Why AVENGERS: ENDGAME Did What GAME OF THRONES Couldn’t - Wisecrack Vlog 

'Will there ever be a serialized show with a satisfying ending?' Yes. It was called Avatar: The Last Airbender.

Well if you have an extended middle and want to finish the show, all you need an extended end. Just be sure to close most of your plot points with polished ends, if you spend 6 seasons of building a middle you can't satisfy all plots with 6 episodes, simple as that.

It's ironic because comics are meant to keep on going while GRRM's book were meant to end.

“Serialised TV can never provide a satisfying ending” LITERALLY BRINGS UP BREAKING BAD. What happened to having and maintaining standards?

yeh let's not glaze over the FACT that GoT's show runners wanted it to end ASAP and just plain rushed it.

I disagree. Game of Thrones didn’t fail because it didn’t do an end. It failed because it rushed said ending Edit: see my comment a bit lower for more context on why I think that

There are truths in this...But it's core is wrong... GOT was always building toward an ending... Just an ending not as lazy and uninspired as the one given.

"The politics in game of Thrones got more and more complex" Where we watching the same show? Post season 5 it did not got more complex, it got more nonsensical

Couldn't disagree more. Episodic shows tend to be better received as they go on because they dont have the same built up expectations, not because viewers have a preference for an eternal middle. The majority of disappointing shows wisecrack listed here (including game of thrones) were in decline for multiple seasons before their poor endings. Dexter for instance was definitively still in its "middle" when it soured, and lost was clearly not written with the end in mind.

Doesnt help the fact that literally every GOT youtuber had a better ending than what the writers could think of. Maybe its impossible to satisfy the majority but what got writers did was like-here ,we have got 7 seasons of character development,Build up and narrative,what do we do? Writer-how about we see what we can come up in half an hour?

The Wire did it. Buffy the Vampire Slayer did it. Deep Space Nine (arguably) did it. Babylon 5 did it. Your argument is not convincing given those examples.

I've just noticed how "The Wire" had a pretty satisfying ending, build upon the notion that history repeats itself and the cicle (with some small changes here and there) goes on and on. So in a way, it took advantage of the endless middle theory to make a point that nevertheless felt definite. Btw.: I'd really like to see a video on The Wire!

I actually disagree with this video. There are plenty of serialized television shows that managed to have not only satisfying, but ingenious endings (Six Feet Under, Breaking Bad, The Wire, and yes the Sopranos [it was a great ending whether you got it or not], etc.). The problem with Game of Thrones wasn't that there was no way to satisfyingly conclude it-I actually think the overall beats of where most of the characters (yes, even Bran) ended up were fitting and natural. The problem with Game of Thrones' ending was that the road they took to get to the ending was unnatural, lazy, forced, and unimaginative. The beginnings and endings of stories are crucial in showing the two opposing states of a character before and after a series of choices, but the middle of a story has always been the most important element even since Aristotle's day, because the middle shows HOW the characters get from A to B. If we think of Game of Thrones' narrative progression as like walking a road to get from one city to another, then the overall road would look something like this: 1) First four miles: a neatly paved and pristinely kept road that passes through a series of small, interesting, and fascinating hamlets, where you can always find something new and wonderful, and every little while the road branches off somewhere where a new little adventure can be had. It's a brilliant, beautiful road that has clearly been well-cared for, full of artistry and intricately interweaving branches. 2) Fifth and sixth miles: The road is still neat and tidy, and still very smooth to walk, but there aren't as many places to diverge and have a neat little excursion. The path is still easy to walk, however, and it does still take you through some interesting places. It's still a good journey overall. 3) Seventh mile: Here, the road has started getting more barren, and the paving is less well laid. It's still negotiable, but every once in a while you stumble because the ground is not completely even, and there are a number of unsightly holes in the road. There are no more little side-diversions, no more places to stop and have a good snack and rest up-now the road is just the road, and there's only the city to get to. 4) Eighth mile: Finally, the road has started falling apart. In fact, there's almost more earth than road. Wild animals cross the road regularly because no one has been looking after it; your feet get sore because of the rough terrain, and it's clear no one had any interest in putting up a pit-stop for travelers to rest themselves. At least it's a short road, because there's always the danger that a band of highwaymen might ambush your party and stab you in the gut, and you're not prepared because you'd been told that the last stretch of road would be sufficient, when in truth you'll encounter troubles and dangers that start to make the whole adventure seem not worth it. Eventually, you look back down the road you came, and everything's so broken that you can't even tell how you got here. Nothing about the road makes sense anymore. Finally, by the time you get to the gates of the city, you're broken and weary, maybe clinging on to life, and by the time you get into the city, you start to tell yourself that you would willingly give up those first six miles of wonder and charm if it meant you'd never gone out to this godforsaken city in the first place. Maybe some of your fellow travelers rather enjoyed the first six miles enough to have done it all over again. Maybe some of them actually didn't mind the last two miles so much, though you would look at those people with confounded disdain. You're at the new city now, and you're sore, bitter, disoriented, and starved, but the city's inhabitants look at you like you're crazy. "It's not THAT bad of a walk," they tell you. "You seem like people that just look for any reason to complain. What, did you expect the WHOLE road was going to be as good as those first six miles? Manage your expectations a bit better." Then, after being scolded, you realize you were poisoned by a venomous snake along the last stretch of the road, and now you've lost all feeling. But it gets worse. Then, the people tell you, there's actually more road that goes to different cities (prequels and spin-offs). They all seem eager to walk down those roads that have been paved and constructed by the same exact people, but you-you just want to lay in bed and pretend none of it ever happened.

