Don't Let a Bad Ending Ruin Your Favorite TV Show

For several years, “Game of Thrones” was heralded as one of the great TV dramas, right up there with “Breaking Bad” and “The Sopranos”. While those shows had satisfying and conclusive finales worthy of the quality of their respective shows, “Game of Thrones” ended up with possibly the most infamous ending in TV history. To this day, any recommendation or praise for “Game of Thrones” will be followed by the caveat that the ending is a complete travesty on every narrative level.

Of the several people I’ve asked to watch “Game of Thrones”, only one of them has agreed to do so, with the others expressing how they have been turned away from the show because of the negative reception surrounding the ending. Even people who have already seen the show admit that their enjoyment was completely ruined by the last season. On one hand, I completely understand the sentiment, after all, it can be disheartening to know that a great series doesn’t end in an equally great way. But on the other hand, despite the undeniable pitfall in quality near the end of the show, I don’t believe that “Game of Thrones”, or any other TV show with a bad ending, should be able to be ruined by their endings. While having a good ending is a great asset for any television show, often being the difference between a 9/10 show and a 10/10, a bad ending; even if it is truly awful, can’t singlehandedly ruin a great series.

To keep going with the example of “Game of Thrones”, I find it sad to see people dismiss an entire 8 season show just because the last seasons were disappointing. “Game of Thrones” was such a consistently entertaining and well written series through its first 6 seasons, that even after experiencing the crushing ending, I still have a mostly positive outlook on the show. Recency bias can often be a factor in why shows become more known for their endings rather than the overall experience, since the end of the show is likely the part you have experienced most recently, but in order to properly assess a show’s quality you should factor in each of its aspects rather than focusing on the worst parts. 

“Breaking Bad” and “Samurai Champloo”, two shows with near perfect endings, would still be stellar pieces of television even if they didn’t end perfectly. I would still remember “Breaking Bad” for it’s excellent drama and slow burn character development, and “Samurai Champloo” for its charming tone and likable main trio. It’s undeniable that my enjoyment of these shows is improved by their well done endings, but even the worst ending imaginable couldn’t convince me to hate either of them.

A satisfactory conclusion isn't always the end-all-be-all of a great television show, or even any piece of media in general. When you see a beloved series completely drop the ball in its finale, it’s important to poke fun at and criticize it, but you shouldn’t be convinced that the series you had been enjoying for so long had ended up a complete waste of time. It’s more important to gauge the quality of a show based on all of its parts combined, which is why no ending, no matter how terrible, can ruin an otherwise great TV show.

By Christopher Eckl

OpinionChristopher EcklComment