"Bad" endings vs "No Ending"

[Rocketshipper]

I got into a debate with a friend the other day about show endings and what qualifies as a good ending/bad ending etc. and he expressed the opinion that giving a show no ending at all is prefferable to giving it an ending that is dissapointing or in some sense "bad". His example was the show "Lost" and he insisted that, if it had ended before the final season, it would have gone down as one of the greatest shows ever, but that the real ending "ruined" the show, because it was, in his opinion, so awful and failed to satisfyingly answer any questions.

So anyway, it got me wondering, and so now I'm asking you guys this question; which would you preffer and why? *If* you had to choose, would you rather have a show end with a conclusion that is in some subjective way "bad/dissapointing/anti-climactic" or is it better to just not have an ending at all, leave things hanging and let the audience imagine and come to their own conclusions?

[ChristianKitsune]

I think a "No Ending" is the same as a "Bad Ending," personally

[Atria35]

Depends on the show. I mean, The ending to The Sopranos was great- it was a 'no ending', but half the fans would have hated the ending if they had made one. Not having an ending meant that people could believe what they wanted about it, even if they did groan and complain at the time, and in their imaginations they could make it so it ended the way they wanted.

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

I don't really know what to say. I love Lost. The finale season was deeply flawed but it also had some moments of greatness. It's true that The End didn't deliver many answers to the many mysteries but it was still very enjoyable. Would I have done some parts differently? Absolutely. That doesn't change the fact that it was one crazy ride. Open-ended endings are fine, sometimes but non-endings are so very annoying.

[Yuki-Anne]

No endings leave so much room for the show to live on in your mind. They leave you thinking and wondering about the show. I vote that they're much better than bad endings, because bad endings leave you feeling like you wasted your time, and you gave the writers credit for being much smarter than they actually were.

[Midori]

I think a "No Ending" is the same as a "Bad Ending," personally

Same here, but the other way around. If the ending is bad, I pretend it didn't happen.

[ShiroiHikari]

No endings leave so much room for the show to live on in your mind. They leave you thinking and wondering about the show. I vote that they're much better than bad endings, because bad endings leave you feeling like you wasted your time, and you gave the writers credit for being much smarter than they actually were.

I think I agree with you. I do think that not getting an ending sucks, but bad endings are just infuriating.

[GeneD]

The good thing about getting no ending vs. a bad ending is that you can never "unsee" the bad ending and it can taint your view of the show as a whole, even if you pretend it didn't happen. At least that's what it's like for me.

[Sapphire225]

It depends on the show.

For instance, the "no ending" for the Sopranos was fitting, in my opinion. Given the series, had it continued, it would have most likely ended in a bad ending, if not bittersweet, emphasis on the bitter, at most. Sometimes,an ambiguous ending is better than a definate ending.

Then, you have bad endings that, given the show, can be expected and are sad yet fitting. Although the fanbase were in an uproar of the "no ending" they would probably be more upset if they had a "bad ending."

[Okami]

I think I'm in the same boat as Yuki and Shiroi.

My best example is with Gilmore Girls. I never found the series ending in season 7 to be satisfying at all...always felt there were pieces missing that weren't wrapped up properly and in the back of my mind it has continuously bothered me. I was sad to see my favorite show end so suddenly; I'm one of the few hoping for a movie to decently tie it all together...

[bigsleepj]

It depends on how the story is told, ultimately, and what kind of story it is. A 'happy' ending shoe-horned into a plot that is meant to be tragic can be terrible, and a badly applied 'bad' ending can be equally stupid. In the end it depends on the story and the skill of those telling it.

[Rocketshipper]

I would like to say that I think there is a difference between an "ambigous ending" and no ending at all. "Lost" had an ambigous ending. "Lois and Clark: the New Adventures of Super Man" had no ending; it was cancelled on a cliffhanger.

Personally, I would say having a bad ending is better than no ending at all, because for me, if a show has no ending at all, I feel like "why did I even watch this?" I watch the show to find out what happens. If nothing utlimatly happens, than what's the point? I feel like the only shows that could really get away with having no ending are sitcoms, because sitcoms by their nature aren;t really trying to tell an overarching story, they're just "day in the life of" storylines for the main characters. But a show that is serialized and has a plot, I think needs an ending or else its not complete. Even if the ending ends up being dissapointing, its better than stopping altogether. For me, having no resolution at all is a lot more likely to ruin a show for me than an ending that I feel did not live up to things. Its like walking out of a movie 15 minutes before its over.

Terminator: the Sarah Connor Chronicles is like that for me now. The show ended on a huge cliff-hanger at the end of season 2, and now I feel like "why would I want to watch this show again??" I watch two whole seasons of the show laying the groundwork for what is to come, foreshadowing future events, and then it just ends, without ever being able to finish the story. I wouldn;t want to read a book that was missing half its pages; I wouldn't want to watch a movie that was missing the last 15 minutes, so why would I really want to watch a TV show that stopped before it actually got an ending?