This is why Avatar the Last Airbender is the best American Cartoon Ever It has a long middle but every episode there is something new that gets solved in the same episode, and it has a great end

I don't think the idea of this "Infinite Middle" really hones in on why GoT failed (though, I know this is just a video looking at it from a different angle) But all of the examples listed; Dexter, True Blood, The Sopranos, etc all failed because the writing was terrible and the fans noticed. I honestly think most people look forward to thrilling/satisfying *conclusions* moreso than they enjoy the windup. The payoff for built plot threads is what determines whether a show will end well or not. Game of Thrones failed to deliver satisfying endings to literally every single plot thread just because the writers wanted to move on. So this idea of people wanting an "infinite middle" can take this "infinite middle finger" and have several seats lol.

Why does it have to be the audiences fault? Season 8 was BAD&D

I'm sick of hearing that when something sucks, it's _our_ fault.

11:05 "It can't be that all competent writers leave before final season." Or, you know, maybe writing satisfying ending to a story requires different approach and skills than stretching it ad infinitum.

I don't agree. I think they simply fucked up the ending.

Story started going to shit in season 5, and the pacing went turbo at the end of season 6. The reason why the MCU was so much better than Got at the end was that the MCU didn't rush anything and the writing was great.

Still want a Game of Thrones: What went wrong.

Fullmetal Alchemist Brotherhood's ending was completely satisfying. One of the best endings I've seen regardless of it being serialized

This Video has been EFAPed. All hail the Toxic Brood

Ok, now I'm waiting for a Wisecrack on JoJo's Bizarre Adventure because of the meme.

I swear the GoT showrunners are paying people to spread this 'it could never have ended satisfactorily" narrative...

Let's be honest the showruners on Got didn't bother, whereas in the Mcu you could tell how much effort was made

GoT: Has a bad ending Wisecrack “Video Games”

I love your work, but nah. All my GoT debates over the past decade were about who would end up on the iron throne. The final ending was why I kept coming back.

For the longest time I didn’t know why the logo for Wisecrack was a donkey with a monocle. Then it hit me: Wisecrack = Smart-ass. I take full credit for discovering this. I am the absolute first person to figure this out definitely.

Breaking Bad and The Wire both had incredible stories and ended in a way that pretty much everyone was happy with. TV shows can't have satisfactory endings is a total cop out to excuse poor writing...

"Could Game of Thrones have ever achieved a satisfying ending?" Of course. If they stretched it out into the 10 season's HBO giving them time to properly touch on each of the established plot points (wtf happen to the prince that was promised!!) They could have gave an awesome ending,but starwars happened.

