There’s a particular kind of pressure that comes with ending something beloved, and Finn Wolfhard’s recent comments about the Stranger Things finale reveal just how deeply the ghost of Game of Thrones haunts modern television. When you’ve spent years building a world that millions have come to call home, the final bow becomes more than just another episode—it becomes a legacy-defining moment that can either cement your place in pop culture history or become the asterisk that follows your name forever. The anxiety Wolfhard describes isn’t just about delivering a satisfying conclusion; it’s about avoiding becoming the next cautionary tale in an industry that loves to dissect failures almost as much as it celebrates successes.
What’s fascinating about this phenomenon is how it reflects our changing relationship with television itself. In the streaming era, shows aren’t just weekly appointments—they’re immersive experiences that fans live with for years, forming deep emotional connections to characters and worlds. The final season becomes less about wrapping up plot threads and more about providing closure for relationships that have become part of people’s lives. When Game of Thrones stumbled, it wasn’t just a narrative failure—it felt like a personal betrayal to viewers who had invested nearly a decade in these characters’ journeys. That’s the shadow Wolfhard and his castmates are working under, and it’s a burden no creative team should have to bear alone.
The comparison between Stranger Things and Game of Thrones is particularly telling because both shows represent different eras of television dominance. Game of Thrones was the last great watercooler show of the traditional TV model, while Stranger Things embodies the streaming revolution that followed. Yet both face the same fundamental challenge: how to satisfy an audience that has built up expectations over years of speculation and fan theories. The internet has turned television viewing into a collective experience where every plot twist is analyzed, every character arc debated, and every potential ending predicted months—sometimes years—in advance. By the time the finale airs, the showrunners aren’t just competing with their own earlier seasons; they’re competing with thousands of idealized versions fans have created in their heads.
What gives me hope for Stranger Things is Wolfhard’s mention of the scripts. There’s something telling about that moment when actors first encounter the material that will define their characters’ ultimate fates. That initial read-through becomes a barometer for whether the creative team has stuck the landing. When the cast emerges confident, as Wolfhard suggests they have, it often signals that the writers have remained true to the show’s core identity rather than chasing trends or trying to subvert expectations for the sake of it. The best finales aren’t necessarily the most surprising ones—they’re the ones that feel inevitable in retrospect, that make you say “of course” rather than “what?”
Ultimately, the pressure Wolfhard describes speaks to a larger truth about art in the age of instant feedback: we’ve become so focused on how things end that we risk forgetting to appreciate the journey. The legacy of a great show shouldn’t rest entirely on its final moments any more than a great novel should be judged solely by its last chapter. While I understand the anxiety about sticking the landing, I hope we can remember that what made us fall in love with these stories in the first place was the magic of discovery, the joy of character development, and the sheer pleasure of being transported to another world. Whether Stranger Things delivers a perfect finale or not, the show has already given us countless moments of wonder—and that’s a legacy no single episode can erase.
About the Author
