• Is the new TV model losing viewers? 

Monday (5) saw the finale of the second season of ‘House of the Dragon,’ one of the most popular shows on TV recently. On top of a somewhat lacklustre finale (recollections may vary), we now face at least a two-year wait for the next season.

With the end of this juggernaut show, what does this new model of TV mean for the popularity of a show and audiences’ relationship with television in general? While Season 2 of ‘House of the Dragon’ managed to gather a massive viewership despite the two-year wait between its first and second seasons, can this trend persist much longer?

‘House of the Dragon’ is not the only show to pursue this model; many international TV shows today have reduced the number of episodes they show in a season and dramatically extended the period between new seasons of a show. These are not small budget productions that need to struggle to secure funding between cycles; they are big shows with big followings, ergo, willing investors. 

Viewer frustration

The current state of television shows has evolved drastically from the traditional structure of longer seasons with shorter breaks to fewer episodes and prolonged waits between seasons. Take, for example, ‘Lost,’ one of the biggest and most popular shows of the 2000s, often cited as Peak TV. 

Despite its popularity, ‘Lost’ caused frustration among viewers during its first three seasons (each containing 23-25 episodes) due to story choices and frequent reruns that broke the momentum of its serialised storytelling. Midway through Season 3, the showrunners responded to these complaints by shortening the next three seasons to 16-17 episodes and planning for a definitive end, ensuring a tighter narrative.

This shift marked the beginning of a trend where more fans and creators felt that TV shows should adopt shorter seasons, similar to cable shows with 12-13 episodes and a five-season maximum. However, even as TV dramas embraced 13-episode seasons, viewer satisfaction wasn’t always guaranteed. For instance, the Marvel shows on Netflix faced criticism for their pacing, quality, and consistency. Consequently, networks further reduced episode counts to between eight and 10 episodes per season, akin to UK television.

‘Game of Thrones’ famously did this with its last two seasons, shortening the number of episodes (of an already short 10-season structure) and extending the time in between seasons. These seasons were badly received by audiences for many reasons. One of these reasons was that the shortening of the seasons drastically affected pacing and character development, and the extended wait between seasons served to build hype and expectations that simply could not be sustained given the quality of the final outcome.

In the age of streaming, social media has amplified fan discontent with the current state of TV. Shows are often cancelled abruptly or removed from streaming catalogues, sometimes after just one season or even a month post-premiere, based on algorithmic decisions. 

However, what truly frustrates fans are the extended waits for new seasons of popular shows like ‘Stranger Things,’ ‘Bridgerton,’ and ‘Euphoria,’ only to have those seasons consist of fewer than 10 episodes before another long hiatus. 

While the Covid-19 pandemic and the Writers Guild of America (WGA)/Screen Actors Guild – American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) strikes have contributed to these delays, could it be that viewers now yearn for the days of 22-24-episode seasons, preferring shows to have longer runs and shorter waits between episodes and seasons? Or even shorter runs but also shorter wait times?

A Lankan production perspective

Veteran TV Producer Janaka Siriwardena shared insights on the new model of television and its potential impact on viewership. He believes that long-running TV dramas often become monotonous, causing audiences to lose interest. 

“The main reason is that TV dramas that continue for a long time feel monotonous. Audiences can easily get sick of these types of experiences – the same actors, costumes, and characters – and stop paying attention,” he shared with The Sunday Morning Brunch. 

He advocated for shorter series, contrasting them with Sri Lankan TV shows that can run for 500-1,000 episodes. “We should attempt to shorten these to 200-300 episodes at the very least. I think it is a very good trend that these episodes are longer, of higher quality, and the number of episodes per season is shorter because we are able to give a better quality product to the audience,” he added.

Siriwardena also highlighted the difference in audiences who watched international television shows like ‘House of the Dragon,’ compared to those who watched Sri Lankan TV series. 

“The audiences that watch international television shows are very different from the audience that watches Sri Lankan TV series, especially long dramas. The viewer who goes to work and then comes home and unwinds simply has the show running in the background or watches it with the family. They’re not watching it for intense entertainment or because of fandom; they are watching it simply to pass the time,” he observed. 

In contrast, viewers who watch for serious entertainment purposes and in order to join fan culture notice if there is a drop in quality because it matters to them. “Quality matters over quantity for these types of audiences; however, that’s simply not the case when it comes to Sri Lankan television shows,” he noted, adding that audience consumption patterns were changing.

