shileyn-nea - Tumblr blog

shileyn-nea · 7 days ago

Text

The Scripted Van Scene CONFIRMS Who's Endgame (Hint: It's Byler)

In the van scene from Stranger Things S4E8 ('Papa'), Mike and Will have a totally different conversation that never made it into the show. But, thanks to @strangerwriters on X/Twitter, it wasn't lost forever. By analyzing the original script, we can see what was left on the cutting room floor—and how the changes made are even more revealing than the scene itself.

Van Scene's Page-By-Page Breakdown:

Borrowing the official script pages, this analysis uses my personal annotations to further examine hidden meaning and the original intention of the van scene's emotional painting reveal. Outlined (above) in yellow highlighter are the lines and details omitted from the end product on screen, in blue is a subdued theme owing to the changes, and underlined are symbolic images that are absent.

Table Of Contents

Page 1 - Establishing Objectives, Setting, and Filmic Codes

Page 2 - Omissions, Em Dashes, and Mike's Coming Out

Page 3 - Painting Reveal, Shame, and Baited Breath

Page 4 - Love Confession(s), Pronouns, and the Fulcrum

Conclusion

Page 1

For the most part, the first page is very similar to what made it on screen in terms of dialogue and action. Hence, no highlighter. However, it is still extremely vital for clarifying the scene's true intentions. Direct your attention to the scene heading at the top of the page.

INT. PIZZAMOBILE - SUNRISE

To start, the abbreviation "INT." signifies that the scene takes place inside the pizza van. Following the em dash in the scene heading is a time marker. While screenwriters typically default to "DAY," the specific notation of "SUNRISE" is a very intentional choice. Narratively, the characters have spent the entire night driving ("Jonathan is driving, rubbing his eyes, trying to stay awake"). Still, standard practice would be to convey this information in the action lines, as providing such specific details about the time is less flexible for a fluctuating film schedule or later scene reordering.

If you're at all familiar with photography and film, you'll know there's a "golden hour" window that makes everything look magical and flattering on camera. It's usually the first and last hour of the day. In this case, it's sunrise. Most often, filmmakers either take advantage of natural light or painstakingly try to recreate it. The latter is what this particular scene did, as the cast and crew confirmed they spent a whole day shooting it. This stands out because a three-and-a-half-page scene set in a fairly controllable environment wouldn't normally take all day.

Often, but not exclusively, romantic scenes are bathed in a golden hour light. It's the most flattering for actors because there aren't as many harsh shadows to warp or blemish faces—it's nature's natural filter. It also creates a beautiful halo to frame their hairline and make subjects pop on screen. Suffice it to say, we've all noticed the end result, as they lit Will to glow with a directional light seeping in from his side of the van. This only doubles down on the idea that the idyllic lighting was intentional from the start. As I will discuss later, this is Will's scene, so highlighting him radiantly is important for the audience—and for Mike—to gravitate toward him. He is meant to be awed as he gallantly risks baring his soul to help guide Mike toward what he sees as his full potential.

…SURFER BOY PIZZA BILLBOARD.

By showing the billboard we then have a brief teaser for the Piggyback episode, placing the Surfer Boy pizza chain in Nevada for plot convince (later on when Eleven uses it's dough-prevation tank). This first beat establishes the scene's narrative goal: setting up Mike's love confession to El as a moment that is ultimately motivated by Will at the end of this conversation.

Now, you can start to see how that love confession was indeed Will's doing rather than Mike's through this evocative motif. Both scenes are visually tied to the Surfer Boy iconography. Additionally, the window decals in the van cast prominent shadows that were not mentioned in the script but appear in the filmed outcome—the same decal that matches the logo on El's pizza box blindfold apparatus. We can see this as a hint, like the stick figure drawing on the window: the logo over her eyes embodies El noticing a shift after Will's confession. Or, it could be that Mike is unknowingly making El a reminder of Will, as staring at that logo was the only way he could tell her "I love you."

INTO THE BACK OF THE VAN

We get a sense of intimacy due to the subheading above, which even notes the back of the van as its own location within the space. In my opinion, a writer wouldn't usually do this, as a van is already a small space; it's not a different room or a switch to an exterior. By stretching the space in our minds, the writers set Mike and Will off in their own personal bubble, only to be viewed "far away" in Jonathan's rearview mirror. Here, the brothers are made to be worlds apart, which is another important narrative tie-in for the Surfer Boy location.

Where we find Mike and Will. The mood is a bit more somber back here.

Communicating that it is a somber mood also begins to build the scene's emotional transformation. A scene is like a mini-story that turns the value-charged condition of the character's life (a concept borrowed from Robert McKee's book, Story). Characters oscillate between positive and negative charges within scenes to help track their emotional journey, which can be separate from their overall scene objective. In this scene, both boys begin with a negative charge; they are somber (-).

Will: "Once we save her -- El…" …Will smiles, but Mike doesn't offer much of a smile back.

