A Theory

I have a theory.

Middle school English tells us that every story must have three things: a beginning, a middle and an end. The thing about television that makes it a challenging story telling medium is that the ending is always uncertain. The writers rarely have any idea how long their show will be on the air. Sometimes this causes problems when a show gets cancelled before the writers were expecting resulting in unresolved cliffhangers and unfinished characters. This is the common complaint of television viewers whose favorite show gets "cancelled before its time." Sometimes, though, television's lack of a certain end point causes problems when a show goes on far beyond the limits of the story and its premise. Lost is a perfect example of a show that fits this mold.

It is this second category that leads to my theory: Good television show should be given three seasons, no more. If, at the end of a third season, a television show truly feels strong enough to deserve something more, they should be given a movie deal to give the series one last, but finite, story. The ideal Arrested Development deal, if you will.

Before everyone tells me that networks would never go for this model, that it doesn't result in maximum profitability, let me assure you that I understand this. I'm not suggesting this as a realistic idea, but really as a quality based-ideal. Although, as Jordan McDeere says in Studio 60, "quality is not anathema of profit," so maybe it's more logical than I give it credit for.

By giving the writers of popular television shows a finite end point, it solves two problems.

First, it provides a sense of focus by limiting the stories that a series has time to tell. Writers can focus on the heart of their show without worrying about having to fill time with extraneous characters or subplots that exist solely to provide a later plot twist or cliffhanger. Any ABC Family show tends to have this kind of problem, but if you want a more mainstream example, just look at Glee. Just speaking in general terms, it's a show with characters and stories that exist purely as a device to move from song to big dramatic moment to song. More specifically though, looking back at all of Season 2, Mercedes and Santana's plot lines were perfect examples of this kind of waste of air time.  Now that the show runners have announced that Season 3 will have fewer guest stars and less singing to focus on the quality of the plot and characters, I feel justified criticizing them for their... well, their plot and characters.

Secondly, limiting a show to three seasons gives it a guaranteed ending. Sounds obvious, right? It is. Gone would be the days of cliffhangers at the end of shows' final seasons. No longer would shows like The Office be allowed to stumble off into the future desperately trying to find stories to tell after every major character has completed their arc. Jim and Pam are married with a child, Michael has left the office, and even Dwight managed to run the place for a day. The story has ended, even if the show continues to move forward.

Shows like The Office or Lost which are allowed to drag on long after their initial premise has worn out, only serve to dull their brilliance. Viewers look back at both of those shows now, initially praised and cheered for their greatness, and remember them, at best, as just above mediocre.

Of course, there is always an exception that proves the rule... But we'll talk about that tomorrow.