Introduction
Recently, fans of the NBC show “Good Girls” were disappointed to hear that the show had been cancelled after its fourth season. Despite a loyal following and critical acclaim, the network made the decision to end the show. This cancellation is important to discuss because it highlights ongoing limitations for shows with feminist themes and diverse casts. This article will explore why “Good Girls” was cancelled, the importance of its strong female leads, the response of viewers and advocacy groups, and the broader trend in television that the show was a part of.
Why “Good Girls” was Cancelled
The cancellation of “Good Girls” can be attributed to a number of factors. Firstly, the show struggled with ratings, which made it harder for the network to justify keeping it on the air. Critics have also speculated that the show’s mature themes, such as crime, money laundering, and sex work, made it difficult to attract advertisers. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the show’s production schedule and made it more difficult for the network to keep it on the air.
However, the cancellation of “Good Girls” also highlights a broader problem in television programming. Networks are less willing to invest in shows with diverse casts and nuanced, feminist perspectives. They often prefer to stick to a traditional formula that caters to a narrow demographic. This is particularly problematic because shows like “Good Girls” offer a fresh perspective that challenges traditional gender roles and the status quo.
There are numerous examples of similar shows being cancelled prematurely. For instance, the Netflix show “GLOW” was a critically acclaimed show about women wrestlers that was cancelled after three seasons. Similarly, the ABC show “For the People” was a legal drama with a diverse cast that was cancelled after two seasons. These shows represented fresh perspectives on genres that are typically male-dominated. However, they struggled to find their audience despite positive reviews and audience response.
The Strong Female Leads of “Good Girls”
One of the most significant aspects of “Good Girls” was its portrayal of complex and multilayered women. The show’s three leads – Beth, Annie, and Ruby – were all flawed and complicated, but they were also strong and resilient in their own ways. They were mothers, wives, and criminals, each with their own motivations and desires.
Beth was a stay-at-home mom turned money launderer who was trying to provide for her family. Annie was a single mom who was struggling to make ends meet and was looking for a way out of a dead-end job. Ruby was a waitress who was also trying to support her family while her daughter struggled with a serious illness. Together, they formed a bond that was both aspirational and relatable.
The women of “Good Girls” represented the complexity of modern women, both in their successes and failures. They were not perfect, but they were trying their best to navigate an unfair world. This portrayal was refreshing and compelling, as it challenged traditional gender roles and presented women as capable and empowered.
Viewer Response and Advocacy
After the cancellation of “Good Girls”, fans were vocal in their disappointment and frustration. Many took to social media to express their dissatisfaction with the network’s decision, and some even started petitions to save the show. The fan campaign #SaveGoodGirls gained traction on Twitter and other social media platforms, with actors and crew members from the show getting on board to promote the message.
The response of viewers and advocacy groups highlights the impact of audience advocacy on television programming in general. In recent years, fans of cancelled shows have been able to rally and gain enough momentum on social media to influence networks and revive their favourite shows. However, this is not always successful, and it is unfortunate that networks are often not willing to take risks on shows with nuanced perspectives.
Comparing “Good Girls” to Similar Shows
“Good Girls” is not the first show to be cancelled prematurely. As mentioned earlier, shows such as “GLOW” and “For the People” also struggled to find their audience despite critical acclaim. These cancellations are particularly frustrating because they represent a missed opportunity for more nuanced representations of women on television.
Instead, mainstream television often portrays women in regressive ways, reducing them to caricatures and stereotypes. Shows that challenge these depictions are often not given a fair chance to prove themselves, despite the quality of their writing, acting, and themes.
The Broader Cultural Trend
The cancellation of “Good Girls” is part of a broader cultural trend away from the portrayal of women in complex, multifaceted roles. Shows and films that present women in a nuanced and empowering light are often sidelined in favour of more traditional and formulaic programming. This trend is problematic because it perpetuates harmful stereotypes about women and reinforces the status quo.
Other shows and films that have suffered this fate include “One Day at a Time”, “The OA”, and “I Love Dick”. These shows all challenged traditional notions of gender and sexuality, and they were all critically acclaimed. However, they also struggled to find their audience and were ultimately cancelled. This trend is concerning, as it represents a missed opportunity for more diverse and inclusive storytelling.
Intersectional Themes of “Good Girls”
“Good Girls” also attempted to challenge various societal norms through its intersectional themes. The show explored issues of systemic inequality, patriarchy, race, and class. It represented a refreshingly nuanced take on criminality and the struggles that people face in a capitalist society.
Beth, Annie, and Ruby were complex characters with diverse experiences, and the show did not shy away from exploring the intersections of their identities. For instance, Ruby’s experience of being a Black woman in a predominantly white neighbourhood was a key theme of the show. This representation was refreshing because it acknowledged the complexity of modern life and challenged simplistic, one-dimensional portrayals of marginalized people.
The Potential for Revival
Despite the cancellation of “Good Girls”, there is still hope for its revival. Streaming platforms have created a more democratic landscape for television, and many cancelled shows have found new life on these platforms. For instance, shows such as “Lucifer”, “Brooklyn Nine-Nine”, and “Arrested Development” were all cancelled by their networks but were revived by streaming services.
The potential for “Good Girls” to be revived on a streaming platform is exciting, as it represents an opportunity for more diverse and inclusive storytelling. Streaming services do not have the same commercial constraints as networks, which means that they are more willing to invest in shows that challenge traditional gender roles and explore a range of perspectives.
Conclusion
The cancellation of “Good Girls” is a disappointing development, but it is not unexpected. The show represented a fresh perspective on television programming, but it struggled to find its audience in a landscape that often favours traditional programming. However, the cancellation of “Good Girls” also represents a missed opportunity for nuanced representations of women and their experiences. It is important that we continue to advocate for diverse and inclusive storytelling, as it has the potential to challenge harmful stereotypes and empower marginalized communities.