In this beat, we figure out the objective of the scene and who is driving the action (in other words, whose scene it is). Throughout this beat, Mike anxiously checks the map, showing he's being pedantic about the mission details. Yet, by bringing up El, Will makes the first positive change to cheer Mike up, an initial shift away from the somberness. He even smiles at Mike after receiving a dismissive response ("yeah… totally"). His first action to cheer Mike up is clear, and the conflict—Mike's desire to push him away and fret—is opposite to Will's desire to reconnect.

What is at stake for Will is his friendship with Mike, which has been on the fritz since the airport reunion. Throughout the season, he learned he could afford to be lovelorn as long as he had Mike by his side. He understands, or at least thought, El was what Mike valued most. Therefore, his attempt to bring her up had the expectation of reminding Mike of the good times.

The turning point is that it did not work. Mike is unresponsive to El, launching the audience into this scene with Will as we now have to follow his goal of damage control. "He's worried" that he said the wrong thing and that Mike is mad at him again, putting their friendship on the line.

With this groundwork laid out, establishing characters' and scene objectives, we get to the next page, where my first yellow highlight and underline are. Buckle in.

Page 2

This is the first segment I noticed that did not make it from page to screen:

Mike looks out the window for a beat. Just watching the passing desert…

Completely omitted, instead the actor, Finn Wolfhard, or the director, chose for Mike to stay in the moment rather than take a beat. This makes sense in terms of organic flow. Taking a beat so soon after the scene's first turning point could slow momentum. Nevertheless, it is fun to examine how this further contextualizes Mike's character and the conflict.

Perhaps this pensive moment, as he stares out the window into the desert, further isolates Mike. Mike isolating himself also distances Will from his goal to connect. It suggests a very specific shot change to his perspective, shifting toward the outside of the van—his own micro world away from Will. From the way the scene plays out in the show, we never truly get a sense of his reaction to the painting or what he thinks about El supposedly doing it. In interviews, the Duffer brothers promised this would play into season five's plot, and they didn't want to foreshadow too heavily. Therefore, not placing us in his perspective with this beat creates an air of mystery.

Yet, consider if they had allowed Mike to stare out into the desolate, barren image of a desert when reminded about El. As these two ideas—El and desolation—interact, we could derive a new meaning: that he is hopeless, and all the romantic love he had for El is now, or forever was, dried up. Or vice versa, he is reminded that El no longer loves him (a recall of the "from El" note she left him). If this happened, there would no longer be any tension or further questioning of if they still loved each other. Will's goal would feel more easily won in the scene, and Mike's climactic love confession would no longer hold any emotional weight for anyone in the love triangle (as we would've known it was doomed to fail).

It should also be noted that his next line is performed as if it's a question, posing the dramatic question for the next episode, "Does El still need Mike?" In the script, it is curiously punctuated with a period and reads as a statement, as if he's telling Will that she doesn't.

In response to Will saying she does need him, Mike goes:

Mike:"…But the truth is -- I don't believe it. Not really."

I found this little discrepancy noteworthy, mostly due to the punctuation of the two em dashes, which is a cue for the actor to cut himself off. Perhaps this was a conscious decision to conceal the truth of what he was about to say, halting whatever thought was in Mike's head. It could very well be that the line is also meant to sound frantic, a stream of consciousness spewing forth, as it very much does in the final cut.

Maybe what surrounds "I don't believe it" is redundant, therefore cut; however, it's interesting that "truth" was ultimately cut for "believe." So, again, it remains uncertain if Mike's concern is just in his head (and in Will's head, too), rather than definitively real for him. This line, especially, "not really," could also read more as if Mike is already emotionally detached or disinterested in El (e.g. "do you want to play ball?" "not really"). Also within this beat, Will is trying convince Mike he's needed. In what is written, the elaboration is almost like Mike is trying to persuade Will he's got the wrong idea.

Focusing on El as much as Will does, Mike uses her as a crutch in his following argument (below). Conversely what's on screen, he appears self-deprecating, he means to only belittle himself, and shifts the focus on him. Instead of already concluding, he still ponders.

Mike: "…She's going to realize that deep down I'm -- I'm… She's already beginning to understand she doesn't need me. I saw it -- I saw it in her eyes, that last time we talked."

I outlined this omission to again harp on the usage and meaning of the em dash. Here, Mike stops himself from revealing the truth of who he is "deep down," and instead uses a Superman and Lois Lane analogy to describe his relationship with El. This seems to be the case of the former, where his primary motivation for stopping himself is to conceal (based on syntax). It's as if he was getting dangerously close to a truth that must not be spoken.

This succession of ideas, from having to conceal who he is to comparing El to a muscular male superhero, naturally concludes that deep down he is closeted. Previously, he wasn't afraid to admit to Lucas at school or to El during their fight that he was a bullied nerd. Consequently, being a nerd wouldn't be a deep-rooted fear he'd be terrified of her realizing.