[Cognitive Gear]

Honestly, I think that endings being good or bad is far too subjective to really say that I'd rather have no ending at all.

[Scarecrow]

I actually thought Terminator: SCC was a good example of a no ending vs a bad ending and why no ending is better. They were aware the show may not go on another season. They could have ended the whole thing but it would have been pretty crappy since there was so much they'd have to wrap up.

I was satisfied with SCC even though it was obvious there was more planned. Even so, the ending was an excellent ending for the end of a season. I think the last two episodes of SCC are my two favorites. And SCC felt more like an open ended ending than a no ending. You're left to decide what happened. Now, an ending like the end of season one... that would have been a lot more annoying. And I probably would call that a bad ending if it ended there (and it almost did).

[ShiroiHikari]

Firefly originally had no ending, and sad as it was, I think it was enjoyable without one. It would have been stupid if they'd just made some crap up in a hurry just to have an ending. (The movie Serenity makes for a pretty good ending though, so maybe Firefly isn't a good example...)

[Nate]

I prefer a bad ending to no ending. However, I prefer an open-ended ending to a bad ending.

Like Rocketshipper said, I'm fine with a show having an ending that is open-ended. That is, they leave it open, maybe don't resolve all the plot holes, but it is definitively meant to end the series. Star Trek: The Next Generation (the TV series by itself, not including the movies) had an open-ended ending. The ship's journey did not end, and the characters were still around and could have had more adventures, but that was the final episode nonetheless. I am fine with this.

I am not fine with say, what happened to the Sonic Saturday morning cartoon series, where Robotnik was defeated and Snivley was shown to still be alive and there was a shot of evil glowing eyes in the dark, and the series was cancelled. This is not an open-ended ending, it's no ending at all. It was left on a cliffhanger, and it doesn't feel finished (because it wasn't).

I would rather have a bad ending than no ending because even if the ending is terrible, things at least feel resolved. Trigun is a good example of this. The ending of Trigun was AWFUL. Horrible. Stupid and ridiculous. However, I am glad it ended rather than setting up for a sequel series that would never have come, because it would have felt unfulfilling. I can at least say "Ugh, glad that's over with" rather than "Man now I'll NEVER know what happens!" I prefer to at least be able to ignore a story completely because it has ended, rather than always having the gnawing feeling of "BUT WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?"

With Star Trek: TNG, although there is curiosity at what could have happened next (again, ignoring the movies), it still feels completed. I'll never stare at the ceiling at night and go "But man, what COULD have happened?" because it feels finished. With Sonic, there's always the "Man, what was going to happen in the next season?" because there was no ending.

[Blitzkrieg1701]

I'll side with the folks who say that No Ending IS a Bad Ending. I consider a "Good" ending to be one that either wraps up the plot conclusively or at least provides emotional resolution. Since I would take "No Ending" to mean deliberately avoiding either, I'd call it "Bad."

EDIT: I like Nate's point, though: an "Open Ending" and "No Ending" aren't necessarily the same thing.

[ShiroiHikari]

The non-ending of Sym-Bionic Titan is infuriating because they left so much open. They were clearly getting ready to start another story arc. But it would have been even worse if they'd made up a dumb, rushed ending.

[Psycho Molos]

I remember back when the 90s were becoming the 00s and I was sneaking home sub sandwitches in my backpack from college night classes and waiting until mom was asleep to watch Mortal Kombat Conquest (so I wouldn't be bugged about not getting one for her...grumbles) anyway...I remember the last episode aired and I was expecting the next episode because I was like, "Wait....Shao Khan killed just about ALL the characters and at least pulled the village into Outworld, how are they going to link this to the games and movies then??"

I mean it was a PREQUEL series for crying out loud....

[Radical Dreamer]

The thing about this is that whether or not an ending is "good" or "bad" is entirely subjective. For instance, I thought Lost had a fabulous ending, but I'm coming from an entirely different perspective. Had the show ended before season 6, it would've been incomplete and wouldn't have finished telling its story. Just because the final season didn't provide all of the answers to the many questions (and it provided many of them--it can take some thinking and puzzle-working to figure them out, but most of the answers are there) doesn't mean it was a bad ending. The entire point of the ending was that life isn't about getting answers to our questions, it's about the relationships we build along the way. The final season may have had a few flaws, but not answering every single question and catering to every single audience member wasn't one of them.

That said, I simply prefer that my entertainment have an ending. XD Stories have to have beginnings and endings, and whether that means a show is full of short stories or one long story, the ending has to be there. Whether that ending is good or bad will be based more on my own personal tastes, as well as whether or not the ending fits the movie, book, or show that preceded it.

