|
To be honest, "Lost" became ridiculous to me right around the fourth season, when all the time travel and alternate reality crap started happening. I personally thought it was a signal that the writers had run out of good ideas and were just reaching for the craziest possible plot threads to try to keep the audience engaged. I quit watching after that point, but of course looked up the eventual ending online just to see how everything wrapped up -- and you're right. What a dumb, unoriginal, unsatisfying ending. Such a cop-out. I'm shocked that something that bad can air on a major network, but that very strong sci-fi shows with good writing can be canceled even when they're on smaller networks (my poor "Firefly" ...). /rant :)At the end of the third season they were granted seasons 4-6 to plan the shows ending (whether they actually did that or not). The show definitely had a different feel from that point on.
I liked Lost and thought the ending wasn't all that I wanted it to be, but it wasn't a bad ending. I have a feeling you don't know how the show really ended ** spoiler omitted **
Yup, you're right, I didn't actually watch that last episode, just read a synopsis online. From what I read, it sounded awful -- maybe even awful enough to be intriguing, but I guess I'm not really willing to slog through an entire two seasons just to see whether the ending really is as bad as I think it is. Maybe I should just say that this: I liked the first two-and-a-half seasons of Lost, but after that, I just couldn't keep watching.
Oh yeah, and I forgot Firefly was originally on ABC. Been watching reruns of it on smaller networks for so long that I forgot it was actually first aired by a major one!
Veronica Mars
Honestly Angel was a huge letdown for me not because it was a bad ending but the fact that it was the end.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
What about Quantum Leap? It's a long time since I've seen the ending, but didn't the guy end up in a bar for time travellers or something like that?
It's my understanding that a) the show had another season pulled out from under it, and b) Most fans sum their reaction to the end in 5 words. Sam Becket Made It HOME.
(I'm guessing that if they'd gotten another season it would have expanded on the bar, as well as other leapers.)
Let us not forget, we only hate the endings of Lost and Battlestar because they were so awesome. And also, because they were so poorly acted, which was really weird, because those shows were built on solid acting. But what are you going to do?
Also, the ending to the first season of heroes, which was the last good season. For a show that's all about re-imagining comic book genres and deftly connecting multiple plots, they basically just dropped everyone on a street and had a pretty mediocre comic book fight scene. And it never really got back to its old self after that.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Unless i'm misremembering, the tagline at the end of the show said Sam never made it home.Hence the trope, Fan Dumb. :)
Well look at Enterprise and the novels, sometimes Fan Dumb gets their way. :-)
|
Well look at Enterprise and the novels, sometimes Fan Dumb gets their way. :-)Unless i'm misremembering, the tagline at the end of the show said Sam never made it home.Hence the trope, Fan Dumb. :)
do they bring back Trip? If they save Trip I might have to read them.
Wait... did we already have this conversation? Carp...
|
|
I thought the ending for QL was actually pretty good - the whole point was ultimately about friendship and sacrifice.
Sam never made it home because he re-wrote his friends timeline. Al was only around to help him because he had no life and he was trying to save Sam. He gave his buddy a life back at the expense of his own.
For a wrap-up I thought they did a pretty good job, and I like downer endings - FXs the Shield for example had a great ending. It wasn't a happy one nor should it have been.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Well look at Enterprise and the novels, sometimes Fan Dumb gets their way. :-)Unless i'm misremembering, the tagline at the end of the show said Sam never made it home.Hence the trope, Fan Dumb. :)do they bring back Trip? If they save Trip I might have to read them.
Wait... did we already have this conversation? Carp...
From The Wiki
The relaunch novels' concept, of Trip not actually dying in the final episode, is based on an enigmatic moment in which Trip is supposedly near death and is being loaded into a medical chamber. He looks up at Archer, smiles and winks; Archer smiles back and also winks. The novels take this to mean the death of Trip was actually an elaborate ruse and not his actual death. The book reveals that the events of the holo-program from "These Are the Voyages" are a deliberate lie. Noting the inconsistencies in the episode as proof that it is a fabrication, namely, the pirates' warp 2 ship that is somehow able catch up with Enterprise, and the complete lack of MACOs and security teams when the pirates board the ship. It should be noted that the established criteria of Star Trek canon disqualifies novels as being official continuity; the decision to undo Trip's death in "These Are the Voyages" in the novels marks one of the only occasions in which a licensed, expanded universe spin-off has openly contradicted a major part of Trek continuity – an earlier example involved the launch of a series of novels featuring Kirk that suggested the character did not die at the end of the film, Star Trek Generations.
