The producers and cast most definitely wanted to continue. There was a huge backlash at the cancellation, and SyFy actually decided to reverse their decision. But at that point the crew/production side had already moved on to other work, so it wasn’t feasible to continue.

No, the producer gets replaced

I think it's pretty weird too. I would rather have a single season of something that ended on a cliffhanger than nothing (of a show I really enjoyed). I think the position of requiring a 3-season commitment plus 100% resolution of all plot points up front is a bit much. I also think this crowd seems a bit hung up on story alone rather than the whole experience.

I was just rewatching Fringe and wondering the same thing. She could have been a really good addition I think.

Utopia a show on Fox in maybe 2012, it just up And ended and I’ve been sad since

that weird episode of Stranger Things where they met the other girl with powers

The Night King was killed without them having revealed with he was all about. As far of the rest of the characters listed I agree with you.

But one of the other big problems was that in S2 the show mentioned Azor Ahai (the prince that was promised) and never resolved it.

This is true, but right now it's an unfired Chekhov's gun.

Wether or not she becomes a character in SE2 I think it still works to set the action of the series in motion. It’s a reason for Andor to overstep his bounds which leads to his trouble with the police.

Adapt a game which was essentially a movie/series to begin with.

I think this is at least partly a byproduct of having multiple writers writing different episodes. They each throw some spaghetti at a wall and see what sticks when the others take over their yarns.

Right but that partial ownership may not extend to keeping the show going.

It would just require them to still get paid.

I get the sense this season is an apology to fans for not involving TNG in the Dominion War.

Mike Schur ended The Good Place by his own choice after four seasons, because he felt he'd told all the story he wanted to, and anything else would be filler.

Patrick Stewart famously signed onto Star Trek The Next Generation for seven seasons, after being told it would only go one; nobody wanted a spinoff of a beloved show from the 60s. He didn't plan on staying in LA that long.

Well tbf the show is only halfway done, it's very possible that's a storyline they bring back

Walking Dead - Heath

Good show, good acting by Theo I still hate juice though.

There's a reason the series started with that scene (it did in the book too). That was supposed to indicate that the White Walkers were ultimately the important threat and the war of the five kings was, quite literally, a game of thrones in comparison.

Cassian Andor's sister

A ship half full of Maquis. Some of us were not Maquis.

-On behalf of Tuvok

This was excellent, thank you for your explanation. It does seem quite involved to say the least. 😅

> So who owns the the actual playwright?

Do you mean copyright?

>Does an OG producer sell these rights to another?

Generally the corporation that pays for a movie or tv show is considered to be its author or owner.

1st example:

Jim Gavin wrote the pilot for a show he called Lodge 49.

Paul Giamatti and Dan Carey read it and loved it.

They got the script to Susie Fitzgerald at AMC.

Susie Fitzgerald convinced her bosses to film it as a 10 episode series.

Even though Jim Gavin created the show and oversaw its writing, AMC became the author/owner of the series when it agreed to underwrite its cost. However, Gavin has used elements of the show to brand and promote his publishing house. He's negotiating with AMC for permission to publish a series of novels based on elements of the show.

2nd example:

Louis CK wrote a 10 episode series.

He hired actors/etc and filmed it.

He released it to his people who were subscribed to his website.

After a period of time, he sold it to Hulu.

Hulu became the author/owner of the series.

>Or does the studio basically have all ownership?

In both cases these creators signed contracts with the studios who produced/bought their shows. These contracts refer to "rights." Creators' rights to the work they create follows the terms of a contract.

3rd example:

Ben Edlund created a comic book character called the Tick in the mid 1980s.

He signed a contract with New England Comics - who've published several hundred comic book titles based on Edlund's ideas over the last ~35 years.

In the early 1990s, Edlund signed a contract with Fox to produce an animated adaptation of the Tick. It ran for 3 seasons. Fox promoted the show with fast food items, t-shirts, toys, a video game, a board game, and other sundries. This was all negotiated in Edlund's contract with Fox.

In the early 2000s, Edlund signed a contract with Fox to produce a live action adaptation of the Tick. It ran for 10 episodes. Edlund's contact for the animated show prevented him from using several of its most prominent characters so he invented new ones.

In the mid 2010s, Edlund signed a contract with Amazon to produce another live action adaptation of the Tick. It ran for 20 episodes and featured a new slate of supporting characters.

In each case, Edlund retained control over certain elements while the corporation underwriting production controlled others.

The catch is that all of this is negotiated by executives working for the corporation and agents/lawyers working for the creative team. The bigger or more expensive the project, the more complicated this negotiation becomes.

4th, final example:

Steven Conrad created a tv show called Patriot for Amazon. When Amazon cancelled it, he got one of its stars to record an audiobook version of the book that actor's character had written as part of the show. Conrad did this without any permission from Amazon.

I don't know if that helps clarify. I can say that one indelible part of Hollywood culture is that people rarely share details of these negotiations. I guess it is considered gauche.

Its pretty uncommon now for the studio to not at least own a piece of it.

That’s true if they own it. I was basically talking about the owners as the producers but I know it’s more complicated than that.

HBO can keep making unlimited shows based on Game of Thrones but I’m pretty sure D and D had the right to conclude the main story which is why it was so controversial to have a conclusion to a story that the author didn’t have a conclusion to.