The post Why ‘Stranger Things’ Would Have Been So Much Better Without Vecna appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Stranger Things Credit: Netflix Unsurprisingly,The post Why ‘Stranger Things’ Would Have Been So Much Better Without Vecna appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Stranger Things Credit: Netflix Unsurprisingly,

Why ‘Stranger Things’ Would Have Been So Much Better Without Vecna

Stranger Things

Credit: Netflix

Unsurprisingly, I received a bit of pushback to my recent post about the main culprit behind the decline of Stranger Things. I argued at the time that while there were many problems with both Season 4 and especially Season 5, many of these can be traced back to Vecna and how the addition of a fantasy Big Bad fundamentally altered the series for the worse.

One counter-argument I’ve heard from fans is that it actually makes perfect sense to introduce a Dark Lord figure in Stranger Things, since this is a show based on Dungeons & Dragons and that game pretty heavily influenced by The Lord of the Rings. In fantasy, of course, a Dark Lord is pretty common, whether that’s Sauron or Voldemort or The Dark One from The Wheel Of Time. Dark Lords are everywhere in fantasy.

The television version of Game Of Thrones introduced its own Dark Lord in the ominous Night King, which is a pretty significant departure from the books by George R.R. Martin. Naturally, the Night King ended up being a rather lackluster Big Bad in the end.

That’s one trouble with Dark Lord archetypes. They’re built up to be these impossibly deadly and evil and cunning foes, and then our much less impressive heroes manage to take them down through grit and determination or just dumb luck.

Sauron was bested by some filthy Hobbitses and their pal, Gollum. Voldemort would have gotten away with conquering Middle-earth if it weren’t for those meddling kids. (The Vecna/Voldemort similarities are actually pretty hilarious). The Night King was built up over seven seasons, with the nightmarish Long Night perpetually on the horizon and an army of the living dead poised to roll across Westeros . . . and then Arya Stark just stabbed him to death out of the blue. I guess “Stick ‘em with the pointy end” was Chekhov’s Gun, after all.

Game of Thrones

Credit: HBO

The same problem arises in Hawkins, Indiana. The Dark Lord, Vecna, has been set up as this super powerful, evil otherworldly necromancer about to literally destroy the world, and we get one of the most lackluster boss fights ever, despite Vecna and the Mind Flayer teaming up. Many people shrug this sort of thing off, saying that it’s really hard to wrap up a five-season arc, that final seasons are often disappointing. I have no doubt of the challenge, but it’s our job as critics of media to take things apart and figure out why they’re not working. Could this series have driven more confidently across the finish line had it abandoned Vecna altogether? Perhaps.

While Stranger Things certainly was influenced heavily by Dungeons & Dragons, there has never been a great deal of Lord of the Rings DNA in the show. It’s always hewed more toward 80s’ era coming-of-age and horror, from Back to the Future to Ghostbusters to E.T. and so forth. Sticking to this type of story for all five seasons would have almost certainly resulted in a better conclusion.

The Mind Flayer, a creature of the Upside Down with no human emotion or motivations, is a much more interesting, Lovecraftian monster than Vecna ever was. Stranger Things should have either kept the Mind Flayer as the chief antagonist or revealed some even greater, more monstrous power behind it and the other eldritch horrors of the Upside Down. So much of Season 4 and 5 were spent building up Vecna, only to have it all flame out in the end.

Season 4 without Vecna could have revolved around some similar events, with the Mind Flayer targeting individuals like Max. The Upside Down itself could have begun seeping into the real world in unsettling ways. A quest to go into the Upside Down to save Max and kill the Mind Flayer once and for all would have been an exciting storyline. Better yet, it wouldn’t require retconning earlier story beats. The show could have gone other directions as well. Time travel is risky, but with the Upside Down frozen in time, you can see how it might work.

Stranger Things

Credit: Netflix

Regardless, choosing cosmic and psychological horror over mythic fantasy would have been a smart direction for Stranger Things, and would have been more thematically consistent with the first three seasons. Even the Season 5 Mind Flayer felt more akin to a dragon or fantasy monster than the shadowy terror we were first introduced to in Season 2.