This is the dumbest argument I've ever heard. Yes, serialized shows, especially the longer they go on, have a tougher time ending but with proper planning many shows have proven that it is possible (e.g. Breaking Bad, The Americans). Also, it completely ignores (and almost forgives) GoT for its steadily worsening writing after it ran out of book material. The reason Marvel movies had an easier time ending is that after a certain amount of characters got introduced they started planning for their eventual conclusion of their story arcs. They were mostly written with popular mass appeal in mind with typical hero's journey type stories. Therefore, they wrote with character arcs in mind to provide the most satisfying conclusion to the audience. GoT, on the other hand, was written with very different intentions. It was written to deconstruct fantasy tropes and color in the lines where most popular fantasy adaptations didn't delve into (politics, minutae of worldbuilding) with character based plotting and theming. At first, the show largely stuck to this. However, without the source material to rely on, devolved into fan service with objective based plotting/theming. The writers' strengths that served them well in the early seasons (e.g. creating spectacle, trimming story to its most crucial elements) eventually turned into their biggest crutches, without any of GRRM's writing to prop up their weaknesses. The difference wasn't inherent story structure, it was that Marvel stuck consistently with a successful and recognizable standard with an intention of building satisfying character arcs and the GoT started as innovative and unique and changed late-midcourse without any regard to their characters/world they had been building for the past few seasons.

Ok, so...stay with me here, I'm going to propose a radical idea. Video games are not to blame, the ending to Game of Thrones just sucked. I know, I know, insane, right?

WTF, he never explains why endgame succeeds only why game of thrones fails.

George RR Martin told Benioff & Weiss how he planned to end the books. To say that Game of Thrones wasn't built to end is absurd. Long, complex stories like Game of Thrones end in satisfying ways all the time. It's just harder to pull off the ending because of all the build-up and numerous story threads. Sitcoms don't have to worry about paying off years of build-up because there is no build-up. The world of the sitcom basically resets every week, leaving the characters in roughly the same place they started. I would call that format more of a perpetual middle than any long-form series like Game of Thrones. Sure there's a small catharsis at the end of each episode, but that catharsis is made somewhat meaningless when everyone goes back to square one immediately afterward. The reason many people are attracted to big, complex stories is that they generally have bigger catharsis moments because of all the build-up. Watching someone struggle for years will almost always provide a bigger emotional payoff than watching someone struggle for twenty minutes, assuming it was written well. That's why people kept watching Game of Thrones up to the end despite the steady decline in quality over the last four seasons. They were willing to tough out the lackluster middle so they could get to the big catharsis at the end. This video reminds me why I unsubscribed from Wisecrack. They're less interested in genuine analysis and good-faith argumentation than they are in flaunting their philosophy degrees.

*code geass has a best ending* because of good writing. *got* can deliver a satisfying ending if they try much harder

Breaking Bad alone proves this video wrong. And you even mentioned it, but did it so quickly probably hoping we wouldn't think about it, but we do. Nice effort, terrible execution. Just like Game of Thrones.

Don’t know if it was just me but I didn’t find the end of this video satisfying

Take a shot every time he says Alan

7:57 "The politics got more complex" .... it got more black-and-white actually ....

...eeehhhh...sorry, but that writing for season 8 was actually trash. There is a noticeable shift in quality of story. You can't justify it away.

OR, the early seasons were written with Martin's source material and the crap latter seasons weren't?

