However, I do appreciate the art of a great cliffhanger when done correctly and I think the conventions of the device is what can make television special compared to a standalone film. A method in engaging the viewer for the genuine sake of the story in a continuing world. Same way a chapter in a book would end in a satisfying way that urges the reader to see what happens next. I enjoy that the medium can either embrace it or not. TV doesn't need cliffhangers so long as the meat of the narrative is entertaining.
I think that is certainly true. WHen done well, the cliffhangers can be surprisingly good and effective (a lot of seasons have done it and even story arcs as well), even though TV doesn't really need cliffhangers as long as the narrative really works, like you are saying.
Though at the same time, I think a problem is the abundance of cliffhangers and cliffhanger endings in almost each and every episode: I mean, you can still have a partly or fully serialized show without having a more or less blatant hook at the end every single time (I'd say a ending stinger scene could do the job just as well, if not better, in terms of leaving the audiences hanging a bit without having the episode's plot itself come off completely unresolved and cut off in a "See you next week/month/year/next few yearsetc. for the continuation!" way).
Sure, I'm not against cliffhangers done well, but there need to be some kind of moderation and thought put into it (and a consideration of these modern times of TV shows and streaming shows should be applied without hindering the way a showrunner want to tell their story).
If the show ended there, it would be a shame, but I would be thankful the show didn't play it safe to appease the external network powers that be of whether it will get picked up or not for another season. I'd rather a great show go big or go home. And of course, it's all about the execution.
I do think the execution of the cliffhangers is important, yeah. I don't think shows should play it safe just to appease the network suits and all that (being scared of whether or not they will return for a continuation or conclusion), but I think there need to be a moderation, with the showrunners sitting down and thinking "Do we really need a cliffhanger ending here?" and maybe have one of those more or less resolved but not quite endings (with a ending stinger for instance) as to not rely too hard on a full-on cliffhanger, in which case the show is cancelled, it will be left hanging and audiences will be disappointed and feel as if they wasted their time and dedication. But yeah, a good/great show should ideally go all the way, but then again, there can be a risk in doing so these days, unless the ratings are excellent.
I understand that it's hard to keep a show alive in today's landscape when there less episodes per season to develop a story and more competition for audience's attention with platforms that can provide infinite content at a slashed budget (more shows with less seasons) but those are just the goal posts that a successful tv show are required to meet now. It's a problem in the industry for sure, but I don't think the creative storytelling should bend the knee to it as a hopeful workaround.
Yeah, as I've argued before, there's more troubles for shows to stay alive these days in the age of streaming. There's way less episodes and seasons, a lot more competition with tonnes of shows (I'd argue seriously way too many), budgetary issues, and the shows having a lot less time to impress or they will be cancelled (and popularity, great reviews & fans voicing their support cannot really save them).
I mean, sure, those are the goal posts for shows and showrunners & their storytelling shouldn't have to adapt to the situation to work around those limitations, but I think there need to be some kind of caution and moderation these days. You can still have your storytelling and serialization and whatnot without necessarily having giant cliffhanger endings: Sure, you can have them and do well if you are very much sure you're renewed and greenlit for another season or a conclusion of some kind, but if there's any sort of an unsurety and the fate of your show is up in the air or dangling from a thread (and you're feeling that you need to beg fans for support), then maybe adapt a little to the situation and not simply assume that you'll be able to continue and/or finish the story. It depends on the situation and the show.
The TV landscape has changed so much, with those more or less older network shows (like your examples) weren't in such a big danger of being cancelled as opposed to a lot of streaming shows, which get way less of a chance to make an impression both in terms of viewers and ratings, maybe especially the latter as if a show doesn't get the numbers wanted by the powers that be, it may very well get canned, even if it's a very popular and well-reviewed and/or awarded show, as the streaming services don't care for essentially anything than huge viewership numbers, which has turned into a problem (causing a lot of popular shows to end before their time).
It also depends on how much faith the studio and streaming service has in the show, but seeing as shows don't tend to go for more than 4 or 5 seasons tops, then I think the showrunners should have a goal set with the storytelling and being able to wrap it up in that time (and if getting the word that the show is being cancelled prematurely, get a chance at wrapping things up early).
