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

[gh4chiefs]

Well I appreciate your input and mean no offense but I think you're reading too much into this particular show. It's not some kind of epic story that needs the imaginations of the viewers fired. This isn't Lost. It is what it is, a silly little sitcom with Shatner getting off an occasional good line. There's not much depth here, no story waiting to told.

I'm not talking about that show. As far as I can recall, I haven't said a single word about it. I've never seen it and have no basis for reading anything into it, nor any interest in doing so. What I'm responding to are the more general questions being raised: why are cliffhangers used at all, what is the point to them in general? I know some people have a tendency to address a specific complaint by casting their objections in more universal terms, but if a question is posed to me as a generality, then that's how I assume I'm expected to address it.

Well since I bumped the thread from oblivion to rant (aka whine ) about shat, I thought we were talking about that show. My apologies.

That being said, I have to agree with Jax and respectfully disagree with you. Generally speaking that is. Cancellation or no cancellation, I think cliffhangers are more often an annoyance than anything. And I think the time from the end of one season to the beginning of the next dilutes their effect. He'll half the time by the time the new season starts, I've forgotten what happened in the cliffhangers. There are the exceptions like LOST or "who shot jr" but mostly they're annoying.

 

[Jax]

The biggest problem with Cliffhangers is that the writers want them to be so BIG and epic...the pay off come the next episode is a letdown, hurting your show more in the process.

Writers should not force the issue for the sake of it when it comes to ending your season on a cliffhanger or not...do what fits the story because fans return on quality.

 

[Christopher]

That being said, I have to agree with Jax and respectfully disagree with you. Generally speaking that is. Cancellation or no cancellation, I think cliffhangers are more often an annoyance than anything. And I think the time from the end of one season to the beginning of the next dilutes their effect. He'll half the time by the time the new season starts, I've forgotten what happened in the cliffhangers. There are the exceptions like LOST or "who shot jr" but mostly they're annoying.

Well, that's an understandable reaction, but I think it comes more from the overuse of cliffhangers than from an intrinsic flaw in the trope. Tropes Are Not Bad, even if they are often abused. I tend to agree that we have reached a point where cliffhangers tend to be used to excess, more because they're expected and habitual than because they're really needed in a given instance. But that doesn't mean there never was a valid reason for their use.

After all, the question I was answering wasn't about the "rightness" or "wrongness" of cliffhangers, it was about why the makers of television shows consider cliffhangers to be worth doing. Whether you agree with their reasoning or not is up to you; I was simply trying to explain what their reasoning was, what purposes a cliffhanger is intended to serve and what reasons producers would have for considering them valuable.

 

[Captaindemotion]

One show whose ending seemed to be a cliffhanger - but wasn't really - was Angel. And that was a fantastic ending, which while shocking at the time has held up a lot better than many a 'wrap up all the loose ends' ones.

 

[23skidoo]

My 2 cents is that you can't have it both ways. People these days want - sometimes demand - shows be serialized or at least have strong arcs. I have several friends who ignore shows with standalone episodes (Doctor Who being an apparent exception) because they want to be challenged, to follow stories that require undivided attention over 13, 22, 44 weeks. So they look down upon shows like, say, CSI or NCIS whose episodes can (almost) be watched in random order.

If you want everything serialized, you're gonna eventually get cliffhangers. The sad part is when a show is cancelled prematurely, and a cliffhanger has occurred, the story is left unfinished. The history of television is already littered with dozens of TV equivalents of "The Mystery of Edwin Drood" - V (the original series), Terminator, Earth2 are three that come immediately to mind. Just as bad are shows cancelled before their story arcs are completed, such as the remake of Bionic Woman.

I personally think if a studio/showrunner is planning to end a season with a cliffhanger, they should do so only after obtaining a renewal guarantee from the network. And it is possible: Spielberg was able to get a two-year commitment on Amazing Stories.

Alex

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ That was an eternity ago, in tv terms. And not every producer is Spielberg.

 

[Quinton O'Connor]

Renewal guarantees... heh.

Didn't save Farscape from (almost) suffering an abrupt end.

 

[bigdaddy]

Renewal guarantees... heh.

Didn't save Farscape from (almost) suffering an abrupt end.

I actually like that ending.

 

[Christopher]

My 2 cents is that you can't have it both ways. People these days want - sometimes demand - shows be serialized or at least have strong arcs...

If you want everything serialized, you're gonna eventually get cliffhangers.

