The problem with the Seinfeld finale, IMO, was Larry David's involvement, and his bizarre belief that these characters should be punished for their past misdeeds, and that the audience would feel the same way. What he and the writers failed to understand was the audience actually liked and related to these characters, and were more often than not on their side.
I think the AV Club hit the nail on the head:
"It’s all reminiscent of the furor over the finale to
The Sopranos and how many people expected Tony to get his grand comeuppance and were disappointed at the ambiguity of the episode conclusion. That show’s creator, David Chase, said that he was put off by the bloodthirstiness of the show’s fans—fans who had happily followed Tony’s wrongdoings for many years. Larry David seems to take the opposite approach, gleefully punishing the gang for their countless wrongs. Were there a lot of
Seinfeld fans hoping Jerry’s theft of the marble rye would finally be avenged? Unlikely."
This is why I think there's sometimes a disconnect between writers and their audience. We root for the protagonists because it just natural for us to do so, even when we recognize how despicable they are. The Sopranos, for example, wouldn't have been a success if everyone hated Tony.
I guess you could argue that the SG1 show was wrapped up (through the two movies). SGA and SGU obviously had a lot left going for them.
