2443 replies to this topic

[Lotamoxie]

Alright, I stole the title from the Charmed forums. Some people have complained that Supernatural isn't original and has stolen all of its ideas from other shows, like Charmed (blech...), X-Files, Buffy and more. Even movies, especially The Ring. So here's your thread to compare Supernatural to other TV shows (and movies).

Personally, I think that Supernatural is an interesting and original show. The myths they pick every week may have been done by other shows and movies, but Supernatural handles them differently than these other shows. If new shows can't use a topic old shows have used then shows like X-Files, Buffy and Angel would never have been created because lots of shows and movies tackled the subject of vampires and demons long before these shows ever showed up. What makes the shows different is how they cover the subject matter, not that they often times cover the same subject.

I’ll get us started, by discussing three episodes that have been criticized as ripping off other shows:

Wendigo
Sure, Charmed did a Wendigo episode, but the Charmed writers completely hacked up the Wendigo legend and twisted it into something completely unrecognizable. In fact, it was more of a Werewolf story than the Wendigo legend by the time the Charmed writers were finished with it.

Dead in the Water
Creepy kids in the water were around long before Samara climbed out of a well in The Ring. Other than a wet creepy kid, DiTW and The Ring have little in common. DiTW was a eerie episode with some genuine fright moments. Plus, Dean bonding with Lucas was heartwarming and sad at the same time, because the viewers realized just how much of his mother's death that Dean remembered and how much that has affected his life.

Phantom Traveler
I think Phantom Traveler was kind of an homage to a classic Twilight Zone episode that starred William Shatner (I can't remember the episode title), but I don't think it ripped anything off.

So, compare and contract Supernatural to other shows to your hearts' content!

Edited by Lotamoxie, Nov 4, 2005 @ 5:23 PM.

[keita]

Dead in the Water
Creepy kids in the water were around long before Samara climbed out of a well in The Ring. Other than a wet creepy kid, DiTW and The Ring have little in common. DiTW was a eerie episode with some genuine fright moments. Plus, Dean bonding with Lucas was heartwarming and sad at the same time, because the viewers realized just how much of his mother's death that Dean remembered and how much that has affected his life.

Actually, I thought it was more of a Dark Water imitation. Well, I never saw the American Dark Waters, I saw the original Japanese one and that freaked me out. It was basically a scary wet child freaking everyone about. And yes, the child did lose her mother a long time ago.

I love Supernatural and I feel that it's drawing a lot of Japanese horror schemes to produce the same chilling effects. Growing up on Japanese horror films, I can't say it's not a sweet home-coming. And the boys are so...[fill in the blank] hot, that the show becomes addictive.

ETA: All shows have a basis somewhere. At least Supernatural did not skimp on the production and worked to make it enjoyable for the viewers. That in my mind, makes it far superior than most of the other shows that are currently airing on the WB. *cough cough Charmed coughs some more*

Edited by keita, Nov 4, 2005 @ 6:25 PM.

[tenaciousmetoo]

For me, the pilot with its fast edits and shaky Constance reminded me more of the way The Ring was cut than DiTW. But I still found it original.


ETA: blech. Grammar. wrong "its"

Edited by tenaciousmetoo, Nov 4, 2005 @ 6:27 PM.

[DumbBrunette]

The only time I've ever thought "rip-off" while watching this show was in "Bloody Mary", as the character in question was far too Samara-like for my tastes. Other than that, not at all. No show owns the urban legends this show thrives on, IMO. It's the delivery that matters, and so far, Supernatural is original in that way.

[Lotamoxie]

Me too, Dumb Brunette, but I've read others' posts that did call many of SN's shows rip-offs, so I figured I'd create a thread to compare and contrast the shows. I really don't care if SN covers a legend that the other shows have covered, as long as they put their own unique spin on it... and the boys look hot.

[tenaciousmetoo]

The only time I've ever thought "rip-off" while watching this show was in "Bloody Mary", as the character in question was far too Samara-like for my tastes.

Oh, right DumbBrunette, I knew I'd seen them using that quirky edit a second time. Guess the kids doing post like their toys.

[lusus naturae]

The big difference between Supernatural and Charmed is that Supernatural doesn't... you know, suck. (IMHO, don't hurt me, Charmed fans.) I've never been a fan, but I've seen a few over the years. I really don't see how they compare. Yes, they're both supernatural shows. Every genre show is going to have similarities, but I don't think Supernatural is a rip-off. Charmed doesn't own the Wendigo legend, they didn't make it up.