Some of the 'aborted arcs' mentioned on the wiki would have been nice to see too.
Terrible endings I can immediately think of:
- BSG
- Lost
- Enterprise
- anything with a cliffhanger
Some people felt the same way about Prometheus when they grabbed Damon Lindelof to do the script. I see him getting the potential to become more vilified than Joss Whedon in certain circles.
Indeed. And rightfully so, AFAIC.
Can't believe no one has mentioned Sarah Conner Chronicles.
The hero of the future has his timeline eliminated and ends up in the future.
Soap.
Ended with a cliffhanger and not renewed. :(
|
There were a lot of great shows cancelled without a good ending.
It has been talked about in this thread, but for me Firefly was the hardest to take. The stupidity is squarely on the shoulders of Fox. They didn't listen to Whedon. The didn't run the series in the correct order. The put it on Friday night, the death of so many shows. It was too edgy for the time slot. A couple of great episodes were never aired on Fox because they were deemed inappropriate. So the Stupidest TV Show Endings goes to Fox's Firefly.
Soap would be a very close second.
Cheers,
Mazra
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
BSG got screwed by the heads of NBC/USA. First, when they decided to override the writers and decide that season 2 was going to be episodic instead. That tanked ratings and the heads decided that BSG was going to be cancelled so they backed off and season 3 went back to the storyline arcs of season 1. Ratings go back up and that makes the heads look bad. Originally, there was a plan to only do 5 seasons and end it. The studio heads decided that season 4 was going to be the last one.
As for Firefly...Fox kept moving the show around and intentionally tanked the ratings.
Well the Writer's Strike hurt a lot of shows in that point in history, BSG and Heroes being two that come to mind.
Amusing story. Network wanted a 'happy party' in BSG. So they put in all the pilots celebrating one guy's 'thousandth landing'. We saw how that party ended. :-)
The writers of Lost did pretty much outright admit that they were making it up as they went, almost episode by episode with no plan.
|
JMS started writing comics. He's famous for the best Spiderman writing in decades only to have Marvel undo everything he wrote as soon as he left.
Hell, they screwed with his stuff while he was still writing. Remember "Sins Past", where Norman Osborne is revealed to have been the father of Gwen Stacy's (previously unknown) children? JMS wrote Sarah and Gabriel as Peter's children, but Marvel vetoed it, and came up with the storyline that tainted Gwen forever. Because having adult children, even if they were only adults because they aged at an accellerated rate, would make Peter seem too old. *facepalm* By the way, aside from one story with them and an implied appearance by Gabriel, the characters have been all but completely ignored.
Kind of like baby May. Who, due to Brand New Day, ACTUALLY never existed, instead of Marvel just pretending she never existed.
Damn you, Marvel. Damn you.
|
|
Can't believe no one has mentioned Sarah Conner Chronicles.
The hero of the future has his timeline eliminated and ends up in the future.
One good thing I liked about that was something I wish the movie series had managed to do. It showed that John Connor was NOT a special snowflake...that if he were to fall, someone else would just rise to take his place, and in the end humanity would still triumph.
And what about Kyle XY... Another cliffhanger. Another season cancelled.
The writers of Lost did pretty much outright admit that they were making it up as they went, almost episode by episode with no plan.
\
And it showed.
Let's see, for me...
Dollhouse (2007)
Madlax (it was a TV show, if an animated one from Japan. 2005ish?)
(Both of those suffer from various WTF moments and killing off my favorite characters while letting live the ones who get up my nose.)
If you want to make fun of me...
Glee season 3, which for me IS the series finale. (2012) It used to be a fun show to watch...
Wonder Woman (1979) (yes, the whole show is cheesy but usually fun. The last episode is TERRIBLE though. And sad because they truly thought they were going to get renewed for a 4th season, so the "ending" is actually a setup for the beginning of the next season)
That's all I can think of right now. I was okay with the end of BSG, it wasn't my favorite ending ever, but I was okay with it. I actually loved the end of Angel and wish they'd left it there rather than try to continue it in the comics which have varied in quality--although the Angel/Faith series is really good.