I don't think the bad endings are the result of people getting use to an on going arch. They are just literally that, BAD ENDINGs. Dexter for example should of had him going off with his kid and lover at the end. It's been a long while since I've seen it but as I recall he over came his killer need and was going to leave the guy to the police. But the guy breaks free, kills his sister, and Dexter sails off to fake his death to live in a cabin in the woods. Which was stupid as all get out. Dexter always struck me as odd as it seem to be championing Dexter as the hero is a very obvious way. While Dexter often would ponder over how his nature brings suffering to those he cares about the reality of the show is that his refusing his nature is what brings them suffer. Every single bad thing that happens to Dexter in the series is because he doesn't kill the bad guy right away. He gets intrigued by their ability to blend into normal society and thus tries to study them which results in mistakes and him being exposed. Even the ending with him going against his nature to let the cops handle it results in his sister's death. Lost was just a dumb Mystery Box show which had people on the edge of their seats hoping to find out what the clue about the world would be. But ultimately people lost interest and then they finally opened the box at which point most people didn't care anymore and the reveal of they were dead the whole time was kinda dumb. Game of Thrones could have done a good ending but instead it rushed through to lack the proper character development to get the characters in the mind set where their actions made sense. This was the main staple of the series, compared to the later seasons where characters just did things so that pieces would move into place. They pretty much drop all pretense of this in the ending seasons. The show was mostly about good doesn't always win just because they are good. And that every often has to dirty their hands and make compromises. Having the Dragon Queen go nuts and torch a town is a bit cliche villain in that she is now like Cersei and has to go down. At least make it a bit more gray like when she attacked the caravan and demanded the swear alliance to her or die. That sort of thing can be common in a Medieval setting so there is some debate to be had on if it was a sound move or not. The same with the Mad King who saw enemies everywhere, have her slowly build to be more paranoid eventual turn on some of her former allies. Also the whole battle vs the undead was done by a tactical moron which even people not that picky about medieval combat were pointing out, which means you know you screwed up. Plus when your heroes win despite being incredibly stupid it undermines them as it seems like they won because of plot armor rather than being cool. Unless you like shows aimed at kids where the power of belief and friendship make you stronger to win the day. AKA most Shounen anime.

The extended middle is not something we "evolved" to like, we don't like it. We still like endings. Big corporations don't like endings, that's for sure, but it's top down, not the other way around. Could GOT have had a good ending? YES, if it was built to end. It wasn't, like Lost, it was built to last til the cow was completely out of milk.

Another clever video. This time though I don't think you hit the nail on the head. Pretty sure GOT could have been brought to a satisfying end by enough time and good writers.

Serialized shows can’t have satisfying endings Cough Full mental alchemist brotherhood cough cough

Problem with extended middle is not ending but a shallow, rushed ending.

I think the influence of cash on the companies producing shows should also be taken into consideration when we look at an extended "middle." The longer they can stretch a show, the more cash they can get out of us. This is one reason I enjoy Korean dramas. They usually run 24 episodes then end, forever. I wish more American shows ran the same way. One season, a complete story, then done forever.

I would of rather had every character die by the Night king then the ending we got.

Ending with a jojo reference will always make things better, maybe you should do an episode on jojos bizarre adventures

Nope. Wrong. That it came to an end may be disappointing, but if you don't understand the severe faults in seasons 7 and 8 you're not qualified to run this channel. The problem was NOT in how it ended, but in how we reached the ending, or rather how we were rushed in a half-arsed way towards it.

I think one of the major issues with ending a series with an extended middle is the amount of plot threads it accumilates during it's run time. Too many of them are left open to maybe come back to them later and when the final season comes it's impossible to wrap everything up in a satisfying way. In my mind a good ending is possible if the writers keep track of loose endings, open plot points, any needed character development or change, planned reveals etc and do a decent chunk of them along the way so each can get the needed time and attention instead of putting too much wheigth on the last few episodes.

I saw your Jojo reference and now all I want is a video on Jojo and why the fanbase is so extreme.

Simple: Endgame tied up its character arcs naturally without always relying on spectacle. Even the final battle felt like payoff rather than a substitution for development. GoT focused too much on the style and spectacle that its character’s motives felt rushed

Flow is the anwser to Most things and knowing that a Lot of people dont know what flow is makes my head explode

That JoJo reference though lol!

Why is there no mention of books ? Delaying middle with pauses is what we experience (have been experiencing for ages) in book entertainment. Most TV series end up with bad conclusion because writers rush to finish (deadlines). Seeing how much time Georgie takes to end ASOIAF it may end a lot better than its "adaptation".

The biggest issue I have with this is that GoT is based on books, which were planned to end from when George started writing them. Books series almost always have gigantic middles, yet they often seem to end in satisfactory ways none the less. So unless it is an issue specific to tv I don't think this really holds up.