Edited by lusus naturae, Nov 4, 2005 @ 7:05 PM.

[Lotamoxie]

Exactly, but at Charmed-centric boards they were all up in arms about Supernatural ripping off their show. Charmed didn't even tell the Wendigo legend (or just about anything) correctly. The writers reworked it to suit their needs, so much so that the final product wasn't even close to the legend.

[DumbBrunette]

I think it's because the Wendigo isn't the most well known of legendary creatures. Most people who aren't interested in such things would have no reason to believe that it wasn't something the Charmed writers made up.

[lusus naturae]

Huh. I don't really know how badly they messed the legend up, because I've never seen the episode. Doesn't Charmed have it's very own Hogwarts rip-off, anyway?

I'd never heard about the Wendigo until Supernatural, but I just typed it in Google and got about 420,000 hits. There was even a movie called Wendigo in 2001, so did Charmed rip off the movie, or did the movie rip off Charmed? :P

Edited by lusus naturae, Nov 4, 2005 @ 7:25 PM.

[DumbBrunette]

Doesn't Charmed have it's very own Hogwarts rip-off, anyway?

Yes. It's called Magic School. Yes, the writers are that crack-addled.

There was even a movie called Wendigo in 2001

And yet, the Wendigo is still a fairly obscure creature, in my experience. Or maybe I just lead a sheltered life?

[keita]

And yet, the Wendigo is still a fairly obscure creature, in my experience. Or maybe I just lead a sheltered life?

Actually, I've never heard of it either... To be honest, I'm not really familiar with most of the legends that's been airing on Supernatural. The stories like hookman, BloodyMary, and wendigos are all new to me. It's probably because I didn't grow up in the US, so I was not familiar with most of these legends. So everytime I watch the show, I feel it's pretty much a bonus of not knowing what to expect.

Doesn't Charmed have it's very own Hogwarts rip-off, anyway?

Yes. It's called Magic School. Yes, the writers are that crack-addled.

Magic school? How lame can they be... HP and Charmed don't mix, and the writers on Charmed should leave the Harry Potter Series out of this--please.

[ImmortalGoddess]

Magic school? How lame can they be... HP and Charmed don't mix, and the writers on Charmed should leave the Harry Potter Series out of this--please.

Yeah I know they should, being a fan of the series the way they ripped off HP pissed me off and they did it in such a bad way.

[mustbekarma]

The big difference between Supernatural and Charmed is that Supernatural doesn't... you know, suck. (IMHO, don't hurt me, Charmed fans.)

Since I agree with you, lusus naturea, I won't hurt you. I was a fan of Charmed. Charmed has characters that never develop and mature. The same mistakes and flaws keep cropping up, and fucking Phoebe never learns anything unless she’s going to be burned at the stake for it. The burning at the stake/learning reference isn't mine, but I forget who originally coined it.

Exactly, but at Charmed-centric boards they were all up in arms about Supernatural ripping off their show. Charmed didn't even tell the Wendigo legend (or just about anything) correctly. The writers reworked it to suit their needs, so much so that the final product wasn't even close to the legend.

That surprises me, Lotamoxie. Fantasy and science fiction shows use myth and urban legends as sources of inspiration. Charmed has certainly borrowed ideas from myth and urban legend. I assume 99.9% of the people who post on TWoP are intelligent and would Google urban legends. A few typed characters and mouse clicks later, and you could find the real story behind the Wendigo legend and realize that Charmed completely fucked it up. I suppose I could word this more politely, but this "you ripped off Charmed" attitude really upsets me. Really, does Charmed have a patent on urban legends? Well, I guess we are talking about Brad Kern, the fucking moron, after all.

My final answer to this is pot, kettle, black.

Doesn't Charmed have it's very own Hogwarts rip-off, anyway?

Yes, lusus naturae, and Demian, I believe, cleverly called it Notwarts.

Supernatural is so much a better show than Charmed has been for the last three seasons. The sisters don't even show a fraction of the loyalty that Dean and Sam have shown in 7 episodes.

No, I'm not an opinionated bitch. I'm all sweetness and light and bake chocolate chip cookies for orphans.

[lusus naturae]

Yes, lusus naturae, and Demian, I believe, cleverly called it Notwarts.

