But the whole point of theatrical art is to make something that can become a franchise that shits out soulless garbage to the point of over saturation so that some art hating child rapist can make a bunch of money off of it.

Individual stories are fine as long as they don't end up with a cliffhanger, or as something I have to watch to understand upcoming movies or shows. I'm also sick of shit getting cancelled early.

The most recent Lanterns was great, but the way it ends feels like the story isn't finished and I will be annoyed if they wrap it up there. They're planning to use him in a future movie, so it was left feeling incomplete and they haven't renewed it for a second season yet. That's annoying to me, and guarantees I'll never watch the show again unless I have to for the movie and I've forgotten what happens.

A great example is Mr Robot. The story was written start to finish and wrapped up in four seasons. They told the story they wanted to, and it feels complete to the viewer. If instead they were planning on continuing the story and ended early, or didn't wrap it up so they could use the same characters in a movie or something, it would feel incomplete and lose a lot of meaning/value to me as the viewer.

Tl;dr just finish the fuckin story in a concise and satisfying way if you don't want to continue with the character.

I would argue that it is a complete story. It just ends with John ready to begin something new.

Cope. Both are fine techniques. It's ok to accept that both are valid, don't need to be a butthurt baby just because you stick to one particular style.

I think this is in response to the "homework problem" you often see people complain about for the MCU. I'm not convinced it's a real problem, apart from Wanda's storyline, but perhaps behind the scenes it causes more issues.

It'll be interesting to see how some non-Gunn lead stories shake out in the coming years. "Man of Tomorrow" will reportedly have both Guy Gardner and Jon Stewart in it. How will that affect a future season of Lanterns?

Also just the practicality of it all. Is Tom Rhys Harries (Clayface actor) just supposed to chill until his character is needed again? I guess I'm fine if it's a one off. And as we saw in the MCU some actors will just stick around for a while and ultimately do very little (e.g. Maria Hill).

I don't disagree, but then keep doing more stories with the less-connected, less-popular characters. I guess that's what they're doing with Clayface, I just don't care about Clayface. I've been wanting a Resurrection Man movie for years, though. It could be a great "The Crow"-style revenge rampage.

Why create a DC Univers if you want to tell individual stories? That's fucking stupid.