MovieChat Forums > The Goldbergs (2013) Discussion > Blatant ripoff of "The Wonder Years"

Blatant ripoff of "The Wonder Years"

posted 5 years ago by MaximRecoil (4598)
23 replies | jump to latest

In both shows, which are set a ~couple decades in the past, there are three kids: a girl and two boys, with the girl being the oldest and the youngest boy being the main character, with voice-over narration by the adult version of him.

When I was a kid in the '80s I thought it would be cool if, ~20 years in the future, they made a show like The Wonder Years, with it being set in the 1980s instead of the 1960s. I still think it would be cool, despite being a ripoff, if it were done right.

None of the characters in this show are anywhere near as good as their Wonder Years counterparts. Also, it doesn't even remind me of the 1980s, mainly because it uses a modern style of "comedy" writing and acting, and the occasional use of stereotypical 1980s lingo (such as "rad") makes things even worse, because not only is it at odds with the 21st century look and feel of the show, but people didn't really talk like that in the '80s in the first place, except in certain TV shows and movies.

Obviously I wasn't around in the 1960s, so I don't know what it was really like, but I do know that it didn't have a then-current 1980s look and feel to it. The setting felt like a different era. You need more than old props and poor stabs at past fashions, hairstyles, and lingo to capture the look and feel of a past era.

[–] Faridah (1363) 5 years ago

The Wonder Years are more of a drama at least that is how I remember it. The show dealt with a lot of series issues too such as talking about sex and alcohol, war & so on. The first episode is about the death of Winnie's brother in Vietnam. That is hardly a comedy topic.

[–] MaximRecoil (4598) 5 years ago

The Wonder Years was a half-hour sitcom, just as The Goldbergs is. Tons of sitcoms have had "very special episodes" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_special_episode), but sitcoms are still primarily comedy (albeit, usually a poor stab at comedy), and The Wonder Years is no exception. "Very special episodes" were especially common in 1980s sitcoms.

[–] TMC-4 (20123) 5 years ago

The Wonder Years was actually more of a "dramedy" then a straight forward, broad sitcom like The Goldbergs.

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1600&bih=757&sxsrf=ACYBGNQZlKeqfwV5gl6ZkF8VgLDIS_2iUA%3A1579921443489&ei=I7ArXqCvHdS4tQbj3oPIDA&q=the+wonder+years+dramedy&oq=the+wonder+years+dramedy&gs_l=psy-ab.3..35i39.109692.109949..110609...0.2..0.149.280.0j2......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i71j35i304i39.Uzhf-ItoGuE&ved=0ahUKEwjgzKWD4p3nAhVUXM0KHWPvAMkQ4dUDCAs&uact=5

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MaximRecoil (4598) 5 years ago

[The Wonder Years] was conceived by writers Neal Marlens and Carol Black.

Marlens had originally wanted the setting to be his native Huntington, Long Island, where he grew up. Elements were also taken from Black's childhood from the White Oak section of Silver Spring, Maryland.[16] ABC, however, insisted that the location remain nonspecific (the colloquial "Anytown, USA").

Black recalled that "we naturally [took] elements of our experience and [threw] them into the pot. The basic setup, the neighborhood, the era – that's the time and place where we grew up."

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MaximRecoil (4598) 5 years ago

Interpretation of "tone" is subjective, therefore your "tone" argument is a matter of opinion, and as such, consider it dismissed.

These are objective facts:

In both shows (which are both sitcoms), which are set a ~couple decades in the past, there are three kids: a girl and two boys, with the girl being the oldest and the youngest boy being the main character, with voice-over narration by the adult version of him.

It's clearly a ripoff of The Wonder Years.

Not to mention your post is more irrelevant with the spin-off show Schooled.

Ironically, this statement of yours is utterly irrelevant, given that the show "Schooled" has nothing at all to do with anything I've posted in this thread. Given that, it's impossible for it to have any effect on the relevance of my post. All of my posts are perfectly relevant, obviously, since they address the contents of the posts I'm replying to, or in the case of the original post, it's about The Goldbergs on a message board for discussing The Goldbergs.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MaximRecoil (4598) 5 years ago

"Well you seem to believe both shows have the same tone by calling it a blatant rip-off."

