Eaten by the Shark: Can A Show Retroactively Destroy Its Own Goodness?

I seem to remember Robert Christgau making the same point re the Stones. He thought Jagger's persona had become so ridiculous that it ruined his enjoyment of Sticky Fingers.

I could never evict The Simpsons either. But considering that the number of bad episodes are starting to outweigh the good, the case in favor is becoming harder and harder to make.

Not that it's on nearly the same level as the Sopranos, but Alias was like that for me. I loved it for the first two years and thought it managed to be both entertaining and clever, but it went spectacularly downhill, especially in the fourth and fifth seasons, and by the end it was just laughable.

X-Files was ruined because it never wrapped up the questions and mysteries. It's easy to create the first half of a riddle if you're sure you'll never have to make a punchline.

Honestly, and this could hurt my credibility, but I actually thought Friends was an enjoyable show when it first started and throughout the first few years. But, as the show wore on, and every character became caricatures of themselves - "Did you just hear how Chandler said some sarcastic comment about Joey being dumb regarding Monica cleaning up after Phoebe's new-age ceremony? Ross was so dorky in the scene, especially when he made googly eyes at Rachel."

Those later years made it impossible for me to even admit - except to you all - that I even liked this show in the beginning.

The Simpsons, I think, transcends it because the show was that good, as was Seinfeld (although I didn't hate the finale as much as some.) Also, both of these shows had never reached abysmal quality. Even now, the Simpsons can still elicit some laughter from me from time to time and Seinfeld basically maintained quality throughout the entire run.

It happened with Twin Peaks--the first season was great, when we still assumed it was all going somewhere. In retrospect, knowing much of it was oddity-for-oddity's-sake, an oceanful of red herrings that meant nothing, it's not quite so compelling. (Still worth watching, but it loses some luster.)

I have a hard time watching the last few seasons of the X-Files knowing full well what could have made the show phenomenal until its last breath rather than fizzle into irrelevance.

I'm easily frustrated by the significant storytelling potential that existed with the cast changes in later seasons, but the route Chris Carter & Co. chose to go was disappointing.

"What shows have evicted themselves from your TV pantheons over the years? "

If you are talking about shows that are no longer being produced, the answer is "none."

Watching reruns of great "old" shows is as much (if not more) an exercise in nostalgia as it is a effort to re-experience the greatness of these old shows. Even bad episodes and bad seasons are a reminder of the shows glory days... I think the closest a show ever came to ruining itself was "Dallas" with is entire "dead bobby" season that we were told the following year was "just a dream." That was a serious insult to the audience, and abrogation of the producers unspoken agreement with the viewers. (I mean, a "Bobby's twin who was raised by someone else" plotline would have been better if they had to bring Ewing back.)

I agree on Friends, but another NBC Thursday show tops my list -- ER. The first couple seasons were great, but its schtick wore off as the original cast left one by one and other series matched its technical accuracy and steadicam shots. I see the commercials now and it's one ratings stunt after another. The one episode of ER you don't want to miss!

I think Entourage and The Office are showing kinks in the armor after only three seasons. It seems like the ideal run for most series, but especially dramas, is five seasons. Beyond that almost any show starts to feel like a self-parody. Maybe it's just a sign of my own cynicism that I'd rather a show end prematurely than go on way too long. It's better to burn out than to fade away, right?

For me, The Simpsons destroyed itself years ago. Now, even when I watch the old episodes, I can't help but feel that they are tainted by the endless repeating of jokes and "catch-phrasing" of characters, settings, situations, etc.

M*A*S*H is a prime candidate. A comedy that, over time and through cast changes, became maudlin and didactic and limped into a multi-hour finale that was stunning in its self-congratulating and pretentious "seriousness." A finale that, at the time, was the most-watched TV show ever. Go figure.

But I still have a soft spot for Private Charles Lamb, and Colonel Flagg.

Dare I mention Battlestar Galactica? After the escape from the planet, the show lost its way, and, at least in our house, it's gone from "the most amazing TV show we've ever seen" to "we'll watch it on the DVR when we have some time"

Both X-Files and Alias led to great disappointment. X-Files got too complex, and I couldn't follow it any longer -I think they made it so complex, because if they could confuse people enough maybe, no one would notice when they didn't deliver with the answers, or at least some resolution. If you ignore the last seasons it's still a good show, although I haven't watched it since the last seasons drained the life out of it.

After season two, Alias became about JJ Abrams, the producer, screwing the fans. He would pull crap and then pine on about how wonderful the crap was, and anyway he was going to fix everything. He never kept any of his promises, and continued destroying the story, the mystery, and the characters. He really had a 'piss on the fans' attitude -he took advantage of people's hope that he would live-up to his word and fix things.

Abrams starts a show off with great characters and intrigue that captures the imagination, but he has no follow-through. The only hope for any of his shows is he has someone, a show runner or someone, who cares more than he does. He does have an unusual talent for picking great actors, maybe he destroys his shows, because he becomes jealous that they deliver so much more than the script.

For me, it was Star Trek: Enterprise. First of all the show was never really given a break. It improved markedly in the 3rd and 4th seasons. In fact, the fourth season had some really well written stories and was probalbly the best.