I would refer you to three particular examples: Chernobyl, The terror, and Band of Brothers. All three are critically acclaimed. All three are adored by audiences. All three had non-debatable endings based on the history involved. In other words, they had to end, and thus had to be planned with an ending in mind, not an extended middle. The Terror especially stands as an example of a satisfying ending. Of the examples you cite, the ones I am familiar with had their writing quality absolutely tank in the latter seasons - I think this explains it better than some extended middle theory. On the other hand, look at the ratings for The Walking Dead over its whole history, it has no ending in view for the foreseeable future, nor did it ever, and its been bleeding viewers like crazy since season 6.

I think, in this day and age, with the more varied ways in which we consume and interact with storytelling, the way in which the story is told has only expanded. It is not eliminating old methods but increasing in diversity which allows stories to be told (and retold) using new perspectives. That's a good thing.

"It's been quite the summer". Spring literally just ended yesterday.

This is the first wisecrack video to be entirely composed of bad arguments. If you’re going to be saying is, your next few sentences should always explain the because.

Wisecrack: "SEO Optimization" me: *dies*

People are happy with the avengers cheating in end game? Ookkkaayy. That was some unsatisfying stuff.

Totally disagree with the idea that GOT could not have ever satisfied with it's ending. I can only speak for myself, but I will note I have heard my same sentiments echoed by many, many fans of the show both casual and hardcore. Most people are not looking for a cathartic ending that wraps everything up in a happy bow, just one that makes sense in the context the show sets up. This is something GOT failed to do and instead of logical ends, it went for pure shock value. Daenerys becoming a murderous tyrant is not a far fetched ending. Book readers will note how her mental state is always questionable and how that version of the character slowly develops into someone who cares less and less about ruling and the realities of politics and governance and more about decimating anyone who gets in her way and upholding her iron clad sense of justice. The series leaves out so much of the narrative that would allow the audience to never know what to think of her 100% and in doing so presents a totally different character. Add to this the incredibly high moral standard that is set up for her and no other character. Sansa watches gleefully as Ramsy is eaten alive, Arya murders all of the Freys right after feeding a man his own children, and Jon, the pinnacle of morality kills a 13 year old boy who he mentored and who was likely manipulated by others and had a very normal hatred of Jon given the context, and Bran is totally useless and does nothing to help and keeps quiet about his knowledge of what Dany would do to Kings Landing.We are still told to root for all these people but Dany wanting to fly her 3 dragons to the capital and incarcerate her enemies is made to be a sign of absolute madness despite it being the most logical and least bloody option than a prolonged war. Add to this her showing no signs of real malice towards the innocent and total understanding that Cersei is basically holding the city hostage, and her noble act of choosing to help save humanity over her own ambitions and the huge sacrifices that entails, her choice to kill everyone makes no sense at all. Beyond all that are the huge plot holes like Tyrion suddenly becoming totally incompetent and never mentioning the secret passage way into the castle only he knows about to anyone while bitching and moaning about a bloodless conquest when at any time they could have assassinated or captured Cersei or stormed the Red Keep. Had they sown in those seeds to show Dany's madness and potential for evil, had they given Bran more agency and relevance this show could have kept it's tragic ending but it would have made more sense. Maybe not as shocking but shock value should never trump sense in storytelling. Add to all that two show runners tired of working on the show, wanting to do other things, but still having top big an ego to let anyone else take the reigns and you have a recipe for disaster and disappointment that really started in season 5, got slight better in season 6 and went into overdrive in 7 and 8.

Soooo the philosophy of Jojo's Bizarre Adventure? Please?

I feel like bojack is a great counterargument to this whole vid

The specific problem with Game of Thrones isn't that 'serialization is built to continue'. It's that the early seasons were built on Character-driven Plot (because they had the well-detailed model of the books to draw on and play around with), while the final two seasons (being founded on only an outline of the remaining storyline, leaving their writers a 'check-list of must-dos' rather than detailed character development) were built on Plot-driven Characters whose actions often felt less organic than arbitrary.

Or or maybe, just maybe, the ending of game of thrones was rushed, characters acted like idiots, and plots were left hanging.