Heh. Sometimes I think I should watch Charmed just for the fabulous recaps. I'm rather attached to my brain cells, though.

Now, if we have an episode of Supernatural with three annoying scantily clad sisters who happen to be witches? Then I will say Supernatural ripped off Charmed. And then I'll cry.

[DumbBrunette]

Now, if we have an episode of Supernatural with three annoying scantily clad sisters who happen to be witches?

Which brings us to another crappy show this one beats the crap out of: Smallville.

It's horrifying to think that someone would want to rip-off Charmed, but yes, Al and Miles went and did it.

[mustbekarma]

But lusus naturae, would you still cry if the witches were flambeed by Celine Demon? I would, tears of joy.

Now that would be a real reason for the Charmed fanatics to scream.

Edited by mustbekarma, Nov 4, 2005 @ 10:49 PM.

[TiffanyNichelle]

Now, if we have an episode of Supernatural with three annoying scantily clad sisters who happen to be witches?

But what if they took that idea and turned it on it's head? Used the ep to make fun of the Charmed ones? I'd love that, lol, and I watch (and sometimes enjoy) Charmed.

For me, when I compared SN and Charmed, I compare the main characters and the way they handle the supernatural.

With the guys, they were brought up hunting demons. They learned everything while growing up so they have a ton of information and experience. They have a book which they rarely consult. They go to investigate something and can easily rattle off several things it could be and can cite examples (like in Phantom Traveler). They feed the audience information in an offhand way. For exampled in the pilot when Dean casually mentions burning the WiW's bones.

With Charmed, everything for them is new. Almost every week they are running to their book, which by now they should have read cover to cover, to find out what they are dealing with. They hand feed the information to the audience.

[DumbBrunette]

Frankly, I'd place Buffy above Supernatural in terms of quality but on more or less the same level in terms of entertainment. Buffy had much better writing and acting, IMO. Supernatural, however, is my guilty pleasure. It's funny, the characters are wonderful and lovable (and the actors are a great part of that and have a spectacular chemistry together), but it just doesn't have that same wow factor for me.

I'm not even sure I WANT SN to get too bogged down with a complex .season-long arc, as that can lead a show astray

As I recall, Kripke isn't a fan of those.

[Jennifus]

DumbBrunette, word about Smallville. I love the Smallville fandom, but whoa does that show suck. And it had so much potential. It's a crying shame.

Supernatural... now, I'm a fandom whore for Supernatural after, like, three days of reading fic. However, sadly, I've barely watched it... I caught the last twenty minutes or so of the Hookman episode... and that last 20 minutes was better than anything Smallville has had to offer in... ever.

I won't comment in this thread again (probably *wink*) until I've watched some more of this show, but from what I seen, it has amazing potential, and even if it didn't... it has the Brothers Dean, which is more than enough for me to base my enjoyment on. *g*

[keita]

I tend to think shows will get a monster of the week episode for the first season or so. Up until the audience gets tired of it, they will continue that method to build the tone for the series. In a way, it's also good for exploration since the show is just starting and we all get a taste of what flies and what doesn't with the cast/audience, etc.

So for now, I'm more than happy to stick to the monster of the week thing. I'm not sure if there can be an arc for Supernatural... I wonder what they could write up if there is one. Actually, another question is where will the show be heading? I am not too eager to find out for now as I'm just enjoying this series as it is.

I find it is still a bit too early to compare it to Buffy the Vampire Slayer because there's so much we don't know about the creatures that go bump at night. Seems like in Buffy, it was mainly vampires, and they talked and we knew what was going on in their minds. In Supernatural, I don't think we see much of the creature's thought process as a group. I'm still waiting to see what approach TPTB will take in dealing with supernatural beings. Maybe it won't be dealt with ever, and I'm totally okay with it.

As much as I like the conspiracy theory thing, the past few years really got me bored. For once, I wouldn't mind a simple and direct storyline.

ETA: grammar and spelling

Edited by keita, Nov 4, 2005 @ 11:15 PM.

[lusus naturae]

But lusus naturae, would you still cry if the witches were flambeed by Celine Demon? I would, tears of joy.

Are you kidding me? I'm make like Tom Cruise and be jumping up and down on my couch.

But what if they took that idea and turned it on it's head? Used the ep to make fun of the Charmed ones?

Haha, that would be brilliant. I don't think The WB would be too happy, though.

