The Case For Killing Characters
Warning! Spoilers for The Walking Dead, Game of Thrones and Breaking Bad below!
In the vast ocean of TV content, one thing remains constant – the most memorable stories include characters we remember. We root for them, empathize with their struggles, and see pieces of ourselves in their journeys. Conversely, we also despise villains, wanting the bad guy to get their comeuppance and taste some sweet humble pie at the end.
So, when a TV show decides to kill off a main character, it can sometimes feel like a betrayal. But here’s the uncomfortable truth: TV shows need to kill off more of their central characters — and not just for shock value, but to increase tension, suspense, and storytelling depth. This kind of narrative decision, though controversial, can often elevate a show from good to iconic.
TV shows often fall into a cycle of safety. Writers and networks know what their audiences love but the trouble is, they’re also worried about upsetting that very same audience. These characters become beloved fixtures, and killing them off can – to some pockets of the viewing audience – feel like a direct attack on viewers. As a result, many series play it safe, opting to keep characters around far longer than they should, even when the story would benefit from their exit. And yes, I’m looking at you Carol from Walking Dead!
The Walking Dead & Game Of Thrones
On that same note, lets examine The Walking Dead because it’s a great example of storytelling on both sides of the spectrum. At its peak, the show was lauded for its gritty realism and willingness to kill off key characters. It was raw, shocking, and it kept fans on the edge of their seats. Remember T-Dog’s death? It wasn’t in the middle of a series finale, it occurred several episodes into season 3, on a random episode no less!
This became a staple for The Walking Dead and viewers tuned in every week, gripped by the plot and desperate to know who was going to survive next. Unfortunately, the show started to develop plot armour around many of its characters. We knew Rick, Daryl and the rest of the core group would be okay, and it caused the storytelling to become stale and predictable.
But then came the infamous “death” of Glenn. For those who remember, the scene was faked out in Season 6, only for Glenn to miraculously survive underneath a dumpster. And then he was killed off at the end of the season. Or, well, a year later during the big reveal in season 7.
The backlash was palpable; fans felt manipulated, and the stakes of the show suddenly undermined. The result? The tension deflated, and the narrative impact of character deaths in the series was significantly weakened. And you only have to look at the ratings to see how that decision impacted the show.
Want another example? Game of Thrones understood the importance of killing off main characters — at least in its early seasons. From Ned Stark’s shocking beheading to the massacre of the Red Wedding, these moments were pivotal not just because they were surprising, but because they felt permanent. The world of Westeros was dangerous, unpredictable, and, most importantly, no one was safe. That feeling of genuine risk kept viewers on edge, knowing that even their favourite characters could meet a grisly end.
It’s easy to look back and see why Game of Thrones became such a cultural phenomenon. The show’s willingness to kill off key figures made each episode feel consequential. When you watched a battle scene or a political skirmish, you genuinely feared for the characters involved. The stakes were real, and the suspense tangible. This narrative unpredictability is what made the show must-watch TV, something that had people glued to their screens and furiously debating outcomes online. Until the final two seasons of course.
The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones aren’t the only guilty parties here. Stranger Things has flirted with the idea of killing off main characters several times, but has yet to follow through in a meaningful way. By continuously sparing its key players, the show risks undermining its tension. When every season ends with the main cast surviving against all odds, the audience begins to feel that their safety is a foregone conclusion, and the suspense fades away.
The Outer Banks Argument
Recently, we’ve seen a similar backlash with Outer Banks. Without diving into spoilers, the death of a significant character in the latest season was met with outcry. Fans expressed their disappointment on social media, lamenting the loss and calling out the show’s writers for ruining the series. But I’d like to offer a counterargument here: Killing off a beloved character can be the best thing for a show’s longevity and storytelling integrity.
Yes, it’s painful to lose a favourite character. Yes, this person was probably the worst to kill off from a narrative perspective, but similarly, it’s also raised the stakes going into season 5. If a show wants to convey genuine stakes, it has to be willing to let go of its key players. When a show is unwilling to sacrifice its main characters, it risks becoming predictable and formulaic. The suspense dwindles, and viewers become complacent, knowing that their favourites will always escape unscathed. By contrast, when a character we care about is killed off, it reinforces the idea that the world of the show is real and dangerous. It creates genuine suspense because suddenly, anything can happen.
Shows that do it right
Look at Breaking Bad, for example. The show didn’t shy away from killing off important characters, and this decision paid off narratively. Gus Fring’s demise was shocking but fitting for the story. Hank Schrader’s death was heartbreaking, yet it added a crucial turning point for Walter White’s character arc. And if you look on IMDB, it’s also one of the highest rated episodes of any TV show, ever. Each death wasn’t just for shock value; it propelled the story forward, creating a ripple effect that shaped the narrative’s endgame.
The Leftovers leaned into the unpredictability of its narrative. The series wasn’t afraid to let go of characters, making the viewer feel the weight of each loss. It was an emotional gut-punch, but it made the show’s themes of grief and uncertainty all the more powerful. The unpredictability of the storytelling was its biggest strength, and it’s why the show remains a favourite among critics and dedicated fans.
Despite being nearly 23 years old, Band of Brothers is another great example of a show that uses suspense and tension to kill off or severely injure characters, making it one of the best miniseries of all time.
The Problem With Playing It Safe
Through all of this though, there’s also the financial element to consider. Networks and streaming services, particularly giants like Netflix, are often under pressure to keep fan-favourite characters around to retain viewership numbers. But this strategy can backfire. By trying to keep everyone happy and avoiding the risk of upsetting fans, shows can lose the very element that made them compelling in the first place: genuine unpredictability.
Take Money Heist as an example. Originally a Spanish series that saw modest success, it wasn’t until it was picked up by Netflix that it became a global sensation. The early seasons didn’t shy away from killing off key characters, adding to the intensity of the heists. But as the show grew in popularity, it started playing it safer, and the later seasons suffered as a result. The stakes felt lower, the suspense waned, and what was once a high-octane thriller began to feel like a formulaic drama.
Why We Need More Permanent Stakes
In an era where there’s so much content vying for our attention, shows need to stand out. One way to do this is by embracing unpredictability. Killing off a main character isn’t just about shocking the audience; it’s about making a statement. It says, “This world we’ve built is dangerous. Actions have consequences, and no one is safe. Join us for the ride but be prepared to bite your nails all the way through!”
It’s a narrative decision that can elevate a series from good to unforgettable. It creates tension and suspense, drives the plot forward, and makes each episode feel like it could be the one where everything changes. So, while it’s painful to say goodbye to our favourite characters, sometimes it’s just what a story needs to propel itself into the annals of greatness.
It’s not about shock value — it’s about staying true to the world and narrative the show has built. It’s a sign of bold storytelling, and in a world of safe, predictable TV, it’s exactly what we need more of.