Why do low-rated shows end their seasons in cliffhangers?

[Quinton O'Connor]

The letdown of the end not doing the means any justice.

I'm sort of like that too, to a point. Not to an extent that I'd never watch a show with an unplanned 'end' but I do get it.

 

[Christopher]

I guess I've had a frustrating enough life that I don't believe I'm somehow entitled to achieve my desires. I'm grateful for what fulfillment I get, and I can't afford to devalue it every time something doesn't end up the way I wish it could, because so few things in life do.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ A very wise attitude. And, to state the perfectly bleedin' obvious, there are more important things than tv programmes.

Well, apart from Star Trek ones, obviously!

 

[JarodRussell]

I don't believe I'm somehow entitled to achieve my desires.

^ A very wise attitude.

That's a very miserable attitude, in my opinion.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ You don't think that the gratitude for things you do get is a wise approach?

 

[777]

^ I don't think life is in general so inherently miserable that anything enjoyable is very few and far between, and therefore need to desperately and gratefully grasp at any straws that come by.

At least for me, my life has had far more enjoyable experiences than not, so I can complain at the odd irritation like an incomplete story.

 

[Skywalker]

I can understand that. But personally I've always enjoyed reading tie-ins and imagining the actors' voices and performances in my head. It feels more... participatory. Like I'm getting to "play" the roles in the actors' voices and mannerisms, at least in my mind's eye and ear. Not so much analyzing the actors' styles as synthesizing them -- taking what I've observed and analyzed about them before and using it creatively. As a "bit of an actor" myself, though strictly in an amateur, informal capacity, I enjoy doing that.

Wow, it's nice to know other people who do that. I enjoy reading (some) tie-in comics because I can still imagine the actors actually playing their characters as I read what's happening. Like when I would read an issue of Buffy Season Eight, there were many times when one of the characters would do, or say, something and I can actually hear and see the actor doing that. It makes for a much more enjoyable reading experience.

I tend to do the same for comics that aren't tie-ins, too. Mentally assigning accents and other verbal characteristics to characters, imagining their mannerisms and physical reactions based on the expressions the artist has drawn for them in the past, etc.

 

[JarodRussell]

^ You don't think that the gratitude for things you do get is a wise approach?

Being grateful for things you have and not feeling entitled to achieve your desires are two very different shoes.

 

[Christopher]

^ I don't think life is in general so inherently miserable that anything enjoyable is very few and far between, and therefore need to desperately and gratefully grasp at any straws that come by.

That's exaggerating my point. I don't see it as desperation. I see it as appreciating everything positive life gives you, and not being ungrateful for it just because it falls short of your ideas of perfection or completion, because very few things in life are exactly what we wish for. I think it's foolish to reject the worth of something that's mostly satisfying just because it isn't completely satisfying. If you're treated to a delicious 10-course feast and then find out that you're not getting dessert, it's petty, ungrateful, and self-defeating to condemn the entire meal as a failure, to edit your memories so that you forget how much enjoyment you got from most of the meal. At the very least, it's a grossly flawed analysis of benefits vs. losses.

 

[gh4chiefs]

Holy crap,

How did this go from a discussion not ending a show on a cliffhanger to a philisophical discussion about "achieving one's desires?" Surely we're not trying to make the case that wanting a story to have a resolution is somehow a character flaw.

Good grief.

 

[JarodRussell]

Surely we're not trying to make the case that wanting a story to have a resolution is somehow a character flaw.

 

[Quinton O'Connor]

I guess I've had a frustrating enough life that I don't believe I'm somehow entitled to achieve my desires. I'm grateful for what fulfillment I get, and I can't afford to devalue it every time something doesn't end up the way I wish it could, because so few things in life do.

Not a bad line of thought at all. I understand you.

Holy crap,

How did this go from a discussion not ending a show on a cliffhanger to a philisophical discussion about "achieving one's desires?" Surely we're not trying to make the case that wanting a story to have a resolution is somehow a character flaw.

Good grief.

I don't see a problem with where things have gone. I don't think it's gotten as 'bad' as you're making it sound, though.

 

[gh4chiefs]

When someone starts pontificating about "achieving one's desires" when all we're talking about is having stories with resolutions, then I have to respectfully disagree with you.

Wow.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Traditionally, serial television in the U.S. which ties everything up at the end does not do well in re-runs. Shows that leave people hanging actually do better, and hold on to the public's interest longer after cancellation.

The Fugitive is the classic example cited. A hugely successful network series, it tanked in back-end syndication because "everyone knows how it ends."

