🔗 Share this article

It's an all-too-familiar feeling. Season two of your favorite TV show has just begun streaming, and your mind is full of hopeful expectation. Season one ended flawlessly: narrative threads were dangled enticingly, and a key figure faced a shocking fate – or did they?. After the season wrapped, you scoured online forums with other hardcores to uncover hidden hints shedding light on future developments.

Unfortunately, the return episode disappoints. It feels like the entire writers’ room has been fired and replaced by artificial intelligence. Cut to the second episode, your favorite cast member has done something that you and Reddit user Fishy2345 agree is totally out of character. As the story progresses, it becomes obvious the creators forgot around the storylines aggressively signposted in season one. As the underwhelming ending arrives, you silently wish that the show had just been cancelled.

The Pitfall of Overextension

Wishing for cancellation can only be retrospective; viewers usually oppose premature cancellations. Take Kaos, a delightfully satirical take on Greek mythology featuring Jeff Goldblum, which was binned by Netflix due to low viewing figures. But perhaps these fans will rest better with the knowledge the show's quality wasn't tarnished by a weak follow-up.

Looking back at the horror-mystery show Yellowjackets, I now wish it had been a limited series. The first season boasted an inventive concept, and every episode hit the right marks. A 1996 plane crash strands a female soccer team in wilderness. Top-notch cast members (with Juliette Lewis, Lauren Ambrose and Sophie Thatcher) played the characters across timelines. Numerous awards recognition occurred, creators confidently planned five seasons 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. Instead of focusing on the survivors' reintegration, 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 aggravating, and watching a beloved program become tedious is sad.

A Common Phenomenon

However, Yellowjackets isn't alone. Programs including Emily in Paris, House of the Dragon, Squid Game and Stranger Things no longer surprise audiences, and settled into familiar patterns. At times, programs must stop while successful.

Actually, benefits come from self-contained series. Considering Sharp Objects, I May Destroy You, and Adolescence, writers understand when narratives find completion. However, the magic fades with series like Big Little Lies, initially a one-season story, extend endlessly with reduced impact. Hopefully, Adolescence’s producers have thought twice about that rumoured season two.

The Perfect Example

I preferred Yellowjackets as a limited run, occupying our minds endlessly, mysteries intact. My top series ever followed this pattern. The classic teen series, the ideal adolescent show, ran for just one year but achieved film-like breadth: the roles were challenging and multifaceted, the cinematography was perfectly autumnal, and the conversations avoided cliched adolescent writing. Its final episode was bitterly unresolved, but that is perfectly in keeping with the reality of never having real, definitive answers to the open-ended questions from your teenage years. After 18 great episodes (and one mediocre), I was heartbroken and took to writing season two fan fiction myself to answer some of those questions. Though stored on outdated technology, it shows how series resonate profoundly.

The Sacred Bond

If writers recall the sacred audience-series connection, more programmes can bow out when the time is right.

• Priya Elan focuses on cultural topics.