The Walking Dead didn't really have one moment, but since the prison/Governor (Season 3) it's been accused of being repetitive. A few seasons later a guy slides under a Dumpster, avoids a horde of zombies, and is killed in the next episode by a survivor. Things like that, plot armour that comes and goes, villains who are kinda samey (Governor/Negan), and generally losing hope in the main character (is it Rick? Or Carl? Everyone likes Daryl but nobody thinks he's the main).

Then you had House of Cards and Yellowstone where the series lead left for one reason or another. Not getting into politics here. Just saying that the lead left and the show fell apart.

There's also Game of Thrones with its near-universally hated ending.

All of those (except House of Cards, I think) had two or more spinoffs.

Do people think the spinoffs are better? Are they any better? I watched one of the Yellowstone spinoffs. It was okay, but lacked the punch of the original. I watched House of the Dragon, and it just feels like watered down Game of Thrones. I watched the first episode of Fear the Walking Dead, and it didn't do a thing for me.

[–] thejoker954@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago

The 1st episode of fear is incredibly boring. Then it starts getting better until midway? through the season when they decide to shit all over the original premise of seeing the start of the zombie apocalypse.

Besides that bullshit it's still pretty decent up until the end of season 3? When they do another reboot of the show. After that it's pretty much all down hill with a few good moments here and there until it eventually it turns into a pretentious Z-nation.

Honestly I'm still mad at how they massacred not only that show in particular, but the whole damn franchise.

[–] ArtVandelay@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

The 1883 Yellowstone spinoff was ok. The 1923 one was pure nihilism and it's ending rivals game of thrones level stupid. Never again.