When the gender-neutral term "superhero" or the feminine version "Supergirl" was right there, the writers purposely chose for Mike to grasp for the masculine version. Although the scene is preoccupied with Will's pseudo coming-out storyline, this draft actually has Mike be the one to (unknowingly) blurt out that he's a closeted homosexual in an even less subtle way than the gift of a heart-themed painting.

Again, while the final scene leaves the question of whether or not El still likes Mike unanswered, this version definitely closes that case when he says, with definitive proof, he "saw" she doesn't need him.

Will: "You're scared of losing her." Mike nods. Yeah. Will just nailed it.

After the missing "realize that deep down" line re-contextualized this scene for me, this next turning point, where Will tests Mike by disclosing his fear—the one he decided not to say—adds new meaning to the word "scared." His reasons for being scared have to do with themes of shame and sexual repression, where the former subject is far less obvious in the screen translation.

Will understands perfectly because he is scared of Mike pushing him away if he finds out Will is gay and in love with him. Perhaps, Mike is afraid of losing El if she determines his similar secret. The threat of exposure and being ostracized looms large. The fact that Will, a confirmed gay character, clocked Mike, recognized their similar strife, directly compares their sexualities (as if who's holding the painting doesn't already do that).

Mike nods and opens the door an inch to invite Will to present his painting—his veiled love confession (set up by El's opening monologue). Will hesitates as this was a surprise, but now he doubles down after they suddenly understand each other. Screw it. His goal towards reconnection is restated. He passes off the painting as if it's a baton—will Mike reciprocate?

Page 3

[Mike's] breath catches.

Despite this suggesting a positive reaction where for the first time Mike shifts from somber to thrilled, I also highlighted it in blue. This is slightly different than what occurred in this specific moment, where instead Mike beamed and chuckled in response. Still romantic, but not this clear-cut romantic trope.

Here, his baited breath could mean relief—he was afraid of what the painting might hold and relieved that it is, in fact, Mike's. The dread of shame, a mixture of homophobia and rejection, made this moment a risk for Will. And, for Mike, who might've assumed the painting was for someone else, a gift "for a girl."

In the painting, they are heroes (a paladin and a cleric) bravely facing evil, lovers (symbolized in the heart coat of arms), and they can be themselves, their nerdy D&D characters. The themes of this painting closely following Bowie's Heroes lyrics, about overcoming oppression and "shame."

Mike says, "you painted this," to Will, addressing and praising him. This is an unexpected twist for someone who thought he was an invisible third wheel. Mike says "you," but Will's point wasn't about receiving acknowledgment; he's been in the supportive role up until this point. So he flushes in a state of panic (using three em dashes), then immediately hides due to the ingrained sense of guilt and humiliation the closet gives him.

Supporting this interpretation is the next stricken line:

Will: "…It's really scary to be different."

The Stranger Things writers use the root word "scared" and "scary" to describe both Mike and Will on several accounts throughout the season, more so within this scene pre-changes. Now, "scary" and "different" in the same sentence further converges Mike's scary thought of losing El with being different. And we know, that when Will is talking about being different, he is referring to himself and how he is gay. Clearly outlined in this word arrangement, being scared directly relates to the idea of repressed homosexuality.

Just to drive home the idea that Will is in fact talking about himself, and not El, using her to shield his true feelings and desires, the focus shifts to Jonathan's outsider perspective who mirrors the audience.

Jonathan now begins to sense that Will is not just talking about El -- but also himself.

As Will is using El to make a veiled confession in this scene, one starts to wonder if the writers intended on Mike also doing the same thing with his true feelings.

The word "scared" is repeated twice again, but this time it makes it into the final cut. After Jonathan's reaction shot and the change in camera placement, outside the window looking in—that swapped Mike's omitted pensive window beat and gave it to Will—audiences mentally derive that Will also means himself.

By borrowing from Mike's deleted beat, we also know Will is watching the passing desert—the barren landscape expounding his hopeless state of mind. As soon as he got flustered, he immediately retreated behind El. The fear of losing his friend and the ultimate goal of maintaining that friendship is realized when Mike unexpectedly reciprocates, at least in admiration ("This is -- amazing").

Page 4

Once one replaces the feminine pronouns she/her with the first person singular I/me, to better understand Will and the writer's meaning, it becomes clear that El is a defense for Mike as well.

Will: "…it's probably because [I] was scared of losing you. Just as you're scared of losing [me]… because losing you -- it just hurts -- it hurts too much."

Missing is the last line that reads more direct than what was previously said before. It pinpoints Will's exact emotion in this moment, "hurt". Despite the absence of this dialogue the meaning still remains, conveyed much more organically and effectively as actor Noah Schnapp instead is on the brink of tears. Still, the way Will breaks then starts, "Because losing you," makes his feelings for Mike much more explicit with the feminine pronoun now missing in the new sentence.