I didn't say anything about "tone," you did. As for "tone," they are both sitcoms; that's enough.

"I guess that's ok if you see it that way, but the majority would disagree with you."

It's not open to a vote; it's clearly a ripoff.

"You've contradicted yourself"

No, I haven't.

"by calling it a ripoff but also proving it isn't by pointing out how different it is from the original show:"

Is that a joke? Ripoffs are inherently different than the original; if they weren't, they wouldn't be a ripoff, they would be the original, obviously. There's a list a mile long of differences between "Snakes on a Train" and "Snakes on a Plane", or between "Abraham Lincoln vs. Zombies" and "Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter", and so on. Does that mean they're not ripoffs?

Every single part on a Poniac MERA...

https://www.carthrottle.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Mera-Ad-2-690x943.jpg

... is different than on a Ferrari 308. So it's not a ripoff then? Ferrari sure thought it was a ripoff, for reasons which are obvious to people who actually understand the concept of a ripoff (i.e., it doesn't mean perfect clone):

"Naturally, Ferrari didn't take too kindly to this blatant 308 ripoff, and sued Corporate Concepts in 1987. In 1988, the two companies settled out of court, with Corporate Concepts agreeing to cease offering the Mera conversion."

"How is it a ripoff if you keep comparing it to the Wonder Years, stating all the differences and how much worse it is?"

See above, and the rest of your post continues to demonstrate that you don't understand the concept of a ripoff.

"Oh wait... In real life Adam didn't even have a sister, he had two brothers. The only reason he has a sister in the show is because producers told them the show would more interesting with a sister."

That's hilarious. Remember when you said this?

"The Goldbergs is based on Adam F. Goldberg's real life and almost all of the characters in the show portray real people. As far as I know the Wonder Years is complete fiction."

Now you're pointing out that one of the main characters isn't based on a real person, and apparently not realizing how bad that is for your argument. That change made The Goldbergs' family structure match The Wonder Years' perfectly. I guess that was just a coincidence, right?

It's blatantly obvious that The Goldbergs was patterned after The Wonder Years. It's a sitcom that's set a ~couple of decades in the past, it has the same family structure, the main point-of-view of both shows is from the youngest boy, and the biggest clincher is that both shows have voice-overs by an unseen adult version of the youngest boy.

[–] Ldlamb (636) 5 years ago

Wonder Years is meant to be a nostalgic Drama, regardless of whether it is 30 min. Episodes. It follows the chronological path of a kids adolescence.

The Goldbergs is a broad period comedy that has episodes that involve things that occurred in 1983 directly after things that occurred in 1988.

While some basic things about the cast may be similar....the shows themselves aren’t remotely the same.

[–] MaximRecoil (4598) 5 years ago

"Wonder Years is meant to be a nostalgic Drama, regardless of whether it is 30 min. Episodes."

The Wonder Years is a sitcom. The Goldbergs is a sitcom.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094582/awards

Read through that list of awards and nominations for The Wonder Years. Notice that the categories are for a comedy series. Now read through this [much shorter] list of awards and nominations for The Goldbergs:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2712740/awards?ref_=tt_ql_op_1

Notice that the categories are also for a comedy series.

"While some basic things about the cast may be similar"

1. The family structure is the same. If that was the only thing that was the same, that wouldn't be enough for it to be a ripoff.

2. Both shows are set about one generation in the past (relative to the dates that their first episodes aired). That alone is a rarity, as the vast majority of sitcoms are set in the present.

3. The overarching perspective of both shows is from the youngest son. That, too, is unusual, because most sitcoms don't even have an overarching perspective from a specific character at all.

4. The youngest son's perspective in both shows is presented to the audience via voice-over narration from an unseen present-day adult version of the youngest son. How common is that in sitcoms?

A. How many sitcoms can you name where just one of those four things is true?

B. How many sitcoms can you name where two of them are true?

C. How many sitcoms can you name where three of them are true?

D. How many sitcoms can you name where all four of them are true?

As for A, you could probably name several.

As for B, you might be down to only The Wonder Years and The Goldbergs at this point.

As for C, you'd almost certainly be down to only The Wonder Years and The Goldbergs.