They hand feed the information to the audience.

I like that Supernatural doesn't always hand feed us information. Yes, occasionally we have clunky exposition... but a good example of when they didn't is with the Wendigo. Legend says that fire kills it because it melts its heart of ice, but I don't believe they mentioned that on the show.

(remember Buffy's sixth and seventh seasons?!)

I've been trying to forget. Buffy was definitely better, but it's only in it's first season, afterall. I don't think Supernatural has ripped off BtVS, either. It's a very testosterone driven show, and Buffy was the opposite.

[Aunty Mib]

And yet, the Wendigo is still a fairly obscure creature, in my experience. Or maybe I just lead a sheltered life?

We talk about it a bit more on the Urban Legends thread.
It's a much more common legend in Canada-other than the Midwest States I don't think that it's part of folklore in the USA.

Compared to other shows: BTVS is an obvious godmother to Supernatural, monsters exist, most people aren't aware of them and a few 'chosen' people hunt them down and destroy them. Sam is having precognitive dreams a la first season Buffy. I hope it doesn't go further than this.

[Aunt Nic]

I think it's unfair to compare Supernatural to Buffy because there are so many differences. They have the sci-fi element in common, but that's it. Buffy was more of an ensemble show, while Supernatural is strictly about the two brothers. Buffy was the chosen one, and the Winchesters are choosing to do what they do. I know the Celine Demon complicates that idea, but if they really wanted, they could just go after the Celine Demon and forget everything else, or even less than that just mourn their dead and move on. It would be very human and I think forgivable to do so. Mostly, Buffy had demons with sooooooooulllls now, and other demons with humanlike traits. Supernatural gets its angst straight from the human characters, and doesn't need to draw on the "Am I evil or just misunderstood?" Angel-esque brood drama.

[Well Manicured]

Supernatural gets its angst straight from the human characters, and doesn't need to draw on the "Am I evil or just misunderstood?" Angel-esque brood drama.

I love that we finally have a show where demons are demons and humans are humans. I mean Demons with a running snarky dialog can be funny, but I like my shows scary. I agree that Supernatural and Buffy are two completely different shows.

I also keep hearing people comparing Supernatural to Full Metal Alchemist. I've tried watching this show once to see if I would like it too, but 5 minutes later I zoned out and changed it (I've never been into anime).

Edited by Well Manicured, Nov 6, 2005 @ 2:16 AM.

[Alysa]

Aunt Nic, I agree. Also, Buffy more or less created their evil critters to suit a given plot's purpose. From what little I saw, they didn't resemble their base legends very much; they were unique creations of that show -- a very Hollywood way of dealing with supernatural beings, in my opinion. Whereas in Supernatural, the ghosts and demons and monsters are much truer to their origins. Someone on the writing staff is actually doing his homework. If anything, the way Supernatural presents its critters is much more similar to how The X-Files did it.

As for the dialogue, I much prefer Supernatural's. I've never been fond of writing styles where every character is brilliantly witty and every line of dialogue is steeped in quick-paced banter. The Winchester boys certainly have a back-and-forth, but it's far more natural, and I appreciate that.

[keita]

I also keep hearing people comparing Supernatural to Full Metal Alchemist. I've tried watching this show once to see if I would like it too, but 5 minutes later I zoned out and changed it (I've never been into anime).

Wow, I definitely need to see why they can make those comparisons. Having seen this anime in its entirety and even read the manga, I can tell you there's nothing similar between Supernatural and Full Metal Alchemist. In fact, the storylines are so farly removed from one another I'm really curious how that kind of comparison could happen.

I mean, FMA didn't deal with demons--those were humanoids, and the people don't even exist in a universe that's similar to the SN universe.

[Queenrikki]

Wow, I definitely need to see why they can make those comparisons. Having seen this anime in its entirety and even read the manga, I can tell you there's nothing similar between Supernatural and Full Metal Alchemist. In fact, the storylines are so farly removed from one another I'm really curious how that kind of comparison could happen.

I think the FMA comparisons come more from the fact that it focuses on two brothers than any similarity in plot.

[keita]

I think the FMA comparisons come more from the fact that it focuses on two brothers than any similarity in plot.

That's even freakier in the sense that... one is 14 and one is 15. Their relationship and roles are different in what they face. It's like granted both have a missing father, but in FMA's case, they know the situation and finding their father isn't really high on their list.