Programs Including Stranger Things and Yellowjackets Have Become Bloated. I Strongly Prefer the Limited Program
It's an all-too-familiar feeling. The follow-up season of your top TV show premieres online, and optimism runs high. Season one ended with such precision: upcoming stories were hinted at provocatively, and a main character had – cliffhanger! – been offed (or had they?). In the months since the finale, you scoured online forums with fellow enthusiasts to uncover hidden hints shedding light on future developments.
Unfortunately, the return episode disappoints. The writing appears robotic and uninspired. In episode two, a beloved actor's character acts in a way that fans unanimously declare inconsistent. Halfway through the season, the writers appear to have memory loss concerning narrative arcs clearly established previously. As the underwhelming ending arrives, you silently wish that the show had just been cancelled.
The Pitfall of Prolonged Runs
Wishing for cancellation can only be retrospective; viewers usually oppose premature cancellations. Look at Kaos, a clever mythological satire starring Jeff Goldblum, axed by Netflix because of weak audience numbers. However, supporters might find comfort knowing the program avoided a disappointing second season.
Looking back at the horror-mystery show Yellowjackets, I currently desire it was a one-season story. The first season boasted an inventive concept, with ten flawless installments. In 1996, a plane carrying an all-girl high school football team crashes in the middle of nowhere. Excellent actors (including Juliette Lewis, Lauren Ambrose and Sophie Thatcher) depicted the survivors in dual eras. There were multiple award nominations, producers originally mapped out a five-season arc to fully explore the narrative. But last week, it was announced that it would end with season four. This news brought me relief.
The Stranger Things cast returns for season five.
The show has made narrative choices that have undermined its heart. Rather than leading with the girls’ return home, and their struggle with traumatic memories, we were taken in directions that bloated the original premise. A fatiguing tendency emerged of introducing peripheral figures (including the flat character Callie) who did nothing for the broader story. It's disappointing, and as a viewer, it is depressing to see your favorite show morph slowly into a hate-watch.
A Growing Trend
Yet this issue extends beyond Yellowjackets. Programs including Emily in Paris, House of the Dragon, Squid Game and Stranger Things lack original impact, and fallen headfirst into expected or comfortable cliches. Occasionally, series should end on a high note.
Actually, benefits come from self-contained series. Looking at Sharp Objects, I May Destroy You, and Adolescence, TV creators know when to stop when the story has naturally reached an endpoint. Yet the spell breaks for programs including Big Little Lies, first conceived as self-contained, return repeatedly with declining quality. Maybe Adolescence's creators hesitated about continuing.
The Supreme Instance
I desired Yellowjackets as a single-season show, living rent-free in our imaginations, cliffhangers and all. The best program I've seen succeeded this way. This beloved 90s drama, the quintessential youth program, lasted for only one season but was cinematic in its scope: its characters were difficult and contradictory, the cinematography was perfectly autumnal, and the scripts transcended typical youth dialogue. Its final episode was bitterly unresolved, but this reflects truth appropriately of youth queries staying forever open. After 18 great episodes (and one mediocre), I felt devastated and created my own continuation to address unfinished business. It might only live on an old hard drive, it shows how series resonate profoundly.
The Special Relationship
If TV creators can remember the sacrosanct relationship between viewers and shows, more shows can end gracefully.
- Priya Elan writes about the arts, music and fashion.