[rocklobster]

I think it really depends. Now I am in the minority, as I also enjoyed Lost's ending. However, what I enjoy about anime isthat a majority of the shows I've seen have endings. I usually don't like cliffhangers, but sometimes they can be good. (Haibane Renmei comes to mind.)

[Yuki-Anne]

I think we need to clarify what "bad ending" means. Bad ending does not mean tragic ending. Bad ending means thrown together, crappy, and ultimately unsatisfying.

[Psycho Molos]

I think we need to clarify what "bad ending" means. Bad ending does not mean tragic ending. Bad ending means thrown together, crappy, and ultimately unsatisfying.

Like the "end" of Mortal Kombat Conquest! Endings that make u go "huh?" lol

[Nate]

Bad ending means thrown together, crappy, and ultimately unsatisfying.

I'd like to say that "thrown together" isn't necessarily synonymous with crappy or unsatisfying. :p I'm sure if I looked hard enough, I could find a TV series or movie or book that had a rushed/thrown together ending that people still find satisfying and good.

[Ally-Ann]

Sheesh, this is hard for me. Well, I hate bad endings. A lot. I loathe them. But if there's no ending, I can imagine all I want, but at the same time, I hate cliff-hangers. Just as much as bad endings. Therefore, it depends on the show. I haven't seen all these different shows that were mentioned, but I'll give you an example: I just recently (Well, I say recently. It's been over a month.) finished the supposed last episode of Hetalia: World Series. And although I like the episode, it would seriously suck if it was the last one. Seriously. It would. If you guys keep updated on the Hetalia anime, which I know many of you probably do, this most recent episode would be the worst episode to complete a series. Not saying that'll be the absolute last episode of the series, I'm just saying if it were. Hypothetically. 'Cause it's Hetalia... It really can't end... 'cause it's Hetalia... you know... anyway. I know that's not a clear example, but that's all I can think of right now. I'm tired. I'll do my best to explain more if you guys are confused or something...

[Rocketshipper]

I actually thought Terminator: SCC was a good example of a no ending vs a bad ending and why no ending is better. They were aware the show may not go on another season. They could have ended the whole thing but it would have been pretty crappy since there was so much they'd have to wrap up.

You could probably guess that I totally disagree ^^. I think that if they knew it was possible the series wouldn't be continuing then they should have planned ahead of time to at least wrap up the *current* storyline by the end of the season. I personally think that ending a season of a TV show on a cliffhanger, when you don't know for sure what the fate of your series is going to be, is not a very nice thing to do to your audience. Your giving them an incomplete story, the promise that there could be something more, without the gurantee that there will be more. This is why I preffer a show like Buffy the Vampire Slayer; every season had a self contained arc that was resolved by the end, but still leaving the possibility open for more stories next season.

I think we need to clarify what "bad ending" means. Bad ending does not mean tragic ending. Bad ending means thrown together, crappy, and ultimately unsatisfying.

Yeah, thats exactly what I was trying to convey.

[Dante]

And here I thought you meant bad ending as in it ends badly for the characters - those are good, simply because they tend to break the common trend. Bittersweet endings are nice too - they add a bit of realism to the whole thing. Although admittedly both are kind of depressing.

[bigsleepj]

I'd like to say that "thrown together" isn't necessarily synonymous with crappy or unsatisfying. :p I'm sure if I looked hard enough, I could find a TV series or movie or book that had a rushed/thrown together ending that people still find satisfying and good.

I can think of one: Back to the Future.

[spoiler]The original ending was that the Delorean had to drive into a nuclear explosion on a test-site, which required several (then) expensive special effects and extra sets. When the movie's budget was cut half-way through filming by a million dollars or so (still a substantial amount in special effects movie-budgets back then) Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale had to come up with a cheaper ending and wrote the whole thing with the clock-tower and the bolt of lightning, all of which could be filmed cheaply on the already constructed backlot sets.[/spoiler]

Would you have it any other way?

[Nate]

Whoa, the rushed/thrown together ending is way better than the original planned ending in that case.

[Mouse2010]

But a show that is serialized and has a plot, I think needs an ending or else its not complete. Even if the ending ends up being dissapointing, its better than stopping altogether. For me, having no resolution at all is a lot more likely to ruin a show for me than an ending that I feel did not live up to things. Its like walking out of a movie 15 minutes before its over.

I think I agree with this. An ambiguous ending can be okay (depending on the show-- some ambiguous endings have driven me crazy), but I need some kind of closure for a series that has an ongoing plot. So, I think I prefer a bad ending to no ending at all.

FTR, I loved the finale of Lost. It didn't answer all the questions the series raised, but it was emotionally satisfying. I guess I have a soft spot for endings that move you or make you feel good, even if they don't really resolve all the plot threads.