🔗 Share this article

Many viewers know this disappointment. The second series of your favorite TV show premieres online, and you're brimming with anticipation. The initial run ended so perfectly: narrative threads were dangled enticingly, and a main character had – cliffhanger! – been offed (or had they?). In the months since the finale, you were perusing Reddit threads with fellow enthusiasts to decode subtle references 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. By the next installment, a key performer makes a choice that fans unanimously declare inconsistent. Halfway through the season, the writers appear to have memory loss concerning narrative arcs clearly established previously. And by the disappointing finale, you long for an earlier termination.

The Downside of Overextension

Regretting a show's continuation is hindsight; most fans protest when their favorite shows are canned before they can get off the ground. Look at Kaos, an amusing Greek myth parody with Jeff Goldblum, which Netflix dropped over poor ratings. But perhaps these fans will rest better with the knowledge the program avoided a disappointing second season.

Reflecting on Yellowjackets, I prefer it had remained a self-contained narrative. The first season boasted an inventive concept, and its 10 episodes were note-perfect. A 1996 plane crash strands a female soccer team in wilderness. Excellent actors (including 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 develop the plot thoroughly. However, a season four finale was just confirmed. This news brought me relief.

Young actors prepare for Stranger Things' next chapter.

The show has made narrative choices that have undermined its heart. Instead of focusing on the survivors' reintegration, and their struggle with traumatic memories, the story grew padded and excessive. This involved a wearying pattern of introducing peripheral figures (like the underdeveloped daughter Callie) who did nothing for the broader story. It’s frustrating, and watching a beloved program become tedious is sad.

A Growing Trend

However, Yellowjackets isn't alone. Series like Emily in Paris, House of the Dragon, Squid Game and Stranger Things no longer surprise audiences, and embraced predictable tropes. Occasionally, series should end on a high note.

Indeed, pleasures exist in single-season stories. From Sharp Objects to I May Destroy You to Adolescence, producers recognize appropriate conclusion points. But the game is over when shows such as Big Little Lies, originally a limited series, return repeatedly with declining quality. Perhaps Adolescence's team reconsidered a second season.

The Supreme Instance

I preferred Yellowjackets as a limited run, living rent-free in our imaginations, cliffhangers and all. My top series ever followed this pattern. The classic teen series, the quintessential youth program, concluded after a single run but achieved film-like breadth: the personalities were complex and inconsistent, the cinematography was perfectly autumnal, and the scripts transcended typical youth dialogue. Its final episode was bitterly unresolved, but this reflects truth appropriately of never having real, definitive answers to the open-ended questions from your teenage years. After 18 great episodes (and one mediocre), I felt devastated and created my own continuation to resolve lingering mysteries. Though stored on outdated technology, it demonstrates television's powerful connection.

The Unique Connection

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

• Priya Elan covers entertainment and style.