MovieChat Forums > Stranger Things (2016) Discussion > Enjoyed It, But S.T. Ripped Off Stephen ...

Enjoyed It, But S.T. Ripped Off Stephen King So Hard...


...he had to go find a police station to report a mugging.

A good half of the premise was lifted from King's novel, Firestarter, including a main villain (Dr. Martin Brenner) amalgamated from Firestarter's "Cap" Hollister, John Rainbird and Dr. Joseph Wanless, along with a sinister scientific government organization, Hawkins National Laboratory, standing in for The Shop, and even an originating psychedelic drug trial like "Lot 6" responsible for a protagonist's psychic powers. Other elements seem borrowed from King works like Christine (Jonathan and Nancy courageously seeking to rumble with the Big Bad like Dennis and Leigh) and The Body (train track scene). The Upside Down closely resembled King's Lovecraftian shadow realm from stories like The Mist, Crouch End and even The Breathing Method.

To give credit where credit is due, the Duffer brothers expressly name-checked King in episode 6 of season 1, but the large number of borrowed elements from King made Stranger Things seem somewhat more derivative than referential. As always, ymmv.

reply

If you break down most shows, you can pretty much accuse it of ripping off countless other shows/books/movies, just depends how much effort you want to put into something that is ultimately pointless

There is also a difference between ripping off something and paying homage to it, for me and a lot of other people, it's pretty easy to see that Stranger Things pays homage to not only Stephen Kings work (they're self proclaimed mega fans of his) but also the 80's in general and you can see so many examples throughout season 1 of those

For me, what makes it a homage over a rip off, is the simple fact that the Duffer brothers don't pretend to be doing something completely new and original, it's open and they celebrate those things that inspired them and don't try to deny it or come up with some excuse to how it's just a coincidence

Is Stranger Things a completely original and new show, that's never been done before? nope, but what it does, it does very well and by taking inspiration and paying homage in the way that they did, they've created a show that really brings a lot of people back to when they grew up and not many shows can do that and also deliver a very strong and decent story that makes people want to see more

For me, it's not an amazing and game changing show, but it is solid and i enjoyed it a lot and i want to see season 2, so for me personally it's a great show, even though it did have a fair few flaws, none of them for me were enough to spoil my enjoyment

reply

At least they didn't rip-off It's child orgy.

reply

that was It.

imo

reply

There are no new stories. I kept thinking of X-Men while I was watching it. Eleven is Magneto, a child taken from her mother for experimentation. Like Magneto, she develops phenomenal powers to move things with her mind and eventually destroys her captor. They mention the X-Men several times in the show too and can't have been unaware of the resemblance. Though Magneto's powers are limited to manipulating metal objects, many of the biggest things Eleven does (turning over the van, stopping bullets in their tracks and making them change course) did involve metal and were specifically things Magneto did.

Why it never occurs to any of these people that making someone who hates you have superpowers isn't a good idea, I'll never understand. The character of Magneto existed in the 1980s when Stranger Things takes place, but the idea of Sebastian Shaw creating Magneto's powers in the same way Brenner creates Eleven's seems to have originated with X-Men First Class.

"Arguing with trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon . . . ."

reply