🔗 Share this article

Many viewers know this disappointment. Season two of your favorite TV show has just begun streaming, and you're brimming with anticipation. Season one ended flawlessly: upcoming stories were hinted at provocatively, and a main character had – cliffhanger! – been offed (or had they?). After the season wrapped, you scoured online forums with dedicated fans to find some Easter egg clues shedding light on future developments.

But the new season opener falls flat. It seems as if the creative team was swapped for algorithms. In episode two, your favorite cast member has done something that fans unanimously declare inconsistent. Halfway through the season, it’s clear that the showrunners have had collective amnesia regarding plot points heavily emphasized earlier. And by the disappointing finale, you silently wish that the show had just been cancelled.

The Downside of Overextension

Wishing for cancellation can only be retrospective; audiences frequently rally against early axings. Take Kaos, a delightfully satirical take on Greek mythology featuring Jeff Goldblum, axed by Netflix because of weak audience numbers. Yet audiences can console themselves that the show's quality wasn't tarnished by a weak follow-up.

Reflecting on Yellowjackets, I prefer it had remained a self-contained narrative. Season one had a creatively abundant premise, and every episode hit the right marks. In 1996, a plane carrying an all-girl high school football team crashes in the middle of nowhere. Top-notch cast members (featuring Juliette Lewis, Lauren Ambrose and Sophie Thatcher) portrayed the team then and now. Several prize nominations followed, creators confidently planned five seasons to tell the story in necessary detail. However, a season four finale was just confirmed. I felt grateful as a viewer.

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

Plot twists have diluted the essence. In place of exploring post-rescue life, and their coping with awful experiences, we were taken in directions that bloated the original premise. This involved a wearying pattern of bringing in and focusing on new characters (including the flat character Callie) who added little to the overarching plot. It's aggravating, and as a viewer, it is depressing to see your favorite show morph slowly into a hate-watch.

An Increasing Pattern

Yet this issue extends beyond Yellowjackets. Series like Emily in Paris, House of the Dragon, Squid Game and Stranger Things lack original impact, 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, writers understand when narratives find completion. However, the magic fades with series like Big Little Lies, originally a limited series, return repeatedly with declining quality. Maybe Adolescence's creators hesitated about continuing.

The Supreme Instance

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 quintessential youth program, ran for just one year 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, yet this mirrors real life accurately of adolescent uncertainties remaining perpetual. After 18 perfect episodes (and one dodgy one), I was heartbroken and took to writing season two fan fiction myself to answer some of those questions. Despite existing on obsolete equipment, 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.

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