Talk:Finn Collins/@comment-76.17.103.248-20150909225722/@comment-76.17.103.248-20150910001437

You are so right. The grounders are also hypocrits. Those kids were innocent civilians, too. Yet, the grounders started killing them. If life has worth, then so did the lives of those kids, and so did Finn's life. Jason Rothenberg said in an interview that the massacre and Finn's execution was a way to deal with that topic and not be too preachy. What that says to me is that he wanted to show someone being punished for commiting a massacre, whereas in the past, people like LT Calley basically got away with it. But the MY Lai massacre was nothing like what Finn did. It was more deliberate and with a different kind of mind set.

To Kill a Mockingbird is a great analogy. I liked The 100 before I liked Finn, too. But a few episodes in, the character struck a chord with me, and the show became more special. I still like the show, but I resent that Rothenberg cared more about his story than his actor or the fans who loved Finn. You don't just write for your own creative satisfaction. You write with your viewers in mind, too. The episode was one night. Finn and Thomas are gone for the remainder of the series. Like you, I don't think killing Finn was necessary. It didn't really change anything. Clarke would have done everything she could to get those kids out of Mt. Weather regardless of Finn's death. Finn dying was necessary for the alliance only because that's the way the writers wanted it to happen. It could have happened the way Clarke intended, by saving Lincoln as a way to show the grounders that they could eliminate the threat of the reapers.