What made glee go bad for you?
|
|
The writers of Lost did pretty much outright admit that they were making it up as they went, almost episode by episode with no plan.\
And it showed.
As bad as it may be at least Lost and BSG for that matter had an ending. It is worst when there is no ending. Show cancelled! Sorry to the millions that watched, invested their time, etc. Buy hey that's business. Get over it. Phtttt to the TV execs!
What made glee go bad for you?
In short, the utterly inconsistent writing, along with the annoying habit the writers had of writing all the female characters in such a way that whenever they had a problem, they never overcame it themselves, a guy came in and fixed it for them (whereas the guys usually--not always, but usually--fought the issue on their own terms and their independence was lauded). For someone who can express themselves better than I can on the latter issue, I highly recommend reading the recaps by Dr. She Bloggo (tagged "the RBI Report" on her blog).
And just for the laughs, I highly, highly recommend the SIMGM Glee Spoofs. Which also mocks the writing and the issues on the show in a brilliant manner while also being pretty damn funny. And in some, if not many cases, the spoofs are better written with more character development and character consistency than the show itself.
To go longer, I totally started watching Glee just because it was the fun singing and dancing show, and it had Jane Lynch in it, who is amazing. The 1st season was not the mecca of television as many now nostalgic Glee fans view it, but it was a solid piece of entertainment with just enough good characterization to make it appealing on a deeper level while also not taking itself too seriously. And there was fun and dancing and it was a good way to kill an hour. It had its flaws, but its fun qualities made it watchable in spite of them.
The "problem" is, Glee developed the potential to go one of two ways--it could stay the lighthearted singing and dancing show that doesn't take itself too seriously, or it could build upon the foundation of the semi-decent characterization, along with its growing not-yet-anvilicious message of tolerance for all people including LGBT persons, and try to run deep to become a heavily character driven ensemble dramedy.
The writers really needed to choose to go one route or the other, and instead, in lazy and haphazard fashion, tried to do both. So one episode, everything would be fine and dandy and there'd be randomness and Lady Gaga tributes and in another episode there'd be some incredibly heavy bit of character development that would make you see a character in an entirely different light, and then THAT would be followed by an episode that COMPLETELY ignored the character development that happened in the deep episode because the writer really needs the character to have a different attitude so he can shoehorn the character into this Britney Spears number he really wanted her to sing, etc. etc. etc. ad infinitum. Glee became phenomenally good at getting you to be incredibly invested in a character, only to then UTTERLY devastated when the character development established was ignored or even dropped or forgotten entirely. Almost every character in the series can be a good example of this phenomenon, but for the sake of brevity/argument I'll choose one example: Quinn Fabray. Quinn went from worldly-wise popular girl who got pregnant who Learned Valuable Life Lessons about her experience, to crazy lady obsessed with becoming Prom Queen who completely forgot about the baby she gave birth to, from cheater to faithful and wise back to cheater again, from the girl who completely forgot about her baby who then went crazy trying to get her baby back. Season 3 was especially dire as from episode to episode you were never sure whether you were going to see smart, worldly wise who learned from her mistakes Quinn or crazy scheming I'll get you and your little dog too Quinn. And often her incredibly deep and far reaching issues were "fixed" by a single pep talk by a school teacher or a friend quoting John Mellencamp out of context or, in one case, I kid you not, a haircut. It's just nuts.
There's no point in watching a show that makes you fall in love with a character only then to sacrifice that character development on the altar of plot convenience whenever the writers feel like it because otherwise, how will they work in the Boyz2Men tribute? (((Note: they have never done a Boyz2Men tribute))). Not to mention many characters I've enjoyed the most have gotten a lot of the short end of the stick (Santana getting forced out of the closet and the guy who did it never apologizes or explains why what he did was wrong, Sue going from awesome if psycho villain to whatever crazy jumble of nonsense you can call her "character" now, Brittany going from comedy gold mine to sullen, silent ghost/background dancer).
So yeah, done. And again, for more info, see Dr. She Bloggo and the above linked Spoofs.