As for D, I'd bet a substantial amount of money that you'd be down to only The Wonder Years and The Goldbergs (any official spinoffs of either show that may exist, don't count).

"the shows themselves aren’t remotely the same."

Is that a joke? See above.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MaximRecoil (4598) 5 years ago

"Actually you did say a few things about tone, calling it subjective and how my tone argument is a matter of opinion."

Is that a joke? You need to pay attention to context. You said:

"Well you seem to believe both shows have the same tone by calling it a blatant rip-off."

And I pointed out that your assertion about what I "seem to believe" is baseless, because I hadn't said anything about tone that would support your assertion. You're the one who brought up tone.

As for the rest of your post, it demonstrates yet again that you don't understand the concept of a ripoff. Giving the characters different personalities doesn't negate the fact that they ripped off the entire premise in the first place. I'll repeat to you what I posted to the other guy:

1. The family structure is the same. If that was the only thing that was the same, that wouldn't be enough for it to be a ripoff.

2. Both shows are set about one generation in the past (relative to the dates that their first episodes aired). That alone is a rarity, as the vast majority of sitcoms are set in the present.

3. The overarching perspective of both shows is from the youngest son. That, too, is unusual, because most sitcoms don't even have an overarching perspective from a specific character at all.

4. The youngest son's perspective in both shows is presented to the audience via voice-over narration from an unseen present-day adult version of the youngest son. How common is that in sitcoms?

A. How many sitcoms can you name where just one of those four things is true?

B. How many sitcoms can you name where two of them are true?

C. How many sitcoms can you name where three of them are true?

D. How many sitcoms can you name where all four of them are true?

As for A, you could probably name several.

As for B, you might be down to only The Wonder Years and The Goldbergs at this point.

As for C, you'd almost certainly be down to only The Wonder Years and The Goldbergs.

As for D, I'd bet a substantial amount of money that you'd be down to only The Wonder Years and The Goldbergs (any official spinoffs of either show that may exist, don't count).

"You state that this show is a ripoff as if it is a fact"

That's because it is a fact. See above.

"even though you seem to be in the minority thinking that"

It isn't up for a vote.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MaximRecoil (4598) 5 years ago

"Like I said, the majority of viewers would disagree with you."

First, you haven't established that, so it can be dismissed as a mere assertion. Second, even if you did establish it, it's irrelevant, because like I said, it isn't up for a vote. In other words, argumentum ad populum is a fallacy, not a valid argument.

"Just keep watching your Wonder Years and stay away from the Goldbergs if you have such an issue with it."

Your non sequitur is dismissed.

"Who are you to say it isn't up for a vote?"

Logic says it isn't up for a vote. See above.

"No one ever said it was a vote except for you."

No, you are the one who is pretending that a vote was taken and the majority of viewers agree with you.

"It doesn't matter if you think it's open for a vote or not, the majority of people still do not agree with you."

Your mere assertion is dismissed, as is your argumentum ad populum fallacy. Also, since you didn't answer questions A through D, your tacit concession on the whole matter is noted.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MaximRecoil (4598) 5 years ago

"Having similarities does not make it a complete unoriginal copy."

I didn't say "copy," I said "ripoff."

"I don't think it should matter what the answers to your questions are,"

Your tacit concession remains noted.

"it still doesn't make it a rip off."

Yes, it does. Out of the thousands of TV shows that have ever been made, there are only two shows which have those four fundamental points of the premise. That's not a mere coincidence, and the one that came second is the ripoff of the one that came first, obviously.

"No, I am not pretending it is a vote."

Yes, you are. Only a vote can show who agrees or disagrees with something, and since you claim to know that "the majority of viewers disagree," yet there was no vote, that means you are pretending there was a vote. In any case it is an argumentum ad populum fallacy (look it up), and therefore invalid.

"Everyone else that has commented on your post disagrees with you so far."

Is that a joke? Not counting you, only 3 people have replied to this thread, and only 2 of them made any sort of an argument, and of those 2, one of them only concluded that he didn't think it was a "complete" ripoff. And once again, it is an argumentum ad populum fallacy (look it up), and therefore invalid.

"I did establish that the majority of viewers disagree with you, I just worded it differently."