Will takes a "beat" while almost through with his monologue, as if gaining either composure or confidence, "emotional" and slipping in and out of the feminine pronoun.

This is where the scene shifts again, Will indirectly tells Mike he's in love with him. The writers use "need" as a substitute for love, just like El is a substitute for Will, so to not put a fine point on it ("[I love] you Mike. And [I] always will").

In response, Mike is mutually "emotional". He is overwhelmed, attempting to process everything Will just said, but if he didn't feel the same way, his emotional charge would be negative. Their relationship has now been changed by this confession. Sadly, Will loses his grip on their friendship—after doing this, he can no longer think of Mike as his friend, only as something more. For Mike, he potentially just realized he's in love.

These missing lines extend the fulcrum, or final plot point of the scene:

Mike: "You really think so?" Will: "I know so."

Replacing Will and Mike's use of first-person singular pronouns is "Yeah? Yeah," in the similar vein to, "Cool. Cool." Using the same words suggests a similar wave length. And, the moment and meaning isn't totally missing due to the actors being able to say these lines without really saying them. Still, the end result would have a totally different outcome.

If Mike had said "you," it would bring into question if he perhaps saw through Will's charade. By directly addressing him, it is as if Mike desires Will's answer to the dramatic question, not El's. In other words, Mike would be asking if Will needed him (letting it slip he has Will on his brain). And when Will would answer "I know so," confirming this, it would cement that it was a charade the entire time as he lets slip the feminine pronoun for his final point. An intimate ending like this between Will and Mike, crossing the boundaries of pretense, would most definitely confuse the motivation going into the Piggyback sequence, especially if Mike knew how Will felt.

Mike ends on a high note, "feeling better." Meanwhile, Will leaves on a much more emotional low point than somber—"melancholy" (-). Now he is the one to look out of the window, as the scenes ends with distant stares into a freeway endlessly stretching ahead. The emotional image of a desolate, arid land emblematic of isolation and shame returns.

He's just made his confession in someone else's name, and that image of an endless freeway signifies forever, no end in sight to thinking he'll ever be able to say how he truly feels. In the actual scene, Will cries into his palm suppressing his tears and his feelings.

Conclusion

By meticulously examining the original script, we can trace how the description as well as subtle and significant changes to dialogue informs one of the series' most powerful emotional moments. From the deliberate use of golden light to bathe Will in a romantic glow, to the omission of Mike's pensive moment looking at the desert, every change reframed the scene's emotional stakes.

These script-to-screen adjustments also transformed Mike's character, where we shift further away from his perspective and an easier read on his sexuality into ambiguity to keep dramatic tension. Ultimately, what is left on the page reveals a more overt vignette of two boys navigating shame and repressed feelings. And it is ultra clear that even if Will didn't see it, his confession left a positive change (+) in Mike by the end.

#byler #byler endgame #byler nation #byler tumblr #byler analysis #byler proof #byler brainrot #byler canon #byler is canon #byler stranger things #byler is endgame #stranger things #st4 #stranger things season 4

628 notes · View notes

shileyn-nea · 24 days ago

Text

Byler is Narrative Destiny:

Decoding Mike and Will’s (rather obvious) love story

Alternative title: Subtext My Ass

Just an unapologetically nerdy breakdown of Mike and Will through colour psychology, symbolism, and Jungian Archetypes to eviscerate any remaining Byler doubt that may be out there. Mike and Will have been (quite literally) written for each other. Let me prove it.

The psychological significance of red, yellow and blue:

Let's start with the basics.

Mike's representative colour is blue, and Will's colour is yellow.

Blue is the colour of Mike's bedroom and most of the clothing he wears features various shades of blue, as well as green and teal (which are secondary and tertiary colours from blue).

And, although I wouldn't die on this hill, I do think Mike's palette could function as subtle queer-coding as it resembles the gay flag.

Yellow is the colour of Will's bedrooms in both Hawkins and Lenora. He often wears yellow and pairs it with red.

(Interestingly, the only season where Will does not wear these colours as often is season 2, when he is possessed by the Mind Flayer).

And of course, potential queer-coding with red and yellow both being 2 of 3 primary colours featured on the generic rainbow pride flag. Will's wardrobe in general is very colourful.

Unlike Mike's palette which features secondary and tertiary colours, Will's red and yellow are both primary colours. They are very distinct and especially striking when paired together.

Therefore, red should be given equal focus to yellow when we analyze Will's character design and the associated psychology of his character.

I argue that red is Will's other representative colour, because he is psychologically split.

Will having two distinct representative colours makes a lot of sense when we remember that he is constantly associated with split imagery.

This split imagery is usually portrayed using rods or other phallic-shaped objects.

The show is telling us visually that there are two sides to Will Byers, and because the imagery is phallic, it likely has something to do with his sexuality.

When I see rods, I'm reminded of the Suit of Wands in Tarot.

