Last Series Watched
- Thread starter Ru1977
- Start date
Hot Take - The shows people seem to most strongly dislike the endings for often seem to be the ones where the ending resolves the story, as compared to ends it.
Star Trek TNG for instance was never building a story that required an ending per se, so while they connect some dots in "All Good Things" it isn't the conclusion of the story but just a really good last episode.
But for shows like Lost or Game of Thrones, the ending is expected to answer the core storyline that is baked into the shows DNA from the start ("Where are we and will we get home" and "Who will end up on the throne" respectively), which means everyone who invested time since the start and speculated over the outcome is comparing the ending to what they expected. I am actually really fascinated by the reactions to both conclusions.
Both really subverted audience expectations - for Lost, the idea the actual survivors of the Flight 815 really couldn't care less about whatever machinations was going on with the island, they just got stuck as pawns in some power play over the island when all they wanted was to live their lives and be happy - that perspective makes a lot of sense but went against the audience expectation of wanting to learn what the island was. In many ways the audience in fact was aligned with the "bad guys" from the show that cared more about the mystery of the island than the suffering that was caused by trying to understand or control it. So when the show came out that the important thing was the people and what happened to them and they didn't spend the finale laying everything out about how the island could jump around or what not, it wasn't what was expected.
GoT was similar in that so many fans picked what faction they wanted to sit on the Iron Throne, even though the show was trying to say that everyone who wanted it probably didn't deserve it. So while the show ended with the best thing for the people of Westeros - to have none of the houses win but instead move to a better form of government that wasn't based on crazy people lusting to have power because of some lineage (and the stupid throne was melted down) - it seems like many fans rejected that because they had already become invested in and accepting of the idea that the character they had already bent the knee to was deserving, or at least someone was going to win the Game at the end. Once again, many fans took the position that show was actively trying to debunk, that allegiance to someone and desire for power was not that great for peace and prosperity.
I know there are other objections to the final seasons of both Lost and GoT (I think Lost kind of got tripped up with the Sideways world and didn't really pull it off seamlessly, and I agree GoT kind of rushed through some things and maybe didn't get the motivations as clear as needed, but given the author can't seem to figure out how to resolve the story either I give the showrunners some slack on that)
One of the best endings of all time was The Shield, and even that riled up some fans who wanted to believe that Vic Mackey was a "real cop" and his actions were justified even when he killed other cops trying to do the right thing. But it pulled no punches on who Mackey was and what damage he caused.
Star Trek TNG for instance was never building a story that required an ending per se, so while they connect some dots in "All Good Things" it isn't the conclusion of the story but just a really good last episode.
But for shows like Lost or Game of Thrones, the ending is expected to answer the core storyline that is baked into the shows DNA from the start ("Where are we and will we get home" and "Who will end up on the throne" respectively), which means everyone who invested time since the start and speculated over the outcome is comparing the ending to what they expected. I am actually really fascinated by the reactions to both conclusions.
Both really subverted audience expectations - for Lost, the idea the actual survivors of the Flight 815 really couldn't care less about whatever machinations was going on with the island, they just got stuck as pawns in some power play over the island when all they wanted was to live their lives and be happy - that perspective makes a lot of sense but went against the audience expectation of wanting to learn what the island was. In many ways the audience in fact was aligned with the "bad guys" from the show that cared more about the mystery of the island than the suffering that was caused by trying to understand or control it. So when the show came out that the important thing was the people and what happened to them and they didn't spend the finale laying everything out about how the island could jump around or what not, it wasn't what was expected.
GoT was similar in that so many fans picked what faction they wanted to sit on the Iron Throne, even though the show was trying to say that everyone who wanted it probably didn't deserve it. So while the show ended with the best thing for the people of Westeros - to have none of the houses win but instead move to a better form of government that wasn't based on crazy people lusting to have power because of some lineage (and the stupid throne was melted down) - it seems like many fans rejected that because they had already become invested in and accepting of the idea that the character they had already bent the knee to was deserving, or at least someone was going to win the Game at the end. Once again, many fans took the position that show was actively trying to debunk, that allegiance to someone and desire for power was not that great for peace and prosperity.
I know there are other objections to the final seasons of both Lost and GoT (I think Lost kind of got tripped up with the Sideways world and didn't really pull it off seamlessly, and I agree GoT kind of rushed through some things and maybe didn't get the motivations as clear as needed, but given the author can't seem to figure out how to resolve the story either I give the showrunners some slack on that)
One of the best endings of all time was The Shield, and even that riled up some fans who wanted to believe that Vic Mackey was a "real cop" and his actions were justified even when he killed other cops trying to do the right thing. But it pulled no punches on who Mackey was and what damage he caused.
Honestly I really liked the first 3 or 4 seasons of Buffy but I felt it really lost its way after that, for many reasons - too much Spike, not liking the Spike/Buffy stuff, Willow being too powerful, too many characters suffering a bit too much, and Joss getting in over his head trying to be profound with episodes like "The Body" at times.
Ru1977
The Irishman
I think I agree on all of that, but especially the Shield. I think my favorite part of the whole series is when he finally unburdens it all to the federal agent.