Other changes I would make along with Vecna’s removal from the storyline:

  • A slimmed down cast. Sorry, Hopper, you should have died at the end of Season 3, and probably a few other characters along with you. At least one or two of the older teens, like the lovable Steve, could have also been killed. Side-characters like Murray should have been written out before becoming caricatures. Adults in general should have had less presence in the show. The genre is not about adults. It’s about kids. Imagine The Goonies with a half dozen adults tramping through the caves. Imagine that movie with the same size cast as Stranger Things.
  • Much less focus on teen romance among the core group. There was enough romance written into the Steve / Jonathan / Nancy subplot. We didn’t need Mike and Eleven to be anything more than friends. I do think that Lucas and Max ending up as a couple in the end, after he helps save her from the Upside Down / Mind Flayer, could have worked. But far too much time was spent on young teen romance and none of it improved the show.
  • No more de-powering Eleven. Eleven should have been at the forefront of Season 5 rather than sidelined by characters like Holly, though the problem was less about Holly and more about the bloated cast in general. Eleven was de-powered in Season 4 and pushed to the side in Season 5. When Will finally gets powers, he’s almost instantly de-powered as well. This kills momentum. Players of D&D will know that once you gain new powers, the last thing you want is to lose them.
  • Cut the entire military subplot. Once the Hawkins Lab people were out of the picture, I’d narrow the focus down to the main characters and their quest to somehow close off the Upside Down and/or kill the Mind Flayer (and the Mind Flayer could have been just one of many, or subservient to an even greater cosmic horror). The show could still include a government subplot, maybe some shadowy investigators poking their noses around, but as it was written, the military was just unforgivably lame.
  • Have Will come out in Season 4 rather than waiting until the end of Season 5 and, if the show insists on giving all the other kids romantic interests, give him one as well (though ideally we should have just avoided all the romance stuff in the younger group, and put an end to the love triangle in the older group much sooner). But if we must include romances for our main characters, put the “Byler” stuff to rest by giving Will a boyfriend or at least a crush.
  • Remove the ambiguity from the ending. Rather than killing off Eleven or leaving her fate a mystery, give her the happy ending she deserves. Neither of the current outcomes are satisfying in the least, though her sacrifice and death was a bold narrative choice until they nerfed it with ambiguity. In the end, Eleven should have been at the D&D table with her friends, the Upside Down closed, her powers gone for good, and a normal life ahead of her filled with love and pain and struggle and joy. I think a lot of people will disagree with me about a lot of other things in this post, but maybe we can all agree on this.

I should note, before we leave, that none of this is a critique of Jamie Campbell Bower, who played Henry / 001 / Vecna with enormous skill and talent. Even if Vecna was cut, in a perfect world Bower would have gotten some other great role in the show. Maybe a character with powers who was also investigating the Upside Down, but with nefarious motives. A secondary antagonist of some kind. Just not the Big Bad fantasy Dark Lord.

Ultimately, removing Vecna from the story wouldn’t fix all its problems, but without him, Stranger Things would have felt more like, well, Stranger Things. What do you think?

Let me know on Twitter, Instagram, or Facebook.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2026/01/21/why-stranger-things-would-have-been-so-much-better-without-vecna/

Market Opportunity
SQUID MEME Logo
SQUID MEME Price(GAME)
$38.8436
$38.8436$38.8436
+1.10%
USD
SQUID MEME (GAME) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Will Huge $8.3B Bitcoin Options Expiry Trigger Another Dump?

Will Huge $8.3B Bitcoin Options Expiry Trigger Another Dump?

The post Will Huge $8.3B Bitcoin Options Expiry Trigger Another Dump? appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Home » Crypto News The end of another week is here again
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/01/30 14:01
Why Staffing Agencies Need Hot Desk Booking Software to Scale Smarter

Why Staffing Agencies Need Hot Desk Booking Software to Scale Smarter

Your headcount doubled this year. Congratulations – you’re killing it.  But now you’re staring at a lease renewal and wondering: do you really need 40 desks when
Share
Fintechzoom2026/01/30 14:26
Urgent: Coinbase CEO Pushes for Crucial Crypto Market Structure Bill