Tarot uses symbolism, semiotics and numerology to communicate meaning. The wands in tarot are rod-like and traditionally depicted as sticks or branches. They are phallic symbols; representing passion, lust, and vitality, as well as the element of fire.

These are all things we subconsiously associate with the colour red, too!

So, let's take a closer look at colour psychology, starting with red!

Red exudes passion: love, energy, excitement.

It makes sense.

Red is the colour Will used for Mike's heart emblem painted on his shield. (Accompanied by a yellow crown).

Red represents Will's passionate love for Mike.

Not innocent or platonic love, but a mature, sexual and romantic love. The kind a closeted gay teen in the 80s might be terrified of.

What's more interesting is that even though red and yellow are Will’s colors, he projects them onto Mike in this paiting. Likewise, blue is Mike's colour, but Will assigns it to himself through the spell he's casting. Figuratively, casting a spell refers to strongly attracting, enchanting or captivating someone.

The meaning here is twofold:

Mike is attracted to Will, and feels that he is a forbidden temptation or even a seducer (more on that later).

Will knows (or rather, feels) that the attraction is mutual on a subconscious level, even though he may logically believe this not to be true.

The imagery in Will's painting reminds me of the official artwork in which Will is casting a blue lightening bolt spell, which connects to Mike's shield featuring the red heart.

Red and blue are also the only colours depicted in this image. They are clearly significant when paired together. (Perhaps more significant than yellow and blue...)

Red also represents Will's latent manhood (and subverted masculinity).

We associate red with fire, and by extention, with gun-powder.

Will the Wise is a wizard, and wizards cast fireballs—but he hesitates to cast it. Will also literally wields a gun—but he never pulls the trigger.

(At least, he doesn't fire it in the canon of the show. Like the fireball however, Will may have eventually pulled the trigger, as depicted in the comics). When Will does shoot the gun in the comics, he does so while closing his eyes and looking away, meaning that it is unlike him or "feels wrong."

In a symbolic sense, the fireballs and gun (which is phallic) represent masculinity, aggression, and agency.

Will is hesitant to embrace them all.

And the thing is, Will's gentle and slightly more effeminate nature (at least by 80s standards) is a perfectly valid expression. There is a distinction between masculinty and manhood: Manhood is simply the sexual and psychological maturity of an adult man, as compared to that of a child (boyhood). Like how red represents Will's mature love for Mike, it could also be foreshadowing of his coming-of-age. There's no need for him to "toughen up" or act "manly" in order for him to step into his manhood. Rather, he will likely do so by reclaiming his agency.

Will is going to symbolically embrace his manhood by:

Accepting his sexuality and coming out (at least to people he trusts, because it's not everyone's business).

His emancipation from the influences of the Mind Flayer, Vecna and Lonnie (malevolent forces which represent shame, trauma and domination).

Now, let's move on to Will's (apparently) more dominant representative colour.

Yellow exudes innocence: creativity, happiness, optimism.

Will is often percieved as innocent and more child-like than the other party members, despite his advanced emotional maturity.

He wears a lot of yellow (and plaid) to represent this innocence and youthfulness.

Yellow represents Will's innocence.

According to the casting director, Will was casted to appear young and innocent, and also for his large, expressive eyes. Wide eyes (or doe eyes) are associated with innocence, children and prey animals. Will also visually resembles prey animals such as rabbits and deer.

Before he is abducted, Will appears as a metaphorical deer caught in headlights.

(The light is on him when it should be on the demogorgon. He is the prey here).

Yellow also represents Will's artistic sensibilities.

Even though some of the images depict violence, Will's drawings still exude childhood innocence and wonder: they are colouful, whimsical and fantastical.

They also represent optimism and friendship, which is very yellow-like. His drawings appear to be inspired by the antics of the party's campaigns, depicting triumph rather than tragedy.

(Mind Flayer and Zombie Boy drawings aside).

Yellow is associated with Will's halo imagery (and other religious symbolism).

When we see Will from Mike’s perspective, he is bathed in yellow light.

It’s halo imagery—and it provides a stark contrast to the split phallic imagery we get from Will's own perspecitve.

(It's worth asking, since this is Will from Mike's perspective, does it really say much about Will's psyche? Or does it point more towards Mike's own psyche?)

Light signifies optimism, hope and clarity.

A halo specifically sybmolises holiness, purity and martyrdom.

This relates strongly to Will's role as cleric (a class who use divine magic gifted by deities, which is often depicted as golden or yellow). The thing is, Will the Wise is actually a wizard. It was Mike who determined Will was a cleric in season 2. Mike seemingly placed Will into this role, because it fits how he views him.

Additionally, Will's role as spy for Vecna and his "True Sight" can be associated to yellow.

When we see a single eye, it usually signifies the all-seeing eye, also called the Eye of Providence.

The Eye of Providence is typically depicted emanating golden yellow rays of light. It's more religious symbolism connected to Will.

