How do you see the Nick/Adalind/Diana at the end

[Robyn]

Henry wrote:

Renard was a skilled minipulater that's for sure but you have to remember he came from a more privileged background ground than most of the people he was Manipulating maybe Boneparte more on his level was just better than him.

Renard was of Royal blood but he wasn’t acknowledged nor did he grow up as a Royal. Instead, Renard and his mother fled Europe to escape the Queen’s assassins while his father did nothing to protect them. I don’t see Renard as being a master manipulator because of a privileged lifestyle, but rather, because of his forced exile. Renard loathed the Royals and wanted revenge for how he and his mother were treated.

It’s ironic that Renard’s father allowed him to be taken away rather than compromise his lifestyle/standing, then Renard did the exact same when his child was at risk. Renard may have hated his father but he was exactly like him.

[Henry of green]

Yes but I still remember it being stated he went to finest schools then was forced to flee in kings private jet, when I think it was the queen Erics mother who wanted him dead. He had a lot more of a privileged upbringing than nick or Adalind.I don't think Katherine had much money she seemed like the type to leech onto any powerful man she could. Adalind became a lawyer through her own hard work specifally beacuse she wanted to be better than her mother. As she stated in episode 12 of season 5.He did though have a far harder upbringing than the rest of the Royals maybe that's why he's still alive and most of them aren't beacuse he's a survivor.

[rpmaluki]

I get that, and I agree, Renard was a skillful puppet master for four seasons, fooling Nick and the Resistance into believing he was a trustworthy ally. But for me, the reality is that the creative team wrote the bad guy character as a skillful puppet master and the central character/hero as easily manipulated and duped for the benefit of their stories. The fictional characters are simply doing what they were written to do. I don’t really care whether a character is a good guy or bad guy, only that they’re interesting and entertaining to watch.

I enjoyed Adalind’s storylines in the first three seasons because she was interesting and entertaining. I enjoyed her storyline less in the last three seasons because she wasn’t as interesting and entertaining. But antagonists are generally more interesting and complicated because the writers can take more liberties with their characterization and evolution.

It’s the same with Renard. I wasn’t surprised that he joined BC because the organization offered him a quick route to political power, but I was very disappointed that Renard suddenly lacked the manipulating and strategizing skills he had successfully utilized for four seasons.

Characters do act as they are written.. They are puppets on a strings, punfortunately that doesn't negate viewers responding to them either positively or negative or somewhere in between.

[Robyn]

Characters do act as they are written.. They are puppets on a strings, punfortunately that doesn't negate viewers responding to them either positively or negative or somewhere in between.

Exactly. Viewers like, dislike or are ambivalent to a character and his/her storyline depending on their personal preferences. Neither reaction is right or wrong, especially when the fate of those involved is completely fictional.