Then they had to end it with the biggest crap finale to top all crap finales. It was set 10 years in the future, but was viewed as a holodeck program by Riker and Troi based on an Episode of the Next Generation (which was not one of its best). The story, to me, seemed forced and contrived. It didn't seem to flow naturally along from where the series seemed to be headed.

Definitely the X-Files for me. I LOVED LOVED LOVED it the first several years, then after Mulder's abduction/disappearance and the dollars-to-donuts dude was Scully's new partner the show became so stale and lame that I could barely watch it. We had a weekly X-Files viewing in my best friend's dorm room, and every week we were consistently disappointed and frustrated that our favorite show had turned into complete crap. He he he, every week my friend would yell at the TV that we were never watching it again. And every Sunday she would call again and ask when we were coming to watch the X-Files. We gave it every chance to improve and it never got back on track. I love watching the reruns of the earlier seasons, though, but I can't help thinking how bad it got screwed up whenever I am seeing even the ones from the glory days.

I've just started Season 3 on DVD, and I haven't seen the Sopranos finale nor read the critics' reviews so I do not know what has been said here in this forum. But just from the headline, let me offer a few of my opinions..
A novel is all of one piece, as is a movie. If one part didn't succeed, then you can say the whole work suffered, or was flawed. Film and literature classics are classic because all of their parts fit together to create a perfect and memorable whole. You really can't say that about a television show. You can't dismiss a classic show like the Sopranos becuase it had one lousy episode, even if it was the last one. Seinfeld had a lousy finale but in it's run, wonderful, groundbreaking episodes. The same with the Sopranos. Even if the last episode didn't meet expectations, the show has had brilliant hours, at least in the first two seasons that I've seen.

Well, not to go too lowbrow or anything, but Melrose Place and Dynasty were both brilliant shows that ran out of steam a couple of years before their mercy killing.

(and coincidentally, both are shows that had major retooling done after the first season to excellent effect.)

24 right on.

When 24 first started, I thought, "Wow, what a novel idea! In order to pull that off, they must have every episode at least outlined, if not fully written, before they even start!" About the time Jack's wife got amnesia, I realized, no, they did not plan this show out and are just making stuff up as they go along like every other show. I realized the early benefit of the doubt that I had given the writers in the first episodes was sorely misplaced. And I haven't watched an episode since.

@Alex: See this is what I think is interesting about the question, because the novel comparison is more apt for some shows that others. A sitcom or a procedural drama is more of a series of independent parts. But you could certainly say an HBO drama like The Sopranos is much more like a serial novel. Now personally, I wouldn't ditch The Sopranos even if I had hated the ending, which I didn't; but I would think less of a novel that fell apart in its last third, or a serial show with a couple lousy last seasons. (The X-Files comes to mind; but with that show, I've rationalized it in my mind by thinking of the "real" show as having ended when Mulder did, and thinking of the rest as an unfortunate epilogue.)

On the flip side, the last several episodes of Six Feet under completely turned around my opinion of a show that I'd been sick of for a season or two.

I completely agree with you about Six Feet Under, James. Granted, at the time I blamed my boredom with the show on the fact that I watched the entire series on DVD over the period of a few weeks, but I was blown away by the last few episodes.

This phenomenon is something I worry about with Heroes, but I am hopeful it will not fall into a slump after the first few seasons because I have read that the writers have the first 5 seasons already planned out. Brilliant, in my opinion.

Remember when 'Happy Days' was good? The first season or two when Fonzie wore a blue windbreaker/jacket? Had it continued in that vein and eschewed the live studio audience and black leather jacket, it might be considered a claSsic today. I know its a stretch, but I'm throwin it out there cuz I'm a rebel.

Glad you brought up SFU--I've been surprised that in the post-mortem (or is it?) of the Sopranos' finale, I haven't seen much mention of SFU's series finale. To me, that ranks as one of, if not THE, best ever. I've watched that last clip numerous times (sometimes skipping the rest of the episode), crying every time and amazed at how satisfying it was. I get wistful every time I hear that Sia song.

Sigh. I miss that show.

I think that most, if not all, TV shows have episodes (or at least seasons) that function as discrete units, so their largely immune to retro-actively jumping the shark. Certainly a momentary, last-minute sin couldn't taint season after season of greatness. Perhaps multiple seasons of mediocrity (e.g. Simpsons) would do it.

I was just watching the end of the 3rd season of The Sopranos on A&E, and if anything, it was more poignant after knowing the end of the series, especially Junior's crooning (wipes away tear)

@Bemused: I've seen the SFU finale cited by people who hated the Sopranos' ending, as an ending that gave proper closure. I just think that each finale was completely in the (very different) spirit of its own show. And both gutsy in their own ways--I still think there were a couple of inadvertently funny moments in the SFU finale, like Brenda keeling over while listening to Billy drone on about something.

For me, the season finale that ruined the show was St. Elsewhere's. The entire show was the imagination of an autistic child peering endlessly into a snow globe? Oof, that's just wrong.

"For me, the season finale that ruined the show was St. Elsewhere's. The entire show was the imagination of an autistic child peering endlessly into a snow globe? Oof, that's just wrong."

are you kidding? I thought that ending was brilliant -- in fact, its my favorite all-time ending for a series....

2nd favorite -- "Newhart", where Newhart wakes up next to Suzanne Pleshette at the very end...