But this is not a positive thing for Will—it's connected to his abduction, possession and subjugation.

Mike's halo-ifying of Will tells us that he views Will as something angelic: pure, divine and holy. But Will does not percieve himself this way at all. Will is less concerned with the religious symbolism and more concerned with the phallic. To put it bluntly, Will is not as innocent as he appears, and is thinking more about his sexuality and desire than people realize.

Finally, yellow is associated with Will's metaphorical death.

Will's funeral is littered with yellow roses, and through the liturgical prayer (more religious coding) he is again directly tied to innocence.

We now have an association between yellow, innocence, and death.

Let me decode this very simply:

Child = innocence Death = loss A child's death = the symbolic loss of innocence. So even though Will lives, he lost his childhood innocence when he metaphorically died.

I hope that I've been able to get the point across that although yellow fits many aspects of Will's personality, it also seems tied to his repression and stasis.

Psychologically and narratively, yellow does not indicate growth for Will's character, in the way that red does.

Now, let's move onto one of the most tragically misunderstood characters in the series and his representative colour.

Blue exudes sincerity: loyalty, stability and trust.

This is the absolute epitome of Mike.

Mike is incredibly loyal, often even to his own detriment. Everytime Mike does a wrong, he always strives to make a right. In fact, he's prone to taking ownership of things that aren't his actual fault or responsibility. He's also deeply compassionate and determined to do everything he can to help others.

Blue represents Mike's leadership capabilities.

In marketing, brands will often choose the colour blue to subliminally communicate that they are dependable, trustworthy, and leaders of industry.

Mike is also a natural leader: he has played as both Dungeon Master and paladin, he initiated the efforts to find Will among his friends, and he took El under his wing. And this is just in season 1 alone.

He continues to protect and guide his friends through-out the series, using his sharp wit and intelligence (over brute strength) to problem-solve.

Mike's leadership is not based in ego, it's a genuine psychological need. It's where he fits into the world: helping, protecting and guiding others. It's natural for him.

Once again I look to the Tarot, and this time the Suit of Cups.

This suit represents the element of water, representing the inner world, emotions and spirituality. The cups themselves are symbols of fulfillment: is the cup empty or full?

I think we should ask the same question when we look at Mike. Is he empty or full? What is it that he actually wants? Are his needs being met?

The colour blue is associated to water, symbolising the unconscious, emotion and hidden depths.

Blue represents Mike's hidden depths (and his unmet fulfillment).

Mike is associated with water, too. In a very literal sense. He jumped into the quarry to save his friend, likely knowing it would kill him.

(And note that his jacket matches the blue-green colour of the quarry water).

Why did he do this? Was it truly just to save Dustin, or is there more here hidden beneath the surface? Much like Will's experience in the Upside Down, Mike's jumping into the quarry is never explicitly addressed. He never talks about it, and it's never explained.

This implies repression, both emotional and psychological. There is a hidden pain and depth to Mike, that is beneath the surface. He's like still water.

In both Jungian and Freudian psychology, water is associated with the unconscious. And in Stranger Things, water facilitates the transition from unconscious to conscious.

When El has to recover her repressed memories of Hawkins Laboratory, she does so while floating in water. In fact, she uses water to infiltrate other people's consciousness, too: entering their private memories. When Heather begs El for help (though she was already possessed by the Mind Flayer) she is also submerged in water. This was a message from her subconscious, which was repressed by the Mind Flayer.

Mike never becomes submerged into the water, however. In the literal sense this is a relief. But metaphorically, it's a problem. Like Will's metaphorical death at the quarry, Mike is also in a state of stasis.

Mike needs to transition his unconscious to the conscious in order to be emotionally and psychologically fulfilled.

There is no wonder why people often find Mike's character to be confusing or amorphous: he has been intentionally written to be this way.

We as the audience are supposed to experience his struggle with identity, purpose and fulfillment along with him. We're meant to feel his confusion. The story of Stranger Things is (largely) told from Mike's perspective—he's a writer and storyteller after all—and he's hiding the things about himself he does not yet want us to know, because he still needs to deal with them himself.

Okay, I hope you're still with me, because we're getting to the crux of it now.

The Jungian Archetypes:

Now that we've explored how Mike and Will's representative colours (and associated symbolism) reflect their inner worlds and personalities, we have enough information to identify their most prominent Jungian Archetypes (including their shadows).

Jungian Archetypes are often referred to as Character Archetypes or Literary Archetypes. Sometimes, this is why an ending feels “right” or inevitable. When we understand the characters, we already know on a gut level what kind of ending they will get. In way, it's a form of predictive modelling for storytelling.

Will as the Lover archetype:

If red represents Will's passion, love, and lust, then that makes him the Lover.

The Lover archetype is passionate, romantic, and driven by a desire for deep connection. Alongside the Everyman, the Lover belongs to a trio of archetypes that seek belonging above all else. Specifically, the Lover seeks both emotional and physical intimacy.