Avatar the Last Airbender was a serialized tv show that had a very satisfying ending

There were plenty of cathartic moments on GoT, and I dare to say that were those moments that made everybody fall in love with the show.

Finishing a side quest in Scyrim IS a cathartic moment, i don't close my game because i know that i can get another one after finishing another new quest (or buying new couch in Sims). Extended middle is for longer runtime of the show to get more money.

It is still possible to have good endings. It is just more difficult. Not being episodic didn’t ruin the show. The massive dip in writing quality over the past 4 seasons did.

I agree with the premise, but I think we’re missing a few things here when it comes to your conclusions. There IS good serialized content that ends in a satisfying way. Just look at book series like Harry Potter or Unfortunate Events. Just look at shows like Breaking Bad. This is not an impossible thing to do. The real problem is the capital incentives. Some of these shows-Dexter, etc.-just go on for to long due to how much money they make for the studios producing them. Other shows don’t go for long enough due to poor ratings even if it’s critical reception justifies more commitment on the part of producers. Game of Thrones didn’t end badly because it fell to in love with the “middle,” but because, as everyone has now pointed out, the writing tanked. I really don’t think this is inevitable in our current media climate or something; we continue to have good stories even as that climate shifts. The problem was that the show’s creators, in lieu of a solid reference point after they ran out of books, decided to pander to their audience as opposed to telling an authentic story. These shows don’t die because they’re too long, or because they’re serialized. They die because they get sucked into becoming cash cows more than art.

The use of Yes's Roundabout at the end is pretty clever !!!!

I think Daredevil is a good example of a combination of the two. Each season is contained. But yet each episode in that season is serialized. So each season ends the themes and narrative it started but the episodes of said seasons still capture you into its flow. This way it gives satisfying conclusions to each season and there is no need for an absolute finale.

The discussion is worthwhile, but the conclusion is a bit of a non-sequitur. Why should one's competency or fascination in rising tension indicate an inability to reach a satisfying climax and falling action?

I hope that was a tease for a JoJo's Bizarre Adventure video!

Hannibal was a serialized show that got cut short, and it STILL had a great ending that was both satisfying for long time viewers and fit the episode and season.

anybody else love the respect Klay Thompson gets in this vid's section on flow?

Kinda makes me wonder about Breaking Bad, it's not really episodic, yet it has one of the most satisfying endings there is, yet, you could say each season has its own different story.

There are shows with a lot of fillers (like animes), and then the ending is satisfactory.... No excuses for lazy writting

I feel like this video introduced quite a few concepts without entirely connecting them AND without adequately comparing and contrasting the 22 movies of the Infinity Saga with the 76 episodes of Game of Thrones.

This is where anime comes in and each season is a episodic-like story arc

After Gus's death, I read that the Breaking Bad writers said that they had no idea what was going to happen next, they hadn't thought about it. I thought, "aww crap, they didn't have it all planned out?" I was afraid that it was going to be like Alias and LOST where they introduce story-lines that went nowhere. My fear was unfounded. Everything came full circle in the finale as if it was planned out since episode one. How? This is because despite them don't know where they were going, every time they take the next step, they re-evaluate everything that came before. I was surprised how much this worked for Breaking Bad. And I think that was the same for MCU too. Before Infinity War, they didn't know how they were going to end it. So they could re-evaluate what happened before and develop a satisfying conclusion. They didn't plan for Thanos to be like this back in Avengers 1, that's for sure. Game of Thrones on the other hand, had the ending in mind. They knew that Bran would be king, they knew that Arya would kill the night king, they knew that Dany will turn evil, they knew that Jon will kill Dany. BUT, they didn't know how to get there. And that was the real problem. MCU has this moment too. Age of Ultron. That movie was not as good as the first Avengers, because Joss Whedon has to set up for the movie that came after it. Ironman and Cap was going to fight later in Civil War, he has to set up for that. So, making things up as you go along, and let the character develop on their own, is actually the best way to write, because sometime, your characters simply doesn't take the story where you want them to go. And you have to write what makes sense, rather than trying to reach your planned end game.

