On Season/Series Finales

My comments here are in connection with Doctor Who season/series finales, but I think they also apply to television shows as a whole. First, let me explain the whole “season/series” thing. In the US, we call a show’s run, which is generally between September and May (unless it’s a summer show) and usually consists of around 22 episodes, a “season.” In the UK, that same run would be called a “series” (only UK series tend to be much shorter–I’ve not noticed any longer than 13 episodes).  Since I’m living in the US, I’ll stick with “season” from here on. But just so everyone knows what I mean.

So, here’s my thought. Since Doctor Who was re-booted in 2005, aside from the obvious format differences (film-look as opposed to videotape, higher production values due to much larger budget, stand-alone 45 min stories as opposed to each story consisting of multiple 25 min episodes with a cliffhanger), there are other, perhaps not as immediately obvious differences. And I wonder if these are really improvements, or if they are just pandering to the different demands of 21st century television tastes.

One difference is the need for there to be a story arc that connects each season’s episodes in either subtle or not-so-subtle ways.  In the 2005 Doctor Who season, it was “Bad Wolf”–a phrase that followed the Doctor throughout the season, leading up to the finale where it was explained. In 2006 it was Torchwood, starting with a mention in “The Christmas Invasion” (David Tennant’s first story), then we see the Torchwood Institute being established by Queen Victoria in “Tooth and Claw,” and finally we see the modern-day operation in the two-part finale (and the spin-off series). The arc for 2007 centered around “Mr. Saxon,” culminating in the return of The Master. I thought 2008’s was a little more creative: dropping hints that something was afoot (bees disappearing, planets vanishing, etc) until all becomes clear in the finale. In 2009, we only had four specials, but each of these built up to the re-return of The Master, an appearance by The Time Lords and Rassilon, and the Tenth Doctor’s regeneration. Last year it was the crack in time; this year it was The Silence, and the mystery of the Doctor’s death.

There were story arcs in classic Doctor Who. Tom Baker’s last season (one of his best, IMO), introduced elements into stories that would play a part in his eventual denouement with The Master in the season finale. Also within Tom Baker’s era, there was “The Key to Time” season, in which the entire season consisted of the Doctor and Romana I (the best Romana IMO) chasing around the universe looking for the six parts of the Key to Time (each story revolved around finding a part of the Key). And then there was the Sixth Doctor’s “Trial of a Time Lord” season. But on the whole, each Doctor Who story stood alone. And as fans, we were fine with that. Each week, we looked forward to finding out what trouble the Doctor was going to find, who his enemy was going to be, and how he would get out of it. Sure, we oo-ed if reference was made to a previous storyline, but on the whole we didn’t care if the stories had any kind of connection to one another. In fact, that there wasn’t any connection between the stories suited the idea of the Doctor randomly flitting around time and space.

The main difference I’ve noticed, though, and this connects to the “story arc” concept, is the need for an earth-shattering season finale, where you throw the Doctor, his companions, the Earth, the Universe, time-and-space-as-we-know-it, and the whole kitchen sink into jeopardy, with as many aliens, spaceships, CGI, and explosions the budget can afford. In 2005, we had mega-fleets of Daleks; 2006, it was Canary Wharf being invaded by Daleks and Cybermen that were locked in combat; 2007, it was the Master taking over the world and turning everyone into his slaves; in 2008 it was Davros and his plans to destroy the universe; in 2009 it was The Master taking over the world again, only this time by replicating himself. Last year, we had an all-star gallery of Doctor Who monsters allied against him, and then this year we had the explosive truth about Amy Pond, River Song, and how the Doctor cheated death.

As I do a quick mental flip back through 48 years of Doctor Who (and, I hasten to add, I was not alive for at least the first 7 of those years), the most dramatic “season finales” were the ones that ended with the Doctor regenerating. But the producers back then didn’t always feel the need to have the Doctor change at the end of the season. In fact, I can only count three classic Doctor Who regenerations that were season finales. Comment Challenge: which are they?

The problem with the explosive finale is every year trying to top last year. Eventually you can’t. You run out of steam. There are only so many times the earth can be threatened, the universe imperiled, and life-as-we-know-it destroyed before it becomes passé. And I fear the new series of Doctor Who may be running into that very problem. This past finale, while certainly trying to ramp up the tension, was not as explosive as last year’s. But more than that–and here’s my main point with all of this–what ultimately gets sacrificed in the desire to satiate fans’ appetite for thrills is story.

The classic series, with all its budgetary woes and slow pacing (by modern standards) survived on the strength of its characters (particularly the lead character), and the stories. Those seasons that didn’t fair well in the ratings generally had poorer stories. The “golden era” of the show in the mid-to-late seventies had some superb storytelling. And many of the season finales worked, not because they were edge-of-the-seat, end-of-the-universe type-stories, but because they were just GOOD STORIES. I’m thinking of stories like The Time Meddler, The Evil of the Daleks, Inferno, The Talons of Weng-Chiang, Logopolis, to name just a few. All these were finales, but what kept us coming back week after week, season after season, were the characters and the stories.

I doubt things are going to change much. I’m probably just a relic of a bygone era of television viewers. But I think what is true in television is also true in literature. You can appeal to the masses through sensation, and you can draw people back time and time again with thrills and spills. But what lasts, what people remember, what inspires people, and what always draws an audience is good storytelling. Give me a great story like “Blink,” or “Vincent and the Doctor” over any of the recent finales. Not that the finales weren’t good. They just weren’t the best stories.