What about Quantum Leap? It's a long time since I've seen the ending, but didn't the guy end up in a bar for time travellers or something like that?
QL had one of the best series enders to me - at least it was one of the few times a TV show or movie has made me tear up.
Samuel Beckett never made it home again.
That was great TV.
As for Firefly...Fox kept moving the show around and intentionally tanked the ratings.
And it cost 5 times more than any other show getting the ratings it was (which were nearly identical to Buffy's in season 1).
Honestly I liked Firefly but the show was way too expensive for what it was.
Interesting, tmdq. I sense a bit of writer-go-round from your description, as well as people getting ready to leave the show if certain things don't happen with their character, but overall, I think I should have remained lighthearted comedy/musical.
What made glee go bad for you?In short, the utterly inconsistent writing, along with the annoying habit the writers had of writing all the female characters in such a way that whenever they had a problem, they never overcame it themselves, a guy came in and fixed it for them (whereas the guys usually--not always, but usually--fought the issue on their own terms and their independence was lauded). For someone who can express themselves better than I can on the latter issue, I highly recommend reading the recaps by Dr. She Bloggo (tagged "the RBI Report" on her blog).
And just for the laughs, I highly, highly recommend the SIMGM Glee Spoofs. Which also mocks the writing and the issues on the show in a brilliant manner while also being pretty damn funny. And in some, if not many cases, the spoofs are better written with more character development and character consistency than the show itself.
To go longer, I totally started watching Glee just because it was the fun singing and dancing show, and it had Jane Lynch in it, who is amazing. The 1st season was not the mecca of television as many now nostalgic Glee fans view it, but it was a solid piece of entertainment with just enough good characterization to make it appealing on a deeper level while also not taking itself too seriously. And there was fun and dancing and it was a good way to kill an hour. It had its flaws, but its fun qualities made it watchable in spite of them.
The "problem" is, Glee developed the potential to go one of two ways--it could stay the lighthearted singing and dancing show that doesn't take itself too seriously, or it could build upon the foundation of the semi-decent characterization, along with its growing not-yet-anvilicious message of tolerance for all people including LGBT persons, and try to run deep to become a heavily character driven ensemble dramedy.
The writers really needed to choose to go one route or the other, and instead, in...
What made glee go bad for you?
The glee dude in the wheelchair totally broke my immersion!
Just kidding. I never watched that show.
Interesting, tmdq. I sense a bit of writer-go-round from your description, as well as people getting ready to leave the show if certain things don't happen with their character, but overall, I think I should have remained lighthearted comedy/musical.
Definitely some writer-go-round. Of course, I don't know what has gone on behind the scenes, but I don't know if anyone ever threatened to leave because of a character issue. I know one actor was ticked off he didn't get upgrade to series regular, so then they asked him to leave the show... but then later asked him back anyway, but that's about it. I think actors have made certain requests on behalf of their characters but I am not aware of anyone going so far as to threaten to leave if they didn't get their way, and it seems out of character from what I know of most of the cast (I did follow the fandom a bit rabidly for awhile). Of course all I can do is speculate, however.
I can say that the writers often listen too much to the fans, which may sound like a great idea but isn't. If one group of fans like a given pairing so the writers put them together, and then another group of fans hates the pairing so the writers break them up.... that's not a good way to write a story. There's a difference between taking feedback into consideration and even a little fan pandering, and just letting fans' chaotic dictates utterly drive the (lack of) direction of the program.
JMS started writing comics. He's famous for the best Spiderman writing in decades only to have Marvel undo everything he wrote as soon as he left.Hell, they screwed with his stuff while he was still writing. Remember "Sins Past", where Norman Osborne is revealed to have been the father of Gwen Stacy's (previously unknown) children? JMS wrote Sarah and Gabriel as Peter's children, but Marvel vetoed it, and came up with the storyline that tainted Gwen forever. Because having adult children, even if they were only adults because they aged at an accellerated rate, would make Peter seem too old. *facepalm* By the way, aside from one story with them and an implied appearance by Gabriel, the characters have been all but completely ignored.
Kind of like baby May. Who, due to Brand New Day, ACTUALLY never existed, instead of Marvel just pretending she never existed.
Damn you, Marvel. Damn you.