So the producers of these shows might be seen as simply acting in their economic self-interest. I certainly don't hold that against them.

 

[gh4chiefs]

Traditionally, serial television in the U.S. which ties everything up at the end does not do well in re-runs. Shows that leave people hanging actually do better, and hold on to the public's interest longer after cancellation.

I hope you'll take this in the spirit it's intended because I'm NOT trying to be antagonastic with you, but I need to see some kind of source for that statement, some kind of proof.

I'm really having a hard time believing it to be honest with you. And just one example, like the Fugitive for example, is not enough evidence to prove or disprove this theory.

 

[Christopher]

Surely we're not trying to make the case that wanting a story to have a resolution is somehow a character flaw.

No. There's nothing wrong with being disappointed that a story was ended before its time. I just don't understand how that translates to dismissing the entire story as worthless or a waste of time. Even if the ending was disappointing, there's still value in what came before it. Like I said, I'm sad that The Middleman was cancelled and that we didn't get to see the season finale (I'm particularly upset that I never got to see Natalie Morales in a Slave Leia outfit), but that doesn't mean I enjoy the episodes we got any less. They're still great fun. By the same token, when Alien Nation ended on an unresolved cliffhanger, I was upset by that, but I didn't hate and condemn the entire series as worthless because of that. I think that's misplaced anger. (And yes, that cliffhanger was eventually resolved/retconned in the revival movies, but I'm talking about my reaction before that happened.)

Now, I can see how premature cancellation could be a problem if a series is excessively serialized, if the makers are so focused on telling one great big, extended story that each episode is merely a fragment rather than a satisfying whole in itself. If a series like that were cancelled in the middle, I can see that being as frustrating as getting to read only the first third or quarter of an unfinished novel. That's why I think too many shows today take serialization too far. It's better to make each episode a whole story in itself even if there is a larger unifying arc. That's what Alien Nation and The Middleman did.

 

[gh4chiefs]

Surely we're not trying to make the case that wanting a story to have a resolution is somehow a character flaw.

No. There's nothing wrong with being disappointed that a story was ended before its time. I just don't understand how that translates to dismissing the entire story as worthless or a waste of time.

I guess I missed anyone trying to make that particular claim, but maybe I didn't read all the posts close enough.

However, that being said, I would not knowingly start a story, whether it be a book, a serialized TV show, or a movie, if I KNEW UP FRONT that the story was't going to be resolved. I simply don't enjoy unresolved stories. Which to me is what a cliffhanger to a cancelled series is.

 

[JarodRussell]

The Fugitive is the classic example cited. A hugely successful network series, it tanked in back-end syndication because "everyone knows how it ends."

Maybe the quality of the show could simply not live up to it. If "will he make it?" is the ONLY thing that makes it worth watching, then it's not very good.

 

[JediKnightButler]

What's the point of creating anticipation when they KNOW they're going to be cancelled? That seems to serve no purpose other than to piss off the viewers they do have.

I'd like to think that most viewers aren't so quick to anger. Having a story cancelled without resolution can be disappointing and frustrating, yes, but those emotions can be handled more constructively. Often, if a show is cancelled without resolution, it can fire the imagination of the fans, make them keep it alive in their minds as they imagine ways it could've been resolved, write fanfics that continue the story, etc. For people to whom fandom is merely a passive process, absorbing what's fed to them, getting no resolution can be frustrating and angering because they have no way to cope. But for people who actively engage their minds and their imaginations, who understand that being a fan isn't just about being a couch potato but about embracing a fictional world and engaging in it with one's own creativity, an unresolved cliffhanger can be an inspiration. Conversely, if a show wraps everything up and leaves its audience with nothing to wonder about, the audience may eventually lose interest, stop thinking about the show and move on to something else.

It's an ancient show business axiom: "Always leave them wanting more." It's good if your audience wants there to be more of the story than what you've shown them, even if you have no plans of telling any more of it. Because if they continue to be curious about the fates of the characters after the story ends, then they will keep the story alive.

Excellent Points. At least for me, I think this explains why I ended up loving (and thinking about) Angel more than Buffy after their shows' respective ends even though the Angel ending was painfully frustrating. Eliza Dushku's "Tru Calling" ended on similar kind of cliffhanger (at least the unaired final episode mid-season 2)

 

[Christopher]

^Yeah, Tru Calling is frustrating because it was just starting to get really interesting, and what I've read about the planned story arc sounded fascinating. So I do feel frustrated when I get to the end, but I still enjoy the stuff leading up to it, at least in the second season (wasn't as engaged by the first).