🔗 Share this article

Many viewers know this disappointment. The follow-up season of your top TV show drops on your platform, and your mind is full of hopeful expectation. The initial run ended with such precision: upcoming stories were hinted at provocatively, and a protagonist met a mysterious end – or so it seemed. After the season wrapped, you scoured online forums with dedicated fans to decode subtle references pointing toward upcoming twists.

But the new season opener falls flat. It seems as if the creative team was swapped for algorithms. By the next installment, a beloved actor's character acts in a way that you and Reddit user Fishy2345 agree is totally out of character. Halfway through the season, the writers appear to have memory loss regarding plot points heavily emphasized earlier. As the underwhelming ending arrives, you silently wish that the show had just been cancelled.

The Downside of Overextension

Wanting a series to end early is often late realization; viewers usually oppose premature cancellations. Look at Kaos, a clever mythological satire starring Jeff Goldblum, which was binned by Netflix due to low viewing figures. Yet audiences can console themselves that the program avoided a disappointing second season.

Looking back at the horror-mystery show Yellowjackets, I prefer it had remained a self-contained narrative. The debut offered a richly imaginative setup, with ten flawless installments. A 1996 plane crash strands a female soccer team in wilderness. Excellent actors (featuring Juliette Lewis, Lauren Ambrose and Sophie Thatcher) portrayed the team then and now. There were multiple award nominations, producers originally mapped out a five-season arc to fully explore the narrative. Recently, news broke of a season four conclusion. This news brought me relief.

Gaten Matarazzo, Finn Wolfhard, Caleb McLaughlin and Noah Schnapp in the forthcoming fifth season of Stranger Things.

Story decisions have weakened the core. In place of exploring post-rescue life, and their coping with awful experiences, the narrative expanded unnecessarily. That included the show’s tiring habit of bringing in and focusing on new characters (like the underdeveloped daughter Callie) who added little to the overarching plot. It's aggravating, and watching a beloved program become tedious is sad.

A Common Phenomenon

However, Yellowjackets isn't alone. Series like Emily in Paris, House of the Dragon, Squid Game and Stranger Things have lost the shock of the new, and fallen headfirst into expected or comfortable cliches. At times, programs must stop while successful.

The thing is, there are joys to be had in a limited, “one-and-done” series. Looking at Sharp Objects, I May Destroy You, and Adolescence, producers recognize appropriate conclusion points. Yet the spell breaks for programs including Big Little Lies, initially a one-season story, extend endlessly with reduced impact. Perhaps Adolescence's team reconsidered a second season.

The Perfect Example

I desired Yellowjackets as a single-season show, occupying our minds endlessly, mysteries intact. The best program I've seen succeeded this way. This beloved 90s drama, the perfect 90s teen dramedy, lasted for only one season but achieved film-like breadth: the roles were challenging and multifaceted, the cinematography was perfectly autumnal, and the dialogue was untethered from the normal “teen speak written by a 35-year-old” trope. The ending left questions unanswered, yet this mirrors real life accurately of never having real, definitive answers to the open-ended questions from your teenage years. After 18 perfect episodes (and one dodgy one), I was heartbroken and took to writing season two fan fiction myself to resolve lingering mysteries. It might only live on an old hard drive, it shows how series resonate profoundly.

The Unique Connection

If TV creators can remember the sacrosanct relationship between viewers and shows, more programmes can bow out when the time is right.

• Priya Elan writes about the arts, music and fashion.