Urgent: Coinbase CEO Pushes for Crucial Crypto Market Structure Bill

BitcoinWorld Urgent: Coinbase CEO Pushes for Crucial Crypto Market Structure Bill The cryptocurrency world is buzzing with significant developments as Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong recently took to Washington, D.C., advocating passionately for a clearer regulatory path. His mission? To champion the passage of a vital crypto market structure bill, specifically the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act. This legislative push is not just about policy; it’s about safeguarding investor rights and fostering innovation in the digital asset space. Why a Clear Crypto Market Structure Bill is Essential Brian Armstrong’s visit underscores a growing sentiment within the crypto industry: the urgent need for regulatory clarity. Without clear guidelines, the market operates in a gray area, leaving both innovators and investors vulnerable. The proposed crypto market structure bill aims to bring much-needed definition to this dynamic sector. Armstrong explicitly stated on X that this legislation is crucial to prevent a recurrence of actions that infringe on investor rights, citing past issues with former U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair Gary Gensler. This proactive approach seeks to establish a stable and predictable environment for digital assets. Understanding the CLARITY Act: A Blueprint for Digital Assets The Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act is designed to establish a robust regulatory framework for the cryptocurrency industry. It seeks to delineate the responsibilities of key regulatory bodies, primarily the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). Here are some key provisions: Clear Jurisdiction: The bill aims to specify which digital assets fall under the purview of the SEC as securities and which are considered commodities under the CFTC. Investor Protection: By defining these roles, the act intends to provide clearer rules for market participants, thereby enhancing investor protection. Exemption Conditions: A significant aspect of the bill would exempt certain cryptocurrencies from the stringent registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, provided they meet specific criteria. This could reduce regulatory burdens for legitimate projects. This comprehensive approach promises to bring structure to a rapidly evolving market. The Urgency Behind the Crypto Market Structure Bill The call for a dedicated crypto market structure bill is not new, but Armstrong’s direct engagement highlights the increasing pressure for legislative action. The lack of a clear framework has led to regulatory uncertainty, stifling innovation and sometimes leading to enforcement actions that many in the industry view as arbitrary. Passing this legislation would: Foster Innovation: Provide a clear roadmap for developers and entrepreneurs, encouraging new projects and technologies. Boost Investor Confidence: Offer greater certainty and protection for individuals investing in digital assets. Prevent Future Conflicts: Reduce the likelihood of disputes between regulatory bodies and crypto firms, creating a more harmonious ecosystem. The industry believes that a well-defined regulatory landscape is essential for the long-term health and growth of the digital economy. What a Passed Crypto Market Structure Bill Could Mean for You If the CLARITY Act or a similar crypto market structure bill passes, its impact could be profound for everyone involved in the crypto space. For investors, it could mean a more secure and transparent market. For businesses, it offers a predictable environment to build and scale. Conversely, continued regulatory ambiguity could: Stifle Growth: Drive innovation overseas and deter new entrants. Increase Risks: Leave investors exposed to unregulated practices. Create Uncertainty: Lead to ongoing legal battles and market instability. The stakes are incredibly high, making the advocacy efforts of leaders like Brian Armstrong all the more critical. The push for a clear crypto market structure bill is a pivotal moment for the digital asset industry. Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong’s efforts in Washington, D.C., reflect a widespread desire for regulatory clarity that protects investors, fosters innovation, and ensures the long-term viability of cryptocurrencies. The CLARITY Act offers a potential blueprint for this future, aiming to define jurisdictional boundaries and streamline regulatory requirements. Its passage could unlock significant growth and stability, cementing the U.S. as a leader in the global digital economy. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) What is the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act? The CLARITY Act is a proposed crypto market structure bill aimed at establishing a clear regulatory framework for digital assets in the U.S. It seeks to define the roles of the SEC and CFTC and exempt certain cryptocurrencies from securities registration requirements under specific conditions. Why is Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong advocating for this bill? Brian Armstrong is advocating for the CLARITY Act to bring regulatory certainty to the crypto industry, protect investor rights from unclear enforcement actions, and foster innovation within the digital asset space. He believes it’s crucial for the industry’s sustainable growth. How would this bill impact crypto investors? For crypto investors, the passage of this crypto market structure bill would mean greater clarity on which assets are regulated by whom, potentially leading to enhanced consumer protections, reduced market uncertainty, and a more stable investment environment. What are the primary roles of the SEC and CFTC concerning this bill? The bill aims to delineate the responsibilities of the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) and the CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission) regarding digital assets. It seeks to clarify which assets fall under securities regulation and which are considered commodities, reducing jurisdictional ambiguity. What could happen if a crypto market structure bill like CLARITY Act does not pass? If a clear crypto market structure bill does not pass, the industry may continue to face regulatory uncertainty, potentially leading to stifled innovation, increased legal challenges for crypto companies, and a less secure environment for investors due to inconsistent enforcement and unclear rules. Did you find this article insightful? Share it with your network to help spread awareness about the crucial discussions shaping the future of digital assets! To learn more about the latest crypto market trends, explore our article on key developments shaping crypto regulation and institutional adoption. This post Urgent: Coinbase CEO Pushes for Crucial Crypto Market Structure Bill first appeared on BitcoinWorld.
Share
Coinstats2025/09/18 20:35