it was time well spent? Define ‘well spent’. It was time I wasn’t using anyway. I only stand by it in that if I hadn’t watched it I wouldn’t have believed what everyone was saying.
So much wasted potential.
I couldn’t help but notice how many people actually died related to plot-points of the show.
1) The new mayor’s Wife. She died before the show started, driving him to attempt suicide, which becomes a problem for his campaign and his “alibi”.
2) The father of some kid, killed off camera, long before the show ever started. This serves so that in a late episode of the season he can show up and murder…
3) A local mafioso. Some uninteresting hodgepodge of stereotypes who was the boss of Rosie Larson’s father once upon a time.
4) Rosie Larson. This is your title “killing”.
5) The gunman who tried to murder the mayoral candidate, who instead paralyzed him. The gunman promptly blew his own head off.
6) The campaign assistant guy who everyone thought was guilty at the beginning of the last episode.
7) Some anonymous American Indian whose bones were thrown into a dig site in order to keep them from laying down a waterfront project due to historical significance.
I watched the whole thing. Meh. Whatever you people say. There are way more ridiculous shows on TV. Without any red herrings we’d have a two episode show. It didn’t bother me that much.
I’m looking forward to season three where, hopefully, Holder is the main character. Love that guy.
I would like to offer myself a big pat on the back for skipping out on the second season of The Killing.
Way to go me.
How did that Jamie guy get the unconscious girls body through the casino after knocking her out the first time?
Hucked her over the balcony.
Also, the killer was the ‘Red Herring’. Surprised you didn’t pick up on it as it appeared in every episode.
The Pup Named Scooby Doo gang was on top of that sh*t from the beginning…
I love this site and your guys’ writing. I like this site because, even when I disagree (which is rare), I still find myself enjoying the article which, in my opinion, is a sign of excellent, critical writing (keep in mind that I’m not a writer myself).
I’ve watched both seasons of The Killing. I’ve even watched the Dutch version. I really, honestly, and truthful thought seasons one and two of the American re-make were good. I loved the way it was drawn out and I personally felt the reveal and the inclusion of the Aunt/sister-in-law was pretty awesome. Most of the hate seems to come from people who wanted the case to close with season 1 – “BUT WHY DIDN’T I FIND OUT WHO THE KILLER WAS AFTER SEASON 1 FUCK THIS SHOW” is more-or-less a typical reaction.
Are people that impatient? Am I literally the only one who enjoyed both seasons? Season 1 had some episodes that really could’ve been cut out, but I just don’t understand the blanket hate towards this show.
I, for one, will tune into season 3 if it comes around (and I hope it does).
Well when the marketing campaign for said show’s first season is “Who Killed Rosie Larsen?” it’s kind of a dick move to, you know, not reveal the killer.
I watched the first season, and felt cheated. Watched the second season premiere and I felt like a moron. Is this show some kind of inside joke that only the writers and showrunners are in on?
Yeah, but can you and should you hold the writer’s accountable for what the marketing crew at AMC does? Are we sure that Veena Sud was okay with the way S1 was pitched? (Honestly, if someone has an answer, feel free to share).
I don’t know why you would feel stupid watching a show, specifically this one. Cheated, okay. I can understand that. But there’s so many dumbed down shows on TV…I just don’t feel like this is one of them.
I just don’t get why people hated the longer arc so much. Instant gratification does not exist with shows like this. I personally did not feel cheated at the end of last night’s finale. Underwhelmed, sure. Cheated? No.
Also, in regards to Jamie’s “over acting” during his breakdown: I don’t know about you guys, but if I had been sitting on some crazy shit like that for a few weeks, I might snap and “over act” as well.
Valid and noted. I don’t hate the show and am normally into slow-paced storylines, but this just felt different. You are right, the marketing team/AMC execs could’ve fucked with the story after seeing that it was getting good ratings.
If that’s the case then, in the words of my Southern Indiana family members, “that ain’t righ”
Munch and Ice T woulda’ figured this out in 44 minutes.
America, F yeah!
I watched both seasons as they played and enjoyed it. I didn’t get all pissed off that they didn’t reveal the killer at the end of season 1 but it was still a dick move by AMC. My friend just started watching the show a week or so ago. Blew through the first season on Netflix fast and loved it. He caught up on Season 2 before the finale and really enjoyed it as well. I don’t know. Maybe it’s a show that’s better if you watch it all at once. Watching it week by week can make it drag.
By Dutch, do you mean Danish?
Yes, I was wrong. It’s a Danish show, not Dutch.
I talked to a friend today who did the same thing your friend did, hahe71. He, on the other hand, hated S1 and LOVED S2 – everyone’s got a different opinion.
BTW, ‘Who killed Rosie Larson?’ does not give any indication of the timeline where we might find the answer. Nothing in any press anywhere for season 1 said ‘you will find out who killed her by the end of the season.’ People are reading too much into what they think *should* have happened. I found nothing wrong with AMC’s marketing. And I found little wrong with either season 1 or season 2. I get most of my TV through Amazon and I paid for all the episodes, and I have no regrets.
st8CHILL killed Rosie Larsen.
Beat her with a corgi. The bastage!
So glad I never bothered with this show.
So glad I didn’t waste my time watching the second season. I still have the premiere recorded, and never touched it.
Kind of a dumb way to answer the show’s central question, but the idea of it being the aunt was pretty neat, and I liked her confession scene a lot. Anyway, I didn’t really have a big problem with the first season ending without solving the mystery — I don’t think there was much of a real reason to expect that that would/should happen — but I got sick of the “suspect of the week” structure pretty early on and mostly bailed about halfway through the first season. Nice to see the case solved, though. Maybe the next season (if it happens?) can be better, now that this bullshit investigation is out of the way.
I disagree with nearly every point in this review. I will admit that the storyline was a bit convoluted at times but for me this series was all about the journey. The finely drawn characterizations, the off the charts acting, the bone-chilling rain-soaked atmosphere all combined to make each episode mesmerizing. More than just a story about a crime, it was about the far-reaching effects of a crime, the many lives that are touched and changed forever, the palpable grief of the family, all elements that are rarely explored in crime dramas.
If you must have the crime solved in an hour or even an entire season, then this was not the show for you. For me it was must watch TV and I will be hoping for a 3rd season.
You touched on something that I haven’t seen a lot of – general vibe/atmosphere. I, like you, love the show for both of those reasons (oh, and the music/audio mix is incredible, but I don’t blame you if you’re not into that).
This show is fucking HEAVY. The aunt confessing was probably the heaviest scene of the first two seasons.
Perhaps I’m stupid, but how does Aames get out of this unscathed? Did I miss something?
I thought they left that kind of open ended? As if it wasn’t clear what his fate was, but it probably wasn’t good.
I knew it all along!
the thing that bothers me the most is that it seemed like the writers picked the killers out of a hat and then had to come up with motivation. jamie’s is fine i guess. but terry’s is complete bullshit.
the only reason she pushed the car into the lake is because her boyfriend aames ridiculously says something along the lines of. “i’m out. i don’t want to be a part of this. my affair is over.”
terry didn’t like that and with good reason. because it makes absolutely no sense. what in the hell does their affair have to do with covering up a murder?