🔗 Share this article

Many viewers know this disappointment. The second series of your favorite TV show premieres online, and optimism runs high. The debut season ended flawlessly: future plotlines were teased tantalisingly, and a protagonist met a mysterious end – or so it seemed. In the months since the finale, you scoured online forums with fellow enthusiasts to decode subtle references illuminating what would happen next.

Unfortunately, the return episode disappoints. The writing appears robotic and uninspired. In episode two, a key performer makes a choice that viewers recognize as jarringly uncharacteristic. As the story progresses, it becomes obvious the creators forgot around the storylines aggressively signposted in season one. By the lackluster conclusion, you privately hope it had ended sooner.

The Curse of Overextension

Wanting a series to end early is often late realization; most fans protest when their favorite shows are canned before they can get off the ground. Look at Kaos, a delightfully satirical take on Greek mythology featuring Jeff Goldblum, which Netflix dropped over poor ratings. 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 first season boasted an inventive concept, and every episode hit the right marks. A 1996 plane crash strands a female soccer team in wilderness. Excellent actors (with 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 tell the story in necessary detail. Recently, news broke of a season four conclusion. This news brought me relief.

Young actors prepare for Stranger Things' next chapter.

Plot twists have diluted the essence. Rather than leading with the girls’ return home, and their coping with awful experiences, the narrative expanded unnecessarily. A fatiguing tendency emerged of introducing peripheral figures (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.

An Increasing Pattern

However, Yellowjackets isn't alone. Shows such as Emily in Paris, House of the Dragon, Squid Game and Stranger Things have lost the shock of the new, and settled into familiar patterns. Occasionally, series should end on a high note.

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, originally a limited series, return repeatedly with declining quality. Perhaps Adolescence's team reconsidered a second season.

The Ideal Model

I desired Yellowjackets as a single-season show, residing permanently in our thoughts, mysteries intact. The best program I've seen succeeded this way. This beloved 90s drama, the ideal adolescent show, lasted for only one season yet felt epic in scale: the roles were challenging and multifaceted, the cinematography was perfectly autumnal, and the scripts transcended typical youth dialogue. The ending left questions unanswered, but this reflects truth appropriately of adolescent uncertainties remaining perpetual. After 18 perfect episodes (and one dodgy one), I mourned its end and drafted follow-up stories to resolve lingering mysteries. It might only live on an old hard drive, it demonstrates television's powerful connection.

The Special Relationship

If writers recall the sacred audience-series connection, more series can conclude appropriately.

• The author writes about the arts, music and fashion.