Is that another joke, or do you really think that the few people who have posted in this thread constitute a majority of the viewers of The Goldbergs and The Wonder Years? By the way, this is the last time I'm going to humor you on your make-pretend vote. Bring it up again and I'll simply dismiss it as the argumentum ad populum fallacy that it is.

The rest of your post consists of already-refuted foolishness about your make-pretend vote (which wouldn't even be valid even if it were a real vote), followed by a non sequitur, and as such, consider it dismissed out of hand.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MaximRecoil (4598) 5 years ago

"Copy is a synonym for rip-off."

No, it isn't. A copy is always the same as the original that it was copied from, like when you copy and paste a file or text on a computer, or when you buy a copy of a book, album, DVD, newspaper, etc., at the store. More importantly, the word "copy" by itself carries no indication either way with regard to legitimacy, while "ripoff" inherently denotes illegitimacy, i.e., unauthorized. A ripoff is never a full copy of the original; it is always only a copy of certain elements of the original (an unauthorized, full copy of something is called a counterfeit, fake, bootleg, forgery, etc., not a ripoff). In the case of The Goldbergs, it's an unauthorized copy of the four fundamental elements of The Wonder Years' premise. In other words, it's a ripoff of The Wonder Years.

"If you search on google, "wonder years similar shows" the Goldbergs doesn't even show up. I also looked up "wonder years rip-offs" and I still didn't see it anywhere. I also searched "rip off shows" and nothing. But honestly, I would still disagree even if the Goldbergs did show up somewhere."

Your argumentum ad populum fallacy is dismissed.

"You will see in the IMDb trivia section that the Golbergs does indeed take inspiration from the Wonder Years but is not a complete rip off. If it shares about 2 small similarities but everything else about the shows are completely different, that is not a rip off."

Copying all four of the fundamental elements of The Wonder Years' premise ≠ "2 small similarities," and it also goes beyond merely "taking inspiration." Since the copying was unauthorized, it's a ripoff by definition.

"You've barely posted any sources and none of them have any actual proof the Goldbergs are a complete rip off."

I don't need "sources." I'm not writing, e.g., a Wikipedia article. I've posted facts, i.e., the four fundamental elements of The Wonder Years' premise that The Goldbergs ripped off.

"Btw, you are not humoring me on my make pretend vote."

I fixed your typo (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that it was a typo, because if it wasn't a typo, that means you're an utter idiot), and indeed, I'm not humoring you on your make-pretend vote anymore, just as I said in my previous post.

[–] TMC-4 (20123) 5 years ago

ABC also had a period sitcom called The Kids Are Alright, since it also takes place in the past and has narration by an adult looking back on his childhood, you might as well right it off as little more than a cheap Wonder Years rip off too:
https://www.pajiba.com/tv_reviews/abcs-the-kids-are-alright-hits-the-sweet-spot-between-the-wonder-years-and-the-goldbergs.php

Everybody Hates Chris was like The Goldbergs, set in the '80s and had narration (by Chris Rock) too:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ifyoulikeblank/comments/8r7eh4/iil_everybody_hates_chris_fresh_off_the_boat_the/

[–] TMC-4 (20123) 5 years ago

Everybody grows up and experiences life differently though. The Goldbergs may have taken inspiration or influence from The Wonder Years, but it isn't like the story is 100% similar. And why would or should it be!? One show takes place in "1980-something" while another takes place from 1968 to 1973.

[–] Colorado_Kid (214) 5 years ago

Have The Goldbergs had an episode where Adam is talking and then loses his voice because puberty has set in?

[–] hurricane (1959) 5 years ago

I have noticed the similarities between this and The Wonder Years, but I think they're different enough to not be considered worthy of criticism.

As said, tonally The Goldbergs is played more for laughs than The Wonder Years. Not that The Wonder Years didn't have humour, but it wasn't as straight out comedy like The Goldbergs. TWY felt like more of a drama about growing up, which included funny moments, sad moments, dramatic moments etc. Just like real life. It didn't feel tied down to one thing. On the other hand, TG is more of a straight sitcom where there's a different story every week, and where everything ties itself up after the 22 minute episode.

And bear in mind, Adam Goldberg based this round his own life. So I'd not call it a complete rip-off. Just that the show has some similarities in the way it's narrated.