🔗 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 debut season ended so perfectly: upcoming stories were hinted at provocatively, and a protagonist met a mysterious end – or so it seemed. In the months since the finale, you scoured online forums with dedicated fans to uncover hidden hints illuminating what would happen next.

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 fans unanimously declare inconsistent. As the story progresses, it becomes obvious the creators forgot concerning narrative arcs clearly established previously. By the lackluster conclusion, you privately hope it had ended sooner.

The Downside of Prolonged Runs

Regretting a show's continuation is hindsight; audiences frequently rally against early axings. Consider Kaos, a clever mythological satire starring Jeff Goldblum, which Netflix dropped over poor ratings. But perhaps these fans will rest better with the knowledge the show's quality wasn't tarnished by a weak follow-up.

Reflecting on 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. Skilled performers (with Juliette Lewis, Lauren Ambrose and Sophie Thatcher) played the characters across timelines. There were multiple award nominations, and the showrunners proudly announced there would be five seasons to tell the story in necessary detail. 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.

Plot twists have diluted the essence. 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 highlighting added personalities (including the flat character Callie) who did nothing for the broader story. It’s frustrating, and as a viewer, it is depressing to see your favorite show morph slowly into a hate-watch.

A Growing Trend

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

Indeed, pleasures exist in single-season stories. Considering 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, originally a limited series, return repeatedly with declining quality. Hopefully, Adolescence’s producers have thought twice about that rumoured season two.

The Perfect Example

I preferred Yellowjackets as a limited run, living rent-free in our imaginations, mysteries intact. My top series ever followed this pattern. The classic teen series, the ideal adolescent show, lasted for only one season but achieved film-like breadth: the personalities were complex and inconsistent, the filming captured a fall aesthetic, and the conversations avoided cliched adolescent writing. Its final episode was bitterly unresolved, but that is perfectly in keeping with the reality of adolescent uncertainties remaining perpetual. After 18 perfect episodes (and one dodgy one), I felt devastated and created my own continuation to answer some of those questions. Though stored on outdated technology, it shows how series resonate profoundly.

The Unique Connection

When producers honor the special viewer-program bond, more series can conclude appropriately.

• This writer writes about the arts, music and fashion.