The show is not as good as the intro. And, the show is, like the intro, an homage to a bunch of 80s stuff. If you didn't grow up loving Stephen King novels and movies, and the like, you may not sync up with the stories they're telling.

They really are retreading a bunch of 80s tropes; I enjoy it, but I recognize that the kids are rehashing a Spielberg-ian kidventure flick along the lines of Goonies or ET, the teenagers are stuck in a horror flick ala Friday the 13th, and the grownups are in a paranoid government conspiracy movie. Any of it would also fit comfortably into an X Files episode. I like all those things; even while I recognize they're pandering to my inner child. Then again, my girlfriend really likes it, too, and she's young enough to have not grown up on any of these things.

So, I don't know. I like it. It's not high art, but it's definitely fun pop culture, for me.

There's this interesting thing with the Netflix originals - they feel fantastically formulaic. Or, maybe a better way to put it - I feel like I can see the genes (memes?) in the story, and it comes out the better for it.

In my imagination, it starts with the data scientists identifying a gap or opportunity based on people's viewing habits - House of Cards being the prime example; a show by X staring Y in Z genre.

That provides the baseline; queue the writers raised on TV Tropes. I don't think there's an intact trope in the whole show; anything that is primarily subverted has sub-tropes done straight; anything done straight has sub-tropes subverted.

The Marvel series do this the least; the pure Netflix originals do this the most. I'd say maybe you could call it "high craft"? Like Michelangelo versus Picasso.

House of Cards had the British version to build on, so it's not entirely a Netflix taste triangulation.

But, the CEO or somebody from Netflix has actually spelled out in the past that though they're taking risks in making a bunch of their own content, the risk is smaller than it has historically been. They know the taste of their audience (on a nearly individual level) better than any entertainment company in history ever has. And, they extract the value of their viewers directly and without middlemen, unlike almost every other entertainment company in history. So, for them, a successful show is one that brings in X number of new subscribers and keeps them around through multiple seasons...and that X number is smaller than it's ever needed to be.

So, you're right; they are triangulating in on very specific sub-genres and very specific audiences in ways that entertainment companies in the past couldn't afford to do. This is long-tail television production. Stranger Things, while it is a niche market, is actually one of the bigger niche markets they've tapped into, thus far. It's gotten far more buzz than a lot of the other Netflix original programming.

So, they're either getting better at the triangulation (likely) or they got lucky with this particular toss at the dart board of niche programming, or maybe it's a little of both. And, maybe the people making this show happened to be particularly passionate about it, and it shows in the attention to detail; they're having fun with it, and it makes it fun for viewers who like this sort of thing (or, are at least nostalgic about it...I don't read/watch Stephen King novels/movies very frequently as an adult, but loved them as a kid).

I find the quality of the Netflix originals to vary pretty wildly, and I don't get hooked on most of them. But, I enjoyed Stranger Things. It's a fun escapist bit of entertainment. It's no House of Cards, or even Orange is the New Black, in terms of quality, but it delivers very effectively on what it promises.

I wonder how well Stranger Things is doing among viewers who aren't old enough to have grown up surrounded by this stuff? I know many of my friends on facebook are hooked, but mostly the ones really talking about it are around my age. It's an interesting phenomenon, I think; the stuff it is paying homage to and modeled after was mostly targeted at kids and young adults, but the people most excited about it are maybe middle aged. Weird how that happens.

Having grown up in the 80s, I caught a ton of the pop culture nods in the series. I was the exact same age as these kids during the time the show was taking place.

I like how you broke it down by age group vs movies/tropes, something I hadn't considered.

To add to your list, the adults' situations were mirroring much from Jaws (the iconic typewriter scene, the Chief's plodding hunt for the thing), Poltergeist (the mom talking to the room, addressing her child as "Baby"), and Close Encounters of the Third Kind (the mom's obsessive behavior w/ the lights).

Though I'm not a huge fan, I thought Winona Rider's performance was incredible. She had that perfect balance of almost-over-the-top motherly worry about her son, yet cognizant and brave enough to not quite hit the level of crazy hysterics.

I really hope there's a 2nd season.

