Spoilers for Primal. HBO Max’s three-season science fiction fantasy series took a bold step that other TV shows could learn from. When a TV show concludes, regardless of how well-received the ending is, some viewers will inevitably have objections. As a writer or showrunner, it’s impossible to satisfy everyone.
Sometimes, viewers provide valid critiques, understanding aspects of the characters or story that the writers may have overlooked or intentionally ignored, not realizing how significant those elements were to the audience. Showrunners can respond to that feedback in various ways.
Some double down, others acknowledge potential changes but move forward, while Genndy Tartakovsky chooses to retcon the entire situation. What Tartakovsky accomplished with Primal‘s ending is nearly unprecedented, yet it was undoubtedly the right decision, and more showrunners should take note of his example.
At the conclusion of Primal season 2, the protagonist, Spear, dies. After a climactic battle to save his friends and love, he meets his end. However, his romantic partner later gives birth to his child, and we fast forward to a future scene where we see his partner, his T. rex friend, and their now-grown daughter together and happy, with Spear notably absent from the scene.
Some fans were unhappy with Spear’s death. After watching him triumph over everything from Megalodons to bear-riding Viking armies for two seasons, it seemed inconceivable that anything could defeat him. So for Primal season 3, Tartakovsky literally resurrects Spear, who spends most of the season as a zombie regaining his memories.
By the end of the season, Spear has returned to human form and recovered his memory. The final shot mirrors that of season 2, but now Spear walks into frame. This is a narrative choice unique to fiction; sometimes a retcon is indeed the best option.
Genndy Tartakovsky’s Retcon Of Primal Reveals His Confidence In The Show
Genndy Tartakovsky has been a prominent figure in animation for decades, and he doesn’t frequently revisit and retcon his work. However, it seems that Tartakovsky has been contemplating Spear’s fate since the end of season 2. Clearly, he was dissatisfied with how things concluded.
Revising the final scene from season 2 to include Spear indicates that he was deliberate in his retcon decision and demonstrates his confidence in the series. This isn’t a matter of Tartakovsky wavering about his creation; it’s about him asserting that he wants things to be different.
This is his television show, and it’s fiction. Where else can one go back and amend things in such a manner? Tartakovsky recognized that his narrative was robust enough to withstand the implications of such a significant change while still delivering a compelling story. This retcon stems from his determination about what is best for both his characters and the series.
TV Shows Should Not Be Afraid To Retcon Their Decisions
TV shows should not shy away from retconning their decisions. While there comes a point where one cannot simply alter everything—doing so would render events meaningless—if a show has made an error regarding a character or finale and wishes to correct it, showrunners have every right to reinforce what they have created.
A more detrimental approach is the fake retcon where convoluted storytelling erases or forgets decisions or character arcs while still keeping them as part of the narrative. Primal illustrates that sometimes it’s better to be straightforward about changing the story than to obscure it.
[nospin]Here you can find the original article; the photos and images used in our article also come from this source. We are not their authors; they have been used solely for informational purposes with proper attribution to their original source.[/nospin]
