🔗 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. Season one ended flawlessly: future plotlines were teased tantalisingly, and a main character had – cliffhanger! – been offed (or had they?). During the hiatus, you scoured online forums with other hardcores to uncover hidden hints illuminating what would happen next.

And then season two’s premiere is a damp squib. The writing appears robotic and uninspired. Cut to the second episode, a beloved actor's character acts in a way that viewers recognize as jarringly uncharacteristic. As the story progresses, it’s clear that the showrunners have had collective amnesia around the storylines aggressively signposted in season one. By the lackluster conclusion, 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, an amusing Greek myth parody starring Jeff Goldblum, which was binned by Netflix due to low viewing figures. However, supporters might find comfort knowing the program avoided a disappointing second season.

Looking back at the horror-mystery show Yellowjackets, I currently desire it was a one-season story. The first season boasted an inventive concept, and its 10 episodes were note-perfect. Aircraft disaster leaves a teen girls' team isolated in 1996. Top-notch cast members (with Juliette Lewis, Lauren Ambrose and Sophie Thatcher) portrayed the team then and now. 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. I felt grateful as a viewer.

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

Story decisions have weakened the core. In place of exploring post-rescue life, and watching how they deal with their horrific new secrets, the story grew padded and excessive. A fatiguing tendency emerged of introducing peripheral figures (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.

A Common Phenomenon

However, Yellowjackets isn't alone. Programs including 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.

The thing is, there are joys to be had in a limited, “one-and-done” series. From Sharp Objects to I May Destroy You to Adolescence, writers understand when narratives find completion. But the game is over when shows such as Big Little Lies, initially a one-season story, return repeatedly with declining quality. Maybe Adolescence's creators hesitated about continuing.

The Perfect Example

I preferred Yellowjackets as a limited run, living rent-free in our imaginations, mysteries intact. The best program I've seen succeeded this way. This beloved 90s drama, the quintessential youth program, lasted for only one season but achieved film-like breadth: the personalities were complex and inconsistent, the filming captured a fall aesthetic, and the dialogue was untethered from the normal “teen speak written by a 35-year-old” trope. The ending left questions unanswered, but this reflects truth appropriately of youth queries staying forever open. After 18 perfect episodes (and one dodgy one), I was heartbroken and took to writing season two fan fiction myself to resolve lingering mysteries. Though stored on outdated technology, it shows how series resonate profoundly.

The Sacred Bond

When producers honor the special viewer-program bond, more programmes can bow out when the time is right.

• Priya Elan writes about the arts, music and fashion.