I liked how they depicted being a kid in the 1980s -- that's really how it kind of was -- we just hung out with each other playing D&D and riding bikes, etc. These days kids have such a regulated life style -- they generally aren't allowed to wander off on their own but are expected to be in regulated environments like organized sports, swim lessons, etc.

I think this is more prevalent in suburbs. Plenty of kids outside playing in my generally working class urban neighborhood.

To be fair to the parents, a lot of stuff related to college or jobs is way more competitive hence the push for extracurriculars. They do go a bit overboard though : )

I can understand you disliking the photography but I wouldn't say that the storytelling hewed "very closely to the expectations".

I'm trying to avoid spoiling things for those who haven't seen it, but almost every character became more multi-dimensional and the story progressed in unexpected ways. It took the worn-out tropes and flipped them over. Even your singular use of the word "genre" confuses me. Was there only one genre? It started out as a horror movie and then evolved into some sci-fi secret experiment narrative.

Certainly it blends multiple genres, but to me it's the "X-files" genre.

My complaint is not that it doesn't get better it's that it shouldn't have to get better. That's a pacing issue and when a show has enough solid material in it I theorize most pacing issues can be solved with editing and usually by removing extraneous material.

I think the impact that editing can have on how you perceive a story is profound.

same. not just this show, but all the Netflix originals have this "uncanny valley" aspect to them, where you can tell they're being crafted according to an algorithm, and almost entirely derivative as a result. always very "safe" and according to expectations.

Stranger Things felt to me almost entirely like a sequence of tropes borrowed from other movies. From the Freaks & Geeks cast composition, to the Spielberg Sci-Fi, bald blue-eyed psychic child, etc. Just about the only truly original thing was the design of the threat itself, and it was easily the worst part of the show. Sure, it's a "love letter" to the era, but it's just that.

you can't really A/B test your way out of a local maxima, which is why in spite of most Netflix shows being decent, none of them have actually stood out as "good" in my mind.

Thank you, you've been able to accurately describe my problem with all the true Netflix originals ("true" in that they haven't been bought from other countries or licensed). Except for OITNB, I kinda love that show and it doesn't seem entirely created and written to pander to a demo.

I'd love to see a day when Netflix premiers a show on the level of Better Call Saul or The Wire.

That would be at least the first few seasons of House of Cards for me. I wouldn't rank it quite as high as those two, but I was excited to watch it and any show that elicits that reaction is doing fine by me.

My problem with House of Cards is that it's devoid of mystery. I'm only interested when the plot is moving fast, which is probably 4 episodes a season. There's no introspection, none of the characters have personal motives (except for the "transient" girl who lasted 2 seasons).

I don't know, it's just been disappointing even though I marathon all the episodes when they appear.

Totally agree. The title sequence and music taps into some primitive nostalgic core parts of my history I can't even accurately articulate. As soon as it came on, it's like a light in my childhood blinked on. Wonderful.

But the show itself is just meh.

The acting is uniformly bad. Given that it applies to all of the actors, I assume it says more about the directors than the cast. Everyone is too loud and too over the top, all the time, which has the effect of making everything boring. There's no dynamic range in the emotion (except for the mysterious girl, who is pretty great).

I like the story mainly because I enjoy the all the tropes it rehashes. But the dialogue is pedestrian, the pacing is semi-random, and the episodes I've seen so far feel like more of a pastiche of scenes than something tightly polished.

The cinematography is everything I hate about digital film production. It's so easy to color correct every frame that now you're obligated too and everyone does it the exact same way: Crank up the shadows so 90% of the frame is pure solid black (with none of the subtle detail that would still be just perceptible in there if it were film). Get the that's left and kill every color that isn't orange or blue [1].

Cinematographers! You can do amazing things with color today. Stop always doing the same thing!

Still, having said all that, I do enjoy watching it. I think a more experience hand could tighten it into something more spectacular, but it scratches a nostalgic itch that not many other things do.

[1]: https://www.google.com/search?q=stranger+things&espv=2&biw=1...

Wow, we must've watched different shows then. I thought the cinematography was incredible! easily beats out almost anything hollywood produces otherwise. A beautiful show perspecitve-wise.

I just really don't agree with your interpretation, but to each their own. Great show all around.

Indeed. They need to cut a lot more if I were to watch any more than the first few episodes. The show feels a bit like the first season of true detective, except it's boring and nothing happens...