Why is it so difficult to give the television series the good ending?

In the last minutes of the Game of thrones Tyrion Lannister (Peter Dinklage) states: "There is nothing more powerful in the world than a good story. Nothing can stop it. No enemy can defeat him. "But if there is one thing we learned in the course of EuThe last season is that, in fact, one thing can conquer a good story: a badly judged end.

Few people expected the eighth season of the series to end. Even less were satisfied – although the jury of public opinion has already condemned The Thrones to death by the fire of the dragon well before his final scenes. Before his last episode, hundreds of thousands of people had signed a petition demanding that the last season be redone with "competent writers". He quickly earned 1.5 million signatures, while discouraging images and tweets flooded the Internet, including a video of Emilia Clarke – whose character, Daenerys, had lost the plot in the penultimate episode – laughing nervously when asked if she liked the last season, as for "Fans on the end of the series.

"There was nothing like it," says Radio Times TV columnist Scott Bryan on the outcry. "I do not think we can wait for this social media reaction to a drama for a long time." Eu, says Bryan, is that the series went beyond the writings of author George RR Martin. "It made us all feel that we had a say in the narrative arc of the story and in which we think the series should go, but also where it deserves to go. Game of thrones is so unique, however, because it is built for the end – who deserves and who will get the throne? "

But Game of thrones is not the first feature film to disappoint by its end. After six seasons and 119 episodes, the end of Lost was universally breaded. breaking BadThe final gave rise to mixed reactions. The police drama of David Simon in Baltimore Thread ended with a montage suggesting that the cycle of drugs, murders and corruption would continue – a conclusion that divides, although ultimately realistic. Drama of David Chase in New Jersey The Sopranos was likewise division. After the final, Chase simply said, "Guess what? Life does not end well.

Room of cards, which has continued without Kevin Spacey for his last season, has been directed towards a ridiculous and laughable end, devoid of anything that made the show popular. Online reaction to the last episode of Mad Men In 2015, the gravity of the situation prompted its author, Matthew Weiner, to declare in his first interview: "I do not think there is enough empathy in the world right now."

But why do we have such visceral reactions for television? Why do they matter so much to us? "We all know how to tell a story," says writer Furquan Akhtar, author of the upcoming BBC Three comedy. The thirst. "If you cheat stories in which we have spent years investing, changing one story or another, we will not be happy as an audience. We all successfully tell stories in our daily lives, it's an important part of human interaction. "

Henry Swindell, former screenwriter at the BBC, who worked on The fall, Course of actionand the Channel 4 drama No violation, tells me that a successful TV ending usually starts at the beginning. "Why do we tell a story? We tell stories to make sense of a random, chaotic and random world. "

Swindell says that a central function of the drama is to test our world view, which can be a delicate balance to find to end the TV shows. "Much of our consumption of information challenges our" thesis "of the world. The culture we consume often shows us the antithesis of our worldview, so we need to explore it, engage with it, and finally decide if our vision wins, "he says. "It's also what the stories do, they show us characters confronted with these dilemmas and conflicting ideologies, and we see if they will overcome them and find a solution."

There are three types of on-screen ending, he adds. The closed ending, where either everybody lives happily ever after, or everybody’s dead. “This world is closed, we’ve dealt with it and there’s no need to come back here,” he says. These endings often feature what Hitchbad calls the “morality” or “redistribution” clause” – where the good are rewarded and the bad are punished – which gives the audience catharsis. Next, there’s the open ending, which could be a cliff-hanger, and finally, the ironic ending. “An ironic ending is where the good aren’t obviously rewarded and the bad aren’t obviously punished,” he says. “This often happens in political thrillers where a character gets the power they wanted but have had to sell their soul to do it. So their ‘punishment’ is that they are haunted by their choices and will never actually find happiness.”

Not all shows fall at the final hurdle. Fleabag, the BBC Three series written by and starring Phoebe Waller-Bridge, came to an end earlier this year after two series, and was met with almost unanimous praise.

Sian Clifford, who plays Fleabag’s sister Claire, tells me that Waller-Bridge had originally intended to keep the show to just one series. “We were asked to do another series early on and Phoebe wasn’t sure,” she explains. “Her source material had been the one-woman play and she felt the story was complete then. But fortunately, she was able to have the time that she needed and during the time she had ideas.”

Although she initially thought the show could go on for longer, Clifford thinks it ended at the right time. “I often encounter people who say: ‘Do more! Do more!’ But I really defend the decision now. I think the story is complete.”

Not that Fleabag’s story was neatly tied up. In fact, the ending was beautiful in part because it denied viewers the blissful romantic ending they craved. “It wasn’t about tying things up. I don’t think that was in Phoebe’s mind,” Clifford explains. “Because life is messy. You never reach a point where everything is fixed and healed and dealt with, it doesn’t work like that. But there is hope, and hope galvanises people.”

Fleabag has taught Clifford that collaboration is the key to success, but she says that the hierarchical nature of the entertainment business can have a negative impact on how other stories are told and ultimately concluded. “I wish projects felt more collaborative and not so hierarchical. That’s why there have been so many abuses of power. When you have very powerful producers it can be difficult for people to be creatively free,” she says. “It’s notorious that projects are completely hamstrung by producers, who won’t let writers tell their stories or directors create their vision … If you’re in a situation where you feel restricted, it definitely impacts storytelling and means that projects don’t fulfil their potential towards the end.”

Bryan thinks that, in general, it’s easier to bring shorter shows like Fleabag to a conclusion. “Shorter shows always seem to do well, primarily because it has a narrative arc that is usually planned from the start,” he says. “British shows are very good at this, because even shows on commercial networks here are never planned for more than a couple of series at the start and actor availability can be quite limited to commit for a longer run.” The longer a show runs, the higher the chances it will be cancelled before the story reaches its conclusion. “It’s hard. How many shows have we continued all the way through until the end? So many just drop off.”

TV critic and Independent arts columnist Fiona Sturges thinks that TV conclusions are becoming increasingly complex. “I think endings are more challenging than they used to be,” she says. “You have to have scores of subplots, just to keep that level of engagement. And so when you try to wrap up the subplots at once, it’s pretty much impossible. There’s so much choice that you don’t give shows the attention you used to, because you think, ‘f**k it, there’s something else on that I can start and it’ll give me that sort of instant satisfaction.’ That’s why soap operas are so skilled, because they manage to keep people endlessly engaged.”

Sturges also warns of “multiple ending syndrome”, where TV shows limp on and spend too much time on their conclusions. “I think there are a lot of writers who do think everything has to be neatly wrapped up,” she says. “That doesn’t necessarily have to be the case. You can leave a bit of mystery”.

Swindell agrees. “One of the mistakes that is made with endings is people often spend too much screen-time on them,” he says. “If you think about the best endings, the drama, crisis and climax go on as long as possible, but the resolution is as quick as possible. Because that’s what’s exciting for us to see.”

Bafta-winning screenwriter Jimmy McGovern once said, “A great ending should be both surprising and inevitable.” The ending of Game of thrones was certainly surprising, and it seemed inevitable it wouldn’t please everyone. Now we’re consuming stories at a faster pace than ever before, shows like this, that make us wait every week, face increased pressure.

But the upset proves that TV endings are not just about wrapping up a story – they’re about leaving a legacy. Viewers have an emotional connection with the few stories and characters we follow until the end, and the conclusion of these narratives greatly affects our experience. Just like our real-life relationships, it seems we often remember TV shows by how they end, rather than the joy they once gave us along the way.