They are empathetic and sensual, and I think this relates to Will's deep appreciation for music and art. He's also very in-tune with his own (and other's) emotions, especially Mike's.

(This is the deep, sensuous gaze of the Lover. There's nothing "innocent" about it. He is drinking Mike in, and he's not shy about it).

Again, I reiterate that Will is not as innocent as he appears. When we are placed in his perspective, it's love and intimacy that he most craves. It's phallic imagery that we see. He's no longer a doe-eyed child; he's a young man with emotional needs.

It's worth noting that based off his characterization (sensitive, romantic, selfless and handsome), Will would probably be portrayed as a romantic leading man if he were straight. The one who "gets the girl."

He's Colonel Brandon (Sense and Sensibility). He's Jack Dawson (Titanic).

The Lover's Shadow

The Lover's Shadow-self may be referred to as the Addict or the Seducer.

The Addict or Seducer is hedonistic: They prioritize external validation over genuine connection, and crave temporary gratification. Will is not portrayed as hedonistic, meaning he is sitting quite firmly in the light aspect of his archetype rather than the shadow.

It suits him. It's his endgame.

However, the Seducer certainly invokes the imagery of Will being a spell-caster: one who can enchant others, even against their will.

Perhaps this is Mike's subconscious perspective: Mike feels that Will is tempting him and seducing him into queerness. Was Will Mike's sexual/ gay awakening? It's very possible.

Alternatively, this could represent Will's own subconscious fear regarding his sexuality, considering the attitudes towards gay men at the time: Will fears that he will become a sexual deviant, that his love is impure, and will lead Mike down a path of sin.

Very compelling stuff. Let's take a look at Will's other Jungian Archetype.

Will as the Innocent archetype:

The Innocent is pure, optimistic and hopeful. What they seek most is harmony and safety, and they choose to see the goodness in others.

They represent the desire to return to childhood. It makes sense that a character who had his childhood stolen from him due to trauma, and who has sexual identity issues, would project as the Innocent archetype. However, I think the Light aspect of the Innocent archetype fits better with younger Will (seasons 1-2), than with teenaged Will.

This is why I think Will uses the Innocent as his Persona (projection).

The Innocent's Shadow

The Innocent's Shadow-self is the Victim.

They are naive, vulnerable and easily-manipulated. The Victim embodies the feelings of powerlessness and helplessness.

It's certainly reminiscent of Will's continual misfortune.

From his father's abuse, his abduction and possession, to his "unrequited" love for Mike, Will has been perpetually victimized through-out Stranger Things.

As far as the Innocent goes, Will is sitting more firmly in it's shadow than in it's light.

But Will is not naive, and he's too "wise" to be easily-manipulated. I think Will has partially out-grown his innocent image, or rather, the version of innocence he is attached to (sexless, childish and victimized). Will is going evolve into a more mature (and self-possessed) version of the Innocent: optimistic, wise, and hopeful. He'll achieve this by leaning more into his Lover archetype, which will facilitate his coming-of-age.

Mike as the Everyman archetype:

The Everyman is the protagonist. They are relatable and down-to-earth. They don’t display any outward powers or extraordinary gifts, but they are humble, compassionate, and kind.

Alongside the Lover, they seek belonging above all else. For the Everyman specifically, this belonging centres around community (friendship).

Mike is certainly the Everyman.

There is nothing more important to him than his friends.

His role as the Everyman also makes sense when we remember he's the primary narrator of the story. He's the ordinary boy who is thrust into extraordinary circumstances.

He's constantly in awe of those around him: El's superpowers, Will's light and "innocence." The Everyman often mistakenly believes they are unimportant. They are too normal, while the other characters around them appear so much more distinct and larger than life.

Because the Everyman is usually so caught up in trying to figure everybody else out, they tend to neglect their own sense of self.

But the Everyman is an extremely important character: they ground the story in reality, bring people together and find common ground.

The Everyman is the heart of the story.

The Everyman's Shadow

The Everyman's shadow is the Conformist or the Nobody.

Oh, yeah. We're going there Wheeler.

The Conformist possesses a fear of standing out or taking risks, and assumes socially acceptable identities because they're afraid to dissapoint or subvert expectations. In simple terms, they are repressed.

(Would anyone like a serving of compulsary heterosexuality? Mike's teeming with it).

Speaking of Mike's repressed perspective and subconscious state: Remember his simultaneous halo-ifying of Will and characterization of him as a seducer?

That's deeply psychological too.

This is what his halo-ifying of Will reveals about his pscyhe:

Mike's tendency to place others above himself

Mike's repressed sexuality: viewing Will as something both untouchable and unattainable.

He has decided to view Will as fully Innocent (to the most spiritual degree) as a means of rationalizing his sexual repression. You can't get with the guy who wears a literal halo! That would be… sacrilegious! The religious symbolism surrounding Will may actually stem from Mike's unreliable narration and conflicted feelings about queerness.