The end of Code Geass was WAY more satisfying than the middle.

I think the only way for Game of Thrones to have a truly cathartic ending was for all those little plots that had sprouted years ago, all intertwined for some major story that had taken root before our eyes to bloom. If you really think about it, it kinda did with how many little things in GRRM's story ended up being foretold in subtle ways, the throne being like the one ring, forged by dragon fire and unmade by it, Bran being Prince behind Robb and the rebellion that started with Brandon Stark being burned for wanting to challenge Rhaegar, now his nephew Bran is king, Sansa is Queen, Arya is an adventurer, etc. I think we were all just waiting for the parlor scene where Bran reveals a bigger portion of the game unbenownst to us, but instead he just had weird one liners that weren't fitting.

This concept of a never ending middle is also how bubbles start on stockmarkets and, like GoT's final episode, pop out of existance with a dissatisfactory bang. Share holders will expect their bonds to only grow in value and never need to be sold.

This is first year English major over-analysis to point of becoming non-sensical. Of course Game of Thrones could have had a satisfying ending. There's no shortage of long-form storytelling that does it. The ending was unsatisfying because it was rushed, inconsistent, and poorly developed - not because a satisfying ending isn't possible. No need to overthink this one to justify bad writing.

Or, ya know, one was well thought out than the other. Saved you 12 minutes

bit of an essay below. sorry about that... i believe there is an ultimate formula for this problem used by many greats. the semi-episodic formula. a couple examples of series that use it are: avatar the last airbender, the marvel cinematic universe, and milo murphy's law. in this set up, one tells an overarching story using almost nothing but small, single-unit stories. to use the least recognizable of my three examples: milo murphy's law. in one episode we are viewing some crazy antics at a lard themed amusement park. the story is a simple one about overcoming a fear of roller coasters, but there's a catch. the cause of the fear central to the episode is a hint at the overarching narrative of the season and foreshadowing of future main characters. this is just one example. there are many in all three of the mentioned series. you may think that you're watching a self contained story, but you're really being fed necessary information for future stories. this makes three separate experiences for different types of viewer. the viewer who watches episode by episode gets a self contained story every time. the viewer who wants that extended middle gets it through promises of future reveals. finally, the attentive viewer who focuses on the little things gets to say "i called it!" when the foreshadowed event occurs. i believe that this formula, if used correctly, solves all of the problems with internet age media consumption single-handedly.

Ha it's cool watching these after the podcast. From ideas and conversation to a fully visualized execution. A+

I love it when I find a Jojo's reference out in the wild!

Jojo reference huh Is that mean we're getting an Jojo analysis video (I really hope we do)

The problem with many Serialized stories is that they do not have the entire story plotted. The middle can be great, but when you get to the unsatisfying end, you wonder if the whole experience was worth it. One show that tried to do it right was Babylon 5. They plotted the entire 5 season arc at the beginning. Unfortunately the network played games with them, cancelling the final season, then adding back a final half season, and then extending it to full season. This made for a compression of the story in the first half of the final season, and then needing to add filler for the rest of the season. I think they did a pretty good job with it. Another well done serialized story is in the comic book Sandman. The writer decided to end the story, and took steps to get there in a satisfying way.

"As the show went on the politics got more complex" Wrong! The problem was the exact opposite: the dumbing down of the politics from season 5 onward. I like you Wisecrack...but your whole argument didn't apply here. At least not on GOT.

Eiichiro Oda, creater of One Piece, said that he figured out the ending there is just a lot of stuff in between.

10:37 Yes actually. We just need good writers, see Hello Future Me's proposed alternate ending that satisfies character arcs and development.

I think there are some shows that toe the line between episodic and linear almost perfectly. Code Lyoko would move past its plotless first season into its second season that presented mysteries that would pay off in the final episodes. They had their beginnings, middles and ends while continuing the overarching narratives of the season, building off what had came just before.

Way back then, a single movie has the beginning, middle and end which satisfies the audience and make then have discussion about what they saw after leaving their seats. Nowadays, you'll have to watch a movie which leaves you a cliffhanger or give you a convoluted ending. It seems that "Open Ending" has been the norm in this era.