While I share your disdain for Brand New Day, sometimes you've just gotta punt to escape terrible story lines--like Kang-controlled Tony Stark, replaced by Kid Stark (brrr...I never welcomed any change as much as Busiek's reboot!).
"Millenium"
They cancelled the show in 1999, just before the 2000 series which would have wrapped everything up. &^&*^(^(). And it was getting awesome too, especially with the demons and the plague.
"Millenium"
They cancelled the show in 1999, just before the 2000 series which would have wrapped everything up. &^&*^(^(). And it was getting awesome too, especially with the demons and the plague.
Personally, I liked the earlier episodes... The ones with the murder investigations. I thought it got all screwy at the end with the Roosters and the Owls. Weird stuff...
Ultradan
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
There's a great misstep in logic in that wiki's assumption. If Trip's death had been faked, unless he decided to live in a cave somewhere for the rest of his life, the truth would have come out eventually and it would have been incorporated into that holosequence.
As far as the Kirk novels go, if they were from Shatner's ghost written works, that's more than enough reason to discount them.
You mean just like when the Borg appeared in the Alpha Quadrant, they immediately checked the records from Enterprise's encounters (and the stable time loop)?
Or that the Federation knew of the Borg and a Borg Queen in 2356, yet the first encounter in 2367, they were unknown?
I think it's safe to say that Trip could have gone covert and never been mentioned again. :-)
Personally, I liked the earlier episodes... The ones with the murder investigations. I thought it got all screwy at the end with the Roosters and the Owls. Weird stuff...
I like weird stuff. The best episode was the one with the demons, talking about how they tempt mortals into doing bad things. 2nd best, when the family encountered the bird and started bleeding out of all of their orifices. Super disturbing. But most of all it just sucks that they didn't reach the entire point of the show, what happens on the Millenium? lol.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I'm going to disagree. In 'bright and shiny Trek' (TOS, TNG) maybe. In Dark Trek (DS9, Voyager, Enterprise) I'd say he could. Don't forget Section 39, the augmentation on Dr. Bashir, Soon's augments... When you add in two or three wars (Romulan War, Cardasian War, maybe a Klingon War) keeping someone off the radar would be very possible. Don't forget that TOS was surprised at the concept of time travel, though Enterprise knew it was real.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Don't forget that TOS was surprised at the concept of time travel, though Enterprise knew it was real.I have a rule of never attempting to wrap my head around justification for a prequel created decades after the original looking much more modern and seeming to know in-depth about stuff that was a 'brand-new discovery' years later. It will only lead to an inability to enjoy the whole.
Actually that specific example doesn't bother me so much. It's my recollection that there were 12 or 13 Constitution starships. Why would they tell all the captains that time travel is possible? If non-interference is the Prime Directive, why give them a potential tool to 'fix it'. When the Enterprise-D encountered the Borg, I can see Section 34 going 'oh crap' and pulling out the super classified logs from the Enterprize NX. etc. Modern Fleet captains may have the codes for their nukes, but not for land based ones, etc etc.
Actually First Contact and Enterprise caused two fun fan theories.
Stable Time Loop:
I enjoy this one because it means the Borg were coming, and Q was helping humanity (and screwing with Picard)
Mirror Universe is the real universe.
Same thing for 1960's tech vs 1990's tech being used to depict the future. The Tholians and Gorn don't look like their 1960's counterparts. The Enterprise Defiant is so much shinier than the 1960's models, etc. I don't let that worry me. When they made Enterprise, they talked about how (except for range) the 1960's communicators were so inferior to the 2000's cell phones that they just 'went with it.'
That said, the detail of the Enterprise Defiant sets, costumes etc. was sheer fan porn, like the classic Raiders and Centurians in BSG: Razor. (But even there, the old Centurians used balistic weapons, to keep with the reboot's asthetic).
What made glee go bad for you?The glee dude in the wheelchair totally broke my immersion!
Just kidding. I never watched that show.
You into the Slender Man Mythos?
I've heard stuff like that all the time from the community.
Not familiar with that, no.
Not familiar with that, no.What made glee go bad for you?The glee dude in the wheelchair totally broke my immersion!
Just kidding. I never watched that show.
You into the Slender Man Mythos?
I've heard stuff like that all the time from the community.
You want to start here. It's great stuff.