Good point. Personally, I think the pendulum has swung too far in favor of serialization, to the point that a lot of TV producers have forgotten how to end a story. It's one thing to tell a succession of stories that have unifying, developing threads across them. It's another to have each installment be just a fraction of a story. I find that lazy and unsatisfying, and it gets frustrating when every episode just raises more questions and gives no answers, or just treads water until another hour has been filled.

The history of television is already littered with dozens of TV equivalents of "The Mystery of Edwin Drood" - V (the original series), Terminator, Earth2 are three that come immediately to mind.

In the case of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, the open-ended finale was actually what showrunner Josh Friedman wanted and intended, or so he's said. He knew the show wasn't likely to get renewed, but he chose to end it that way anyway. He prefers raising questions to giving answers, and he wanted to leave the audience with mysteries to ponder. And the finale did basically provide closure to the story he was telling. True, it began a whole new story that we won't get to see, but it was always a given that John Connor's primary story lay in the future.

Didn't save Farscape from (almost) suffering an abrupt end.

I actually like that ending.

Yeah, I would've been satisfied with the cliffhanger we got even if there hadn't been a miniseries to wrap it up. I felt it was perfectly in keeping with the overall craziness and cheek of Farscape to end the series with the characters thrust into yet another impossible peril. It was more fitting to let us know that these characters would continue to have wacky, death-defying adventures for the rest of their lives than it would've been to show them settling down to a quiet life.

 

[Gojirob]

Why a Sitcom needs a cliffhanger ending for a season is beyond me.

Same reason any other show does: to make the audience eager for the show to return. If you don't give them an incentive to come back, they may lose interest over the break.

Remember, The Simpsons' "Who Shot Mr. Burns?" cliffhanger was almost as effective at generating buzz and excitement as "Who Shot J.R.?" had been. Comedy or drama, it makes no difference, as long as you make people eager to find out what happens next or get an answer to a big question.

Ironically, 'Who Shot JR?' came right before a major strike in Hollywood, delaying the answer for something like six months. Dallas's strong standing kept it well out of the group under discussion, though.

Still, the list of shows that honestly thought they were coming back is long. Even longer though is the list of wholly unresolved shows, live action and animated-even when a finale was planned and sometimes scripted.

 

[Quinton O'Connor]

Yeah, I would've been satisfied with the cliffhanger we got even if there hadn't been a miniseries to wrap it up. I felt it was perfectly in keeping with the overall craziness and cheek of Farscape to end the series with the characters thrust into yet another impossible peril. It was more fitting to let us know that these characters would continue to have wacky, death-defying adventures for the rest of their lives than it would've been to show them settling down to a quiet life.

I totally respect that viewpoint and tried my best to just bite the bullet and convince myself that I agreed with it for the several months we campaigners were holding our breath. Ultimately, I just really wanted to see the inevitable conflict between the Peacekeepers and the Scarrans play out to some sort of resolution since it had been teased for a couple of years.

Farscape was definitely way more about its characters than its plot (even though it didn't have a bad plot, either) but that was something I wouldn't have been satisfying hearing some comic book series continuation was going to cover. I wanted to see it on screen too much for that.

 

[Christopher]

Farscape was definitely way more about its characters than its plot (even though it didn't have a bad plot, either) but that was something I wouldn't have been satisfying hearing some comic book series continuation was going to cover. I wanted to see it on screen too much for that.

Well, I respect that viewpoint, but since two of my friends write the Farscape comics (from stories by O'Bannon, so they're canonical), I can't quite agree with it.

And I'm not saying I regret the existence of The Peacekeeper Wars. Naturally it was good that they got an opportunity to resolve the big story threads that got deferred by cancellation. I'm just saying that if the miniseries hadn't happened, I still would've been satisfied with the (non-)ending we got.

 

[Quinton O'Connor]

Farscape was definitely way more about its characters than its plot (even though it didn't have a bad plot, either) but that was something I wouldn't have been satisfying hearing some comic book series continuation was going to cover. I wanted to see it on screen too much for that.

Well, I respect that viewpoint, but since two of my friends write the Farscape comics (from stories by O'Bannon, so they're canonical), I can't quite agree with it.

And I'm not saying I regret the existence of The Peacekeeper Wars. Naturally it was good that they got an opportunity to resolve the big story threads that got deferred by cancellation. I'm just saying that if the miniseries hadn't happened, I still would've been satisfied with the (non-)ending we got.

Oh man, I strongly considered ensuring the tone of my original message came across as warm regarding the comics themselves but decided not to bother. Now I regret that.

