in ,

Yellowstone Fans Aren’t Happy About a Character Leaving the Ranch

yellowstone-reactions

Yellowstone’s recent sixth episode featured the kind of prideful fistfights and filial tension found only in the spiciest of telenovelas: Lloyd and Walker finally threw down, while Jamie stood up to his father, Garret Randall, who promptly sat down and made Jamie cry—seriously, what are we watching this season? The episode’s real casualty, however, was fan-favorite Teeter, who did nothing wrong, has only been badass, and yet finds herself packing her bags.

The decision was John’s. After Lloyd stabbed Walker over—honestly, who knows at this point—Laramie, John decided that the presence of girls in the bunkhouse was creating nothing but bedlam. The new rule John laid down, after deciding not to kil*l Lloyd for violating the sacred “no fighting” rule on a series where fighting means ratings: no girls allowed. That means Laramie (good!), Mia (who cares?) and Teeter (boo!) have to leave.

Fans are livid and confused over the move, which seems to betray one of the most loyal ranchers. And it doesn’t seem like a one-episode thing, either. As some fans have observed, Jen Landon (who plays Teeter) isn’t listed on the credits of future episodes. Her departure may be both sudden and—at least for this season of Yellowstone—permanent.

The decision also follows a slew of episodes that seem to be underwriting the show’s previously robust characters; both Beth and Rip have been excessively dickish, while the series struggles to find a compelling antagonist to the Dutton’s land ownership—the point of almost every struggle thus far. John’s decision to kick out Teeter while paying lip service to loyalty has struck some fans as odd. As one wrote on Reddit, “I thought the whole purpose of having the brand was having a job forever. If Teeter can be fired for something she’s not responsible for, does the brand even mean anything?”

John’s decision appears to ignore the supposed consequence of the brand—the “Y,” which is burned onto the chest and signifies something like family to the Duttons. If you wear the brand, the Duttons will protect you. But, apparently, someone who wears the brand—and hasn’t done anything wrong—can still be left out to dry. So maybe the Duttons don’t care. Like we said: odd.

Here’s what else fans are saying.

What the hell did Teeter do wrong?

Many fans are pointing out Teeter’s loyalty, her injury sustained when a horse trampled her, as well as several acts of bravery, including fighting the bikers and carrying out the Duttons’ other unseemly requests. If Teeter can be punished for someone else’s actions, does her brand really mean anything?

This is the crux of the issue for fans, already upset by the season’s writing . Those qualms continued into episode 6, where some also called out the realism of making Walker fight Lloyd only a day after being stabbed and—we assume—losing lots of blood.

In general, the sympathy for Lloyd as a character has waned, given the rapidity of his escalation; he went from jealous to blood-thirsty in less than a week. (Maybe not unrealistic, but, nonetheless, a characteristic that makes his storyline less than redeemable, even by the show’s low standards.)

Teeter’s punishment is not only disproportionate, fans point out, but also plain stupid. “Not sure how come she’s told to leave as she was branded?” one Redditor added. “Can’t they put her living quarters elsewhere?” Seems sensible.

Mostly, fans theorize Teeter’s sacrifice comes as a writerly decision to work her into the Yellowstone spinoff series 6666, which takes place on the Four Sixes Ranch in Texas. Jimmy is already there. Mia is likely on her way. Why not stuff more familiar characters into a show in order to bate as many Yellowstone fans as possible?

Fans, however, may not be biting. They want Teeter in Montana.

What do you think?

Comments