🔗 Share this article

It's an all-too-familiar feeling. The second series of your top TV show has just begun streaming, and you're brimming with anticipation. Season one ended so perfectly: future plotlines were teased tantalisingly, and a main character had – cliffhanger! – been offed (or had they?). During the hiatus, you scoured online forums with fellow enthusiasts to find some Easter egg clues shedding light on future developments.

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. By episode five, the writers appear to have memory loss around the storylines aggressively signposted in season one. By the lackluster conclusion, you long for an earlier termination.

The Curse of Overextension

Regretting a show's continuation is hindsight; audiences frequently rally against early axings. Look at Kaos, an amusing Greek myth parody with Jeff Goldblum, which Netflix dropped over poor ratings. Yet audiences can console themselves that their enjoyment of the series won’t have been muddied by a sophomore slump.

Considering the thriller Yellowjackets, I currently desire it was a one-season story. The first season boasted an inventive concept, with ten flawless installments. Aircraft disaster leaves a teen girls' team isolated in 1996. Top-notch cast members (including 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 fully explore the narrative. 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.

Plot twists have diluted the essence. Instead of focusing on the survivors' reintegration, and watching how they deal with their horrific new secrets, we were taken in directions that bloated the original premise. A fatiguing tendency emerged of introducing peripheral figures (including the flat character Callie) with minimal impact on the main narrative. It's aggravating, and as a viewer, it is depressing to see your favorite show morph slowly into a hate-watch.

A Common Phenomenon

Yet this issue extends beyond Yellowjackets. Programs including Emily in Paris, House of the Dragon, Squid Game and Stranger Things lack original impact, and embraced predictable tropes. Sometimes shows need to quit when they are ahead.

Indeed, pleasures exist in single-season stories. Looking at Sharp Objects, I May Destroy You, and Adolescence, TV creators know when to stop when the story has naturally reached an endpoint. But the game is over when shows such as Big Little Lies, first conceived as self-contained, return repeatedly with declining quality. Maybe Adolescence's creators hesitated about continuing.

The Perfect Example

I wish Yellowjackets could have been a one-and-done series, living rent-free in our imaginations, cliffhangers and all. My top series ever followed this pattern. The classic teen series, the ideal adolescent show, ran for just one year but achieved film-like breadth: the personalities were complex and inconsistent, the visuals were beautifully seasonal, and the conversations avoided cliched adolescent writing. The conclusion provided no neat resolution, yet this mirrors real life accurately of adolescent uncertainties remaining perpetual. Following 18 excellent installments (plus one weak one), I felt devastated and created my own continuation to resolve lingering mysteries. Though stored on outdated technology, it shows how series resonate profoundly.

The Special Relationship

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

• Priya Elan covers entertainment and style.