Aeryn13

I don`t think they get separated, Sam will just have - another - story of his own. Dean is right now having a story of his own and they are physically together. Carver just put the kibosh on more flashbacks to earlier of the Season. Which IMO is a good thing because if Lester was supposed to have been the worst, the other stuff could only be more redundant. And while I would have liked to have seen more of Demon!Dean, doing so in a flashback would also be redundant. For me it depends if Carver means an actual story here or like he said in other interviews a purely emotional one about Sam questioning his beliefs and how dark he is willing to get. Now to facillitate that, he will of course have to do dark things in the first place but maybe not be another version of supernatural mytharc-Sam. If Carver only means the latter, then fine, anyone is welcome to emo-babble storylines as far as I`m concerned. Just keep them away from Dean and keep him with the mytharc. If it`s however another huge epic Sam-story, then yeesh, not even one year as purely the support compared to Dean`s multiple ones? I`d be up for that with flying colours, of course. Certainly, there is some new angel they could bring in for that. Or get Michael back. He was cool in young!John and a weak whiner in Adam. Make something right and gibe Jensen a chance to play the character he should have played a long time ago.

While I don`t agree with that assessment of Dean at all - seriously, there were various times in the show where I felt he was downright nice in a situation where I would not remotely be - it is not that I don`t understand liking or disliking a character in terms of how they act. I like the powers and the destiny and all that because it makes for exciting watching but not at any price. When starting with the show, I recognized clearly that Sam was supposed to be the lead hero and identification figure for the audience. Now, as I said, the second one is not something I care for, in fact, the less I get to "identify" the better but usually Sam would have been the type of character I would gravitate towards. But his personality type didn`t appeal to me that much. And I don`t mean rather quiet and bookish compared to social, loud and outgoing because I`m the former to a T and none of the latter but the general vibe. Dean was the one who appealed to me right from the start. Both always had obnoxious traits (as everyone does) but some I can live with and some I can not. Dean had more of the former. It`s not limited to Supernatural either. Some shows I go for the goody-two-shoes lead guy and in others more for the antihero/bad guy-ish or in some for the supporting player. Also, luckily, most genre shows have more than one "genre" character so there is a certain range to choose from. So while my initial preference will always be more out-there-character, I do choose my favourite based on personality appeal. Just storyline-wise, I`m 100 % for the genre stuff and the big wins and everything. This is where I`m terribly callous to fictional characters, even the ones I love but on a certain level I don`t care about the sacrifices. Going out in a blaze of world-saving glory is - to me- a wonderful thing to happen to a character. I love it. If the show ends with it and I would have liked them to live, I can make up a happy-end prologue in my mind. Dean going to hell was fantastic for the character in my eyes and I loved that it happened. For the entire Season I was terrified that he WOULD be saved, not that he wouldn`t because hallelujah cool storyline. That`s why stopping the trials on account of Sam dying? Urgh, how unheroic. I expect and WANT my characters to sacrifice themselves for the greater good. They shouldn`t meet a sword, they wouldn`