This is what Mike's view of Will as a spell-caster/ seducer reveals:

Mike feels that he’s been enchanted or bewitched by him.

He frames his desire as something external to himself. Something being done to him, because acknowledging that it originates within would mean facing his own queerness.

Mike is in his Conformist mode, and he's going to break out of it by the end of season 5.

That's not all though, there's also the Nobody.

The Nobody feels invisible and insignificant. They often lack ambition, and have feelings of inadequacy and low self-esteem.

This also sounds familiar.

And yeah, the fact that when Mike is in his shadow he chooses to confide in Will, and Will is the one who helps him step into his light should not be lost on us.

Will sees Mike's worth as the Everyman: the heart of the story.

He is the Everyman's Lover.

There's more to Mike, though. Like Will, he embodies a secondary archetype.

Mike as the Caregiver archetype:

The Caregiver is characterized by compassion, generosity, and a deep-seated desire to help others. Driven by a need to nurture and protect, they often prioritize the needs of others above their own.

They are motivated by structure and order; wanting to maintain the status quo, safety and familiarity.

Mike shows up as the Caregiver frequently. He is always protecting, comforting and safeguarding others, particularly those he sees as most vulnerable or in need of his service: Will and El.

While the Everyman pairs nicely with Mike's role as the narrator and protagonist, the Caregiver pairs with his role as leader. He's not a ruler; authorative, noble and intimidating. That's not his style of leadership. Instead, he's something softer. He leads by example: protecting, healing and serving.

The Caregiver's Shadow

The Caregiver's shadow may be called the Slave or the Enabler.

This emerges when when caregiving becomes self-sacrificing to an unhealthy degree, or when it's rooted in control, guilt, or dependency.

It's the incessant need to be needed, to any end.

Mike needlessly makes a promise to El that he will fix a problem he has no control over, and he breaks that promise because El fixed it herself.

Why does he do this?

Because he feels that it has to be his responsibility, even though he understands that El does not "need" him. This fills him with feelings of guilt and inadequacy, and validates his insecurities. It's very different to Mike's emotional support and compassion which he shows El in the earlier seasons. When Mike and El are dating, his Caregiver self is placed in the shadow: making him insecure, needy, and guilt-ridden.

Now, we approach the climax: Byler's compatibility.

Compatability:

Mike and Will are narratively (and psychologically) compatible, according to their individual character arcs and archetypes.

The Lover and the Everyman

The Lover enchants the Everyman: making them feel special, and convincing them to embrace their emotional and romantic needs, which inspires them to be active and bold instead of hesitant or repressed. The Everyman grounds the Lover: providing them clarity, stability, and a love which is based in sincerity and deep understanding, rather than physical or sexual validation.

Will enchants Mike by making him feel special and worthy of love, and Mike literally brings Will back to reality through his sincerity.

The Innocent and the Caregiver

Is this one not obvious?

The Innocent inspires the Caregiver: reminding them that there is good in the world worth protecting, making their servitude meaningful, rather than sacrificial. (Hello lotr reference! Mike and Will are extremely Samwise and Frodo coded). The Caregiver protects the Innocent: validating their optimism and sharing in their desire for safety, never making them feel stupid or burdensome.

Mike is inspired into action by Will's goodness, and Will confides in Mike as he trusts him to understand and validate him.

Finally, we've reached the conclusion!

The (predictive) endgames:

If characters have archetypical personalities and motivations, then they also have archetypical narratives. That is to say, we can predict the end of their story so long as we just pay attention.

Let me make something clear:

You don't depict someone as the Lover, and have them pine, without giving them their satisfying love story.

You don't depcit someone as the Innocent, and have them continually suffer, without giving them their peaceful ending.

You don't depict someone as the Everyman, who conforms and retreats into shadows, without having them surprise and subvert audience expectations.

You don't depict someone as the Caregiver, who sacrifices and gives, without having their efforts be appreciated and acknowledged.

Some stories do have sad endings, and our protagonists don't always get what they want, or end the story fulfilled. But allow me to remind you:

Stranger Things is a hopeful story about unlikely heroes (outcasts, rejects and non-conformists) beating the odds.

The characters don't just fight literal monsters, they fight metaphorical monsters that represent bullies, abusers and bigots.

The ending of the show may be bittersweet, but Will and Mike are sympathetic characters with good hearts, who deserve their happy endings.

My prediction is simple:

Will the Lover is destined for romantic union with his beloved, Mike. Mike the Everyman is on a path to embracing his true, authentic self. Will the Innocent will finally find safety, and freedom from represison and abuse. Mike the Caregiver will lead and protect with his greatest asset: his heart.

Mike is not just the narrator of this story, he's the heart of it.

And Will just so happens to be his heart.

It all comes down to them, and the show already foreshadowed it: