Online Series: Stranger Things (A love letter to the supernatural classics of the 80's)

NyQuil

Big F$&*in Q
Jan 5, 2005
96,483
61,277
Ottawa, ON
Obviously there were a lot of storylines to keep track of, but the more under-utilized (dropped) ones appeared to be:

-Mike's Mom and her issues with her husband and infidelity
-Nancy and Jonathan's tension

On the other hand, with all of the supernatural horror going on it kind of makes sense for that to take a back seat in the end.
 

jasonleaffan

Registered User
Dec 7, 2008
5,124
716
Toronto
I didn't take any of it for product placement and doubt that they were in because they were paid for. I think that they were in simply for nostalgia and era authenticity. For example, the season was set in the Summer of 1985, so the bit about New Coke (which debuted in the Spring of 1985) was a natural inclusion to provide a slice of 1985 culture, just like Back to the Future was. I found it pretty hilarious and enjoyable to see the debate over New Coke play out between Lucas and Dustin. Also, it's not like you can buy it anymore. In fact, many of the products and brands that were shown aren't around or relevant anymore. For example, I can pretty confidently say that no one paid for the inclusion of Waldenbooks, which went bankrupt 8 years ago, or any of the cereals that were discontinued 30 years ago. If the producers had wanted to, they could've saved money by replacing those brands and products with ones that are still around and willing to pay. Anyways, I'd usually be with you when it comes to product placement, but I love it when it comes to this particular show because it adds to the authenticity and nostalgia by highlighting what was around and popular in the 80s.

30 years ago? You're showing our age!!!

I would rank them 1,3,2.
 

RobBrown4PM

Pringles?
Oct 12, 2009
8,889
2,809
Why are the Russians always dumb in these things? They somehow managed to transfer over an ungodly amount of high tech equipment and do what they did but they outfit their roster with 500 duddley doo rights.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PK Cronin

jasonleaffan

Registered User
Dec 7, 2008
5,124
716
Toronto
Why are the Russians always dumb in these things? They somehow managed to transfer over an ungodly amount of high tech equipment and do what they did but they outfit their roster with 500 duddley doo rights.
They were smart enough to to have built their secret lair in the first place.

I'm pretty sure the Duffer brothers were just having fun and sticking to the 80's theme with all the cold war movies from Red Dawn to Rocky IV. Besides if the Russians were as smart as you think they should have been, Hawkins wouldn't have stood a chance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jussi

NyQuil

Big F$&*in Q
Jan 5, 2005
96,483
61,277
Ottawa, ON
Why are the Russians always dumb in these things? They somehow managed to transfer over an ungodly amount of high tech equipment and do what they did but they outfit their roster with 500 duddley doo rights.

Have you ever noticed that every movie or TV show involving children protagonists in some conspiracy of some kind also involves incompetent adult officials or officers of some kind?
 

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe

Hey! We won!
May 30, 2003
15,548
3,408
I actually think Harbour's performance was a big swing and a miss this season, though I'm not sure how much of that was on the directing. I feel like the tone they were going for with a lot of his scenes was more of a comedic nature, but it rarely ever landed. And there was so little variation with how he played comedic Hopper and bad-ass Hopper (when the times came), so even those scenes lost a bit of oomph for me.

Just finished last night and this was one of my big takeaways too. It's nitpicky because I still enjoy the show very much, but man, the word I would use for Harbour this season is BROAD. I'd have to go back to watch the first two seasons, but I don't recall him being as BIG and LOUD as constantly in the past. There has always been some luggish/oafishness to him but it felt more dialed back in the first two seasons. He had more softer/quieter moments in between the outbursts. Not so much this season. The only real bit of nuance comes as a voice over at the end.

Related, it felt like everyone was yelling at almost all times. Sure there were dire circumstances where that's required, but even in more normal conversation, it felt like there are entire characters that communicated almost solely by yelling this season — Hop, Erica, Murray.

I sound grumpy. I'm really not. Stranger Things hits this magical nostalgia chord with me few things have and it brings me much joy. I've had Living In Stereo bumping in my head for about three days now (now there was a funny, if a bit obvious, pop culture needle drop there). I don't know if I've reflexively smiled at something recently as much as Dustin and Suzy's surprise song rendition.
 

Pranzo Oltranzista

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
3,844
2,704
I thought Hopper set the tone for the entire season with his acting, it was really noticeable right off the bat. They went much more campy this season, and it's the main reason I preferred it to the other 2 seasons. They did a similar thing with Steve's character.

Probably the main reason why I thought it was the weaker season, everybody felt so caricatural. Ain't got nothing against camp, but by changing tone that much, they kind of negated what made the first two seasons effective. Now, the upside down and its creatures are really no serious threat (I get that only and always relaying on 11's powers to end things right would be repetitive, but now we've got kids successfully going against monsters and Russians while joking and singing, maybe a bit much).

Art production was pretty good and it's still a good show, but I don't think a 4th season - with the threat seemingly going global - would benefit from that campy tone. I don't want to see Erica kicking Russians off her snowmobile while taking over Siberia.

And I don't think Hopper is in that cell. I think they made it that obvious so that they can start season 4 with the big reveal, that it's not him (probably Brenner). I think Hopper is in the upside down, and that he'll only get out later in season 4, not totally human anymore.
 

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe

Hey! We won!
May 30, 2003
15,548
3,408
Probably the main reason why I thought it was the weaker season, everybody felt so caricatural. Ain't got nothing against camp, but by changing tone that much, they kind of negated what made the first two seasons effective. Now, the upside down and its creatures are really no serious threat (I get that only and always relaying on 11's powers to end things right would be repetitive, but now we've got kids successfully going against monsters and Russians while joking and singing, maybe a bit much).

Art production was pretty good and it's still a good show, but I don't think a 4th season - with the threat seemingly going global - would benefit from that campy tone. I don't want to see Erica kicking Russians off her snowmobile while taking over Siberia.

And I don't think Hopper is in that cell. I think they made it that obvious so that they can start season 4 with the big reveal, that it's not him (probably Brenner). I think Hopper is in the upside down, and that he'll only get out later in season 4, not totally human anymore.

Seems too obvious that he'd be in the cell, though it's certainly possible. I have no doubt he will return in some way shape or form, but that tag scene feels like a fake out.
 

M.C.G. 31

Damn, he brave!
Oct 6, 2008
96,268
18,937
Ottawa
I think Hopper being in that cell is too easy. I think he’s still alive, but I think maybe he’s going to have a role similar to Billy’s in s4, but more subtle and with more Russian influence somehow.

I’m glad they kind of reasoned why Hopper was so different personality wise at the end but it was still super off-putting for a bit in the first half of the season.

Still, though, I loved this season a lot. I’d put it second after the first season in terms of quality imo.

Dacre was great.
 
Jan 9, 2007
20,127
2,104
Australia
Probably the main reason why I thought it was the weaker season, everybody felt so caricatural. Ain't got nothing against camp, but by changing tone that much, they kind of negated what made the first two seasons effective. Now, the upside down and its creatures are really no serious threat (I get that only and always relaying on 11's powers to end things right would be repetitive, but now we've got kids successfully going against monsters and Russians while joking and singing, maybe a bit much).

Art production was pretty good and it's still a good show, but I don't think a 4th season - with the threat seemingly going global - would benefit from that campy tone. I don't want to see Erica kicking Russians off her snowmobile while taking over Siberia.

And I don't think Hopper is in that cell. I think they made it that obvious so that they can start season 4 with the big reveal, that it's not him (probably Brenner). I think Hopper is in the upside down, and that he'll only get out later in season 4, not totally human anymore.

It is really hard to make shows or movies based around kids saving the world because the premise is silly right off the hop. I agree though, that the tone in seasons 1-2 helped the story. By contrast, season 3 felt more "fun".
 
Jan 9, 2007
20,127
2,104
Australia
Obviously there were a lot of storylines to keep track of, but the more under-utilized (dropped) ones appeared to be:

-Mike's Mom and her issues with her husband and infidelity
-Nancy and Jonathan's tension

On the other hand, with all of the supernatural horror going on it kind of makes sense for that to take a back seat in the end.

Do you mean under-utilized in the sense that you would have preferred more? I thought how they handled those two storylines in particular was masterful. They made us care but not get bogged down with them. Mike's mom isn't a main character, but this added a little depth. And the teenage squabble taken further would detract from the main story, and ultimately not be that interesting IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GoldenSeal

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,342
9,846
Had no idea until yesterday that Robin is the daughter of Uma Therman and Ethan Hawke. Crazy. Good acting bloodline.
Had no idea until 5 seconds ago when I read your post.

I mentioned it in this thread a whole week ago, but did anyone pay attention to little ol' me? No! :sarcasm:

Do you mean under-utilized in the sense that you would have preferred more? I thought how they handled those two storylines in particular was masterful. They made us care but not get bogged down with them. Mike's mom isn't a main character, but this added a little depth. And the teenage squabble taken further would detract from the main story, and ultimately not be that interesting IMO.

I think that the writers didn't explore those topics more because they were already explored in previous seasons. Another example is Max and Lucas. We got the impression that they're still together, but their relationship wasn't explored further. To do so, and to also further explore the other familiar topics would've seemed like re-hashing previous plot points and would've made the season feel too much like the previous seasons, IMO. Exploring new topics, instead, made the season feel fresher.
 

NyQuil

Big F$&*in Q
Jan 5, 2005
96,483
61,277
Ottawa, ON
Do you mean under-utilized in the sense that you would have preferred more? I thought how they handled those two storylines in particular was masterful. They made us care but not get bogged down with them. Mike's mom isn't a main character, but this added a little depth. And the teenage squabble taken further would detract from the main story, and ultimately not be that interesting IMO.

Just that they were interesting storylines but were rightly dropped when more important events developed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: glovesave_35

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad