'You Either Die a Hero or Live Long Enough to See Yourself Become the Villain' — 3 Different TV Shows That Did Not Know When to Quit

TV - still the "go to" format when one really wants to explore a fictional universe in depth. However, it is difficult to pinpoint the right moment when to stop exploring.

A nice "jumping the shark moment" always helps. But mostly, coming to realize that a TV show should have stopped, comes slowly... clearly too slowly for the creators of the show.

Therefore, "quit while you are still ahead" approach is fairly difficult to realize in the world of TV. That brings out a question - just when should a TV show quit and stop? Let's explore three different examples and what we can learn from them.

The Simpsons — Sacrificing Heart for Longevity

When should it have quit?

It is difficult to be more precise, but it should have been between seasons 10 (perhaps even 9) and 13.

Why should it have quit then?

"The Golden Age of The Simpsons". Commonly referred to as the time period starting with season 2 and ending with season 8 (1990-1997). This was the time when the show really perfected it's formula. This is also the time period, from where most of the classic Simpsons moments come from. So, what made it good?

Sharp, often absurd comedy and social satire have always been a part of "The Simpsons". However, episodes made during "The golden era" had two more elements. Firstly, they had heart. Secondly, a sense of consistency towards it's extremely well made cast of characters within it's own (heightened) reality. These elements also made the comedy and social satire more effective.

To put it more simply. When watching episodes from "The golden age", surprisingly enough, the main focus is on the plot and characters. Comedy and social satire come as extremely welcome bonuses (that are also further enhanced by the audience caring about the plot and characters). That, in short, is the reason, the show has had such a big impact on popular culture. So, what happened?

The show got to a point where the creators had a simple but crucial choice: Quit now, or sacrifice some of that heart and consistency for longevity. Needless to say, they went for the latter one...

Little by little, the series started losing it's heart and consistency. The plot became more of an excuse for setting up gags. The that also translated into personalities of the characters becoming whatever the plot needed for setting up a gag.

In the end, the jokes and social commentary were still good. But it did not have the consistent characters and story to back it up anymore. It also relayed more and more on celebrity cameos just for the sake of it.

The best symbol of this decline for many is Homer's change from well meaning doofus to complete (sometimes even a bit mean) idiot. Having said that, the rest of the main and supporting characters also had similar changes.

In the end, by that time, the show had run so long, that it started repeating itself. The only way to go on, was giving up some of it's own established fictional reality and focus on the gags .

Therefore, it's hard to point out when exactly the show should have stopped. There is no clear "jumping the shark" moment (although a lot of people would say it's the episode with Frank Grimes, where the change in Homer's character started being more apparent). Yet, when watching season 9 episodes, the good still far outweighs the bad. Season 10 - there are already more bad ones among mostly good ones. By season 13, there are few good ones among mostly bad ones.

What is clear, is that the show should have quit somewhere during time period from 1998 to 2003. It would have felt natural to end the show somewhere around that time. But, of course, who would willingly end that kind of monster hit.

What good came from continuing?

As said before, it still packs some good jokes and often sharp social satire. Just not a compelling story and consistent characters to back it up. Also, Hit and Run video game (2003) and The Simpsons: The Movie (2007) are two of the bright spots that have come out after the end of "The golden age". Still, it is kind of sad, that "The golden age" is not even half of the show's episodes anymore.

Prison Break - Pushing a brilliant but simple concept too far

When it should have quit?

Maybe I am being a bit tough here, but it really should have ended after season 1.

Why it should have quit then?

No matter how brilliant and complex the writing, original concept behind Prison Break was simple... breaking out of a prison. That was achieved with the first season. Of course, since it had brilliant writing and strong cast, continuation was inevitable. But it was also a bit forced.

The thing is, the following seasons (2-4) were by no means bad. In fact, they were often great. The writing was still sharp, plot still edge of the seat stuff. But, by the time they finally ended it with season 4, the overriding feeling was, that it had gone on for way too long.

Of course, season one left a lot of the story untold and one could argue that season 2, where the characters are on the run, is necessary. But it would not have been a stretch to imagine wrapping the story up with season one. Thus leaving it a cool and simple concept, that was executed perfectly.

What good came from continuing?

As said before, the episodes after season 1 still offer their fair share of thrills. And now we have upcoming season 5 on the horizon... Even though, it really does feel unnecessary like every other season after the first one.

'LOST' — Interesting ideas are not enough to continue a story that has reached its logical conclusion.

When should it have quit?

After season 3

Why should it have quit then?

I don't think there is another TV show towards which I have more mixed emotions.

The first season was simply awesome. It had a nice concept about a bunch of people surviving a plane crash onto a mysterious island. It was as much about survival, as it was about exploring these characters (through their interactions with each other and flashbacks about their past) to flesh them out.

The show did have a clear supernatural element with many mysterious things happening on the island from the get go. But it was quite subtle and not the main focus. The main focus was the characters and them dealing with being stranded on that island.

Of course, the second season had to start explaining and exploring the supernatural element of the show a little more. I was on board with it and enjoyed the second season. Although, slightly less so than the first season.

The third season was already a clear step down in excitement and quality (in my opinion) compared to the first season. But it finished the story (that season 1 set up) in a fairly satisfying way. These mysteries of the island were uncovered, dealt with and the main characters finally got away from the island. In the end, I was more or less happy about how the show had turned out. The series and plot had reached it's logical conclusion.

But there were more seasons coming. In fact, 3 more. It seemed that the only way to continue a show that had reached it's logical conclusion, was to completely change the format and create this mish mash of interesting theories and ideas. But they were simply thrown in together in a convoluted, unnecessary and confusing way.

The characters had gotten off the island. Now the series needed a way to bring them back. And boy did the creators wreck their brains on that one. To achieve it, the show took up time travel and paralel universes. At one point, the characters came to a conclusion that in order to solve their problems, they literally have to set off a nuke... and be blown up with it?! Some characters, who got killed off, somehow kept popping up and so on.

And here is the tricky thing for me. I like that sort of stuff. I am not saying, that I was blown away with them. But there were some very interesting scientific and phylosophical theories that the show presented us with (as pseudo as they might have been on many levels). Therefore, I should have enjoyed it instead of being hugely disappointed. Why was it so?

Exploring these concepts was interesting, but it wasn't the show I had started watching anymore. That show ended with season 3.

Originally, as said before, the show was about bunch of people surviving a plane crash on a mysterious island. The focus was on them trying to get over their past, uncover the mysteries and get out of there. The struggle of these characters was clearly set up and had a clear aim to work towards. And I was invested in it.

But when the show went in this new and convoluted direction, one thing became apparent really quickly. Now matter how ambitious or interesting the content, there is no point in continuing a story that has reached it's logical conclusion. Especially by drastically changing the rules and concept of the show. You will simply lose the point why people became invested in the show.

What good came from continuing?

The show still had it's moments . As said before, these theories and concepts that were presented in later seasons, were indeed interesting. But they were presented as a part of a convoluted and unnecessary continuation of a once great TV show, that had lost it's way. Besides, there are less convoluted ways to find out about the theories and concepts presented in the show.

To Sum Up

It is difficult to pinpoint a moment when a TV show should quit. Especially, if it turns out to be a huge hit. But from these three examples, a common theme seems to emerge.

When the only way to continue a TV show is to drastically or even forcefully change and expand the core elements that made the show popular in the first place, it's time to quit. These changes must always feel natural for the universe and the characters that were set up in the beginning.

It doesn't mean that good things can't come out of a decision to continue anyway. But the original concept and characters shouldn't be messed up because of it. They deserve more... or in this case, less ;).