Another perfect ending is The Americans. That and the Shield were both great shows that I think the ending even elevated higher. I could say the same for the Homicide Life on the Street movie which may have my favorite scene from all of TV with Frank and Bayliss closing one final case...
Well, at least for the fans at work I knew, they seemed more annoyed with who ended up in charge than anything. But sure, there had been some frustration with the whole season up to that - I think the whole White Walkers things kind of fizzled out (and I agree).
EDIT - I should add I was more of a casual GoT watcher, so I never held it in as high regard as some did and therefore was probably more detached than others. It was never a Twin Peaks, The Prisoner or Lost to me that was truly engaging.
Ru1977
The Irishman
Like I said before, I wasn't watching GOT for all the back stabbing and machinations, and the show itself really trained me to not care much about any of the characters as far as hoping they win or even live. The white walker stuff got me interested right away and I was really not as interested in anything south of the wall aside from Daenerys, and Dinklage is fucking wonderful.
I didn't have a problem with who was left in charge, just thought, as was said, the final season was a lot of stumbling etc but I think a lot of the steps to get that make sense.
I guess I HOPED for it to get there for me but I realized it was definitely not. Twin Peaks is usually what comes to mind first when I'm asked my favorite show, but Lost is definitely, still, in my top ten.
JakeEkiss
Filthy casual
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2025
- Messages
- 1,561
The writing on TNG just isn't that great. There are episodes that are good, but there's a lot of recurring problems in the writing that I didn't notice when I was younger that stick out to me now. For one, the first season is just nigh unwatchable. It's bad in a ton of ways and other than one or two episodes it's almost not worth watching at all. A lot of later episodes don't rely on a dramatic solution to problems, but rather a tech solution. It becomes how many different ways can we make the tricorder lights blink or get poor LeVar to spout longer and longer chains of nonsense tech words. There's also rarely a plot that you can't see the end coming miles away from the second commercial break. A huge portion of the TNG appeal ends up being a very charismatic cast. And hey, to their credit, they are a good cast.
Pound for pound I think DS9 is the best Trek going (at least until recently, I can't speak for anything lately except Lower Decks which I do love but it kinda requires you've seen at least one other Trek show). They have stellar one off episodes (Duet, Far Beyond the Stars, Pale Moonlight, etc) that are really sinking teeth into not just scifi concepts, but ethical and character ones. Then about halfway through DS9 starts to link up with the trend for serialized TV, and you get ongoing arcs int he war that really develop a lot of characters. This is another thing TNG largely fails at. The crew of TNG change very little over the course of 7 seasons. DS9 takes characters on much longer journeys. You legitimately see Sisko's kid grow up on that show. He starts out as 'the kid' and he's a war reporter/resistance fighter by the end. Quark and his family? Completely different people by the end. I think Kira, ex-freedom fighter/terrorist who is having to manage the transition of her world from occupied territory into independent nation, and who then has to help liberate the home world of her former oppressors is possibly the best character Trek has ever made. Her moral arc is pretty outstanding even now. Gul Dukat is I think second only to Kahn for Star Trek villains, and frankly Dukat is a more complex, much more terrifying character as he gets 7 seasons of development. The bit late in the series where he's ranting about how Bajor should have thanked him for his mercy in not wiping all of them out is one of the great TV villain moments.
Ru1977
The Irishman
Couldn't agree more. DS9 was such an incredible show. My kids turn their nose up at the effects but damnit, I'll try again in a few years.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2025
- Messages
- 3,418
Obviously, I can't speak for them. But the chatter online and stuff wasn't specifically 'I don't want this guy to be on the throne.' There were so many deep problems with the show's ending that you can't even really effectively summarize them in less than several paragraphs. A lot of it was that you had probably 2 or 3 more seasons of content shoved into basically 4 episodes so the dickhead showrunners could just be done.
Not a single thing in that final season felt earned. Forgetting all other structural problems, visual problems, logic problems, dialogue problems. characterization problems, etc: No one was ever going to be happy with that ending because it felt random. And I suspect for people that watched the show but aren't hardcore about analyzing the things they like, that was the REAL complaint behind 'I don't like that Bran won.'
adrienveidt
Ponderous
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2025
- Messages
- 153
Travelers had a perfect ending, that wasn't.
Not sure we need spoilers for a show that ended 7 years ago but...
It was about the growth of the characters though - they started out as a fake family that I think, at least for the wife, would have felt no remorse leaving the kids behind and also leaving the fake marriage. By the end they didn't really want to leave and wanted to be together, and when the daughter chose the life in America, it was a rebuke of their cause by her. So in the sense that they were not caught, yes they got away with it. But another point of the show I thought was that if you had reversed it and the couple had been American spies living in Russia, you'd be cheering their escape. So were they bad guys really or not?
I would agree, there are lots of mediocre stories in there, and maybe supporting the idea that 25 episodes is too much for a season and 175 episodes too much for one show. The first season did have problems. But I feel it is pretty solid in seasons 3 to 6 with some great episodes in there. Still, I would pick and choose if going through it.
Agreed