Blue Bloods Series Finale Should Have Killed Off a Different Character
The series finale of Blue Bloods brought fans a whirlwind of emotions, wrapping up the Reagan family’s 14-season journey with powerful moments of closure. However, one creative choice left viewers divided: the decision to kill off a specific character. Many fans argue that the finale would have been far more impactful if the show had chosen to end the story of a different character instead.
A Controversial Ending
The Blue Bloods finale delivered a dramatic death that shocked fans and left the Reagan family grappling with loss. While the character’s demise served as a climactic event, many feel that it lacked the emotional weight the series has been known for.
Critics of the decision argue that the chosen character was not central enough to the overarching narrative to justify such a pivotal moment. Instead, they believe another, more prominent figure’s death could have left a lasting impression and tied together key themes of family, duty, and sacrifice.
Who Should Have Been Killed Off?
While fans have differing opinions, one name consistently comes up in the conversation: Frank Reagan.
Frank, played masterfully by Tom Selleck, has been the heart of Blue Bloods since its debut. As the patriarch of the Reagan family and the NYPD Commissioner, his character embodies the series’ core values of loyalty, justice, and leadership.
Killing off Frank in the finale would have been a bold move that underscored the show’s themes. It could have served as a passing of the torch to the younger Reagan generation, forcing them to carry on his legacy while dealing with the emotional impact of his loss.
Why Frank’s Death Would Have Worked
- Emotional Impact: Frank’s death would have devastated both the Reagan family and the audience, creating a truly unforgettable conclusion.
- Symbolism: As the family’s leader, Frank’s passing would symbolize the end of an era while highlighting the importance of family bonds and continuity.
- Narrative Closure: A storyline focused on Frank’s legacy, his sacrifices, and the mark he left on his family and the NYPD would have been a fitting and poignant conclusion to the series.
Other Possible Choices
Aside from Frank, some fans suggest that Danny Reagan (Donnie Wahlberg) or even Erin Reagan (Bridget Moynahan) could have been more compelling choices. Both characters have carried significant storylines throughout the series, and their deaths would have left a more profound impact on the remaining characters.
Danny’s tragic loss could have served as a wake-up call for his family to unite even stronger, while Erin’s passing might have amplified the stakes for the Reagan family’s dedication to justice.
Fan Reactions
The finale’s choice to kill off a less central character has sparked widespread debate. On social media, fans expressed disappointment, with many calling the decision “safe” and “underwhelming.”
“I wanted to feel gutted by the finale, but instead, it just felt like another episode,” one viewer tweeted. Another wrote, “If they had killed off Frank, I’d still be crying. Now? I’m just annoyed.”
A Missed Opportunity
While the Blue Bloods finale delivered its signature blend of drama and heart, the decision to kill off a less significant character feels like a missed opportunity. A more daring choice could have elevated the finale to legendary status, leaving fans with a deeply emotional and satisfying conclusion.
As it stands, the show’s final chapter remains a bittersweet farewell to the Reagan family—one that might have been more powerful with a different ending.