Siriwardena also addressed the issue of production costs and maintaining quality. He pointed out the challenges of creating high-quality episodes, each akin to a movie, in a market like Sri Lanka. 

“Productions don’t take place on a large scale in Sri Lanka because the cost is often not justified. If you take long-running American shows, there is a big expense, but they also have a large audience to match that. Sri Lanka has a limited audience,” he explained. 

He illustrated this with an example: “In India, they would make 1,500 copies per production. In Sri Lanka, we might make 30 copies. That is the level we are at and that is reflected in the budget and profit.”

Siriwardena suggested that television quality was improving in order to address these challenges, with content creators putting more effort into their work. 

“Television quality is a lot better and things are improving. Content creators care a lot more and are making efforts because of the way people view things. If you have to put your product on YouTube, audiences will immediately reject it if it is not up to standard,” he remarked. 

He further noted significant improvements in production quality over the past decade, with better equipment and more investment in maintaining high standards. “If we continue to get more advertisements in the coming years, that would increase our income and justify the quality we have to maintain,” he stated.

Lastly, Siriwardena commented on the economics of long-running serials. “The reason why there are running serials with 1,000 episodes is that the cost of making the second hundred episodes is not double the cost of making the first hundred. If it costs Rs. 1,000 to make 100 episodes, it does not cost Rs. 2,000 to make 200; it would cost less,” he explained. 

However, he emphasised that changes were necessary and already happening in the industry. “Things are definitely changing and must change,” he concluded.

What do Lankan audiences think?

Speaking to some ‘House of the Dragon’ fans and fans of local television shows like ‘Koombiyo,’ ‘Thanamalvila Kollek,’ and ‘Meeya’ revealed varied perspectives on this new trend in television shows. 

Nilakshi Mekhala, who enjoys these newer shows, noted that the shorter seasons motivated her to watch them because she knew the narrative would lead somewhere. 

“‘Thanamalvila Kollek’ had 46 episodes and each one was a maximum of 20 minutes. I thought that was solid because I was able to binge-watch that show due to its fast pace. It felt like it had a purpose, and because it was a comparatively shorter show than other Sinhala TV shows, I liked committing to it without too much anxiety,” she said.

Similarly, Prabath Madushanka shared his thoughts on the recent ‘House of the Dragon’ finale, stating: “I can’t believe we have to wait two more years. It feels almost criminal to make fans wait for this long, but we understand that the level of quality we receive is not achieved overnight and they can’t cut corners. 

“However, there were plenty of good shows in the past that had 22-23 episodes, took a short mid-season break, and then returned with a vengeance. But I suppose now, with this cinematic level of production, it’s just not possible to speed things along.” 

He added: “I watched ‘Koombiyo’ a while back and it had around 57 episodes. Recently, I watched ‘Meeya,’ which had just 21 episodes. They were relatively short shows compared to typical TV dramas on Sri Lankan TV. 

“Despite the massive success of ‘Koombiyo’ and talks about a second season, its popularity didn’t warrant one. Now, if they make a second season after all these years, while it will be well received, I don’t think it will have the legs to go on for a third or fourth season because it will just be a novelty for a show people once loved. That is the risk of having shows be short but have too long a hiatus.”

Prasangika Oruthota noted: “I watched Season 1 of ‘House of the Dragon,’ but by the time the second season rolled around, I couldn’t be bothered because I had forgotten everything from the first season, so I couldn’t commit. I am worried the same thing will happen to ‘Euphoria’ because I really loved that show, but now I wonder if I will be able to care the same way about these characters after being absent for so long.” 

She added: “I think this big gap between shows is a bit ridiculous. It feels like the end of the world whenever a show you really enjoy ends, but here we feel like every season finale is the end because it could easily be the end given that anything could happen in the next two years – actors could have a change of heart, production elements could change; so many things could change and it would all be in vain.”

In summation

Producing a TV show is no small feat; it is the culmination of so many moving parts, both conceptual and technical. 

There are merits to shorter seasons when it comes to storytelling, and to longer waits between new seasons when it comes to production quality. But with the power of a TV show remaining with audiences, the question remains: is it sustainable to bank on interest remaining high over a two-year period between seasons? 

Take for instance this most recent run of ‘House of the Dragon,’ to which reception has been mixed. Will it make casual viewers just switch off from the hype and not even return for Season 3 when it does air in 2026? What of the other juggernaut shows? Will they too face similar nonchalance from viewers? And does this extra-long wait then put more pressure on producers and writers to ‘wow’ their audiences with each and every episode?