I like what little I've seen of the comics just fine. Actually it was about a week ago that I was checking up on ye olde WatchFarscape forums and saw DeCandido asking for opinions on the latest. I looked into them a bit more and I do like what I've seen. I intend to catch up on them eventually but I'll still readily admit that as a bit of an actor, I've always gotten the maximum enjoyment out of watching my favorite characters over reading them. I love analyzing the actors' styles and such.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ I'm not an actor, but I know what you mean. For all the acclaim the post-finale Buffy or Angel comics have gotten or the Firefly comics, to me, they're just not the same as a new tv episode or movie with the original cast. That's no disrespect to the people who undoubtedly made the comics with lots of love and dedication. Just a question of my preferences.

 

[Jax]

^
Comics don't do it for me either because they tend to go OTT and it ruins my enjoyment.

 

[Christopher]

I like what little I've seen of the comics just fine. Actually it was about a week ago that I was checking up on ye olde WatchFarscape forums and saw DeCandido asking for opinions on the latest. I looked into them a bit more and I do like what I've seen. I intend to catch up on them eventually but I'll still readily admit that as a bit of an actor, I've always gotten the maximum enjoyment out of watching my favorite characters over reading them. I love analyzing the actors' styles and such.

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.

 

[Quinton O'Connor]

I like what little I've seen of the comics just fine. Actually it was about a week ago that I was checking up on ye olde WatchFarscape forums and saw DeCandido asking for opinions on the latest. I looked into them a bit more and I do like what I've seen. I intend to catch up on them eventually but I'll still readily admit that as a bit of an actor, I've always gotten the maximum enjoyment out of watching my favorite characters over reading them. I love analyzing the actors' styles and such.

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.

That's... a very interesting way of looking at it. I think it wouldn't be an exaggeration for me to say that I'll be reading comics in a different light from now on.

Thanks for that!

 

[pookha]

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..

well that is if one has time and is that engaged with the show to begin with.
if one is a parent with two or three kids in school all having different interests..
well...

and i do know of people who have stopped watching or are considering stop watching fringe due to they suspect it will end on a cliff hanger.
to them it means they just wasted their time.
as one said it is like buying a novel only to find out the last couple of chapters have been lost.

 

[Christopher]

and i do know of people who have stopped watching or are considering stop watching fringe due to they suspect it will end on a cliff hanger.
to them it means they just wasted their time.

That attitude makes no sense to me. If the end of the story were the only thing worthwhile about it, why even bother telling the rest of the story? Why not just jump right to the end? The answer is that the whole journey matters, not just the destination. As long as you enjoy the show while it's on, as long as it brought you satisfaction, it wasn't a waste of time. If the ending is disappointing, that doesn't mean everything that was worthwhile before somehow retroactively stops being worthwhile.

I mean, really, it's contradictory. If you valued a show enough to care whether it got resolved or not, why should you dismiss it as worthless if it doesn't manage to get resolved? I can't understand that. For me, if I love a show and it gets cancelled prematurely, I'm still grateful for what we did get of it. Like The Middleman, an awesome show that was cancelled just short of its season finale. That was frustrating, yes, but it doesn't make the episodes that exist any less fun. I value them all the more because the show ended too soon. (Fortunately, the finale was adapted as a comic, and there's a full-cast table read of it on YouTube.)

 

[JarodRussell]

and i do know of people who have stopped watching or are considering stop watching fringe due to they suspect it will end on a cliff hanger.
to them it means they just wasted their time.

That attitude makes no sense to me. If the end of the story were the only thing worthwhile about it, why even bother telling the rest of the story? Why not just jump right to the end? The answer is that the whole journey matters, not just the destination. As long as you enjoy the show while it's on, as long as it brought you satisfaction, it wasn't a waste of time. If the ending is disappointing, that doesn't mean everything that was worthwhile before somehow retroactively stops being worthwhile.

I mean, really, it's contradictory. If you valued a show enough to care whether it got resolved or not, why should you dismiss it as worthless if it doesn't manage to get resolved? I can't understand that. For me, if I love a show and it gets cancelled prematurely, I'm still grateful for what we did get of it. Like The Middleman, an awesome show that was cancelled just short of its season finale. That was frustrating, yes, but it doesn't make the episodes that exist any less fun. I value them all the more because the show ended too soon. (Fortunately, the finale was adapted as a comic, and there's a full-cast table read of it on YouTube.)

Same reason why I hate movies if they end bad, and never watch them again. Can I explain it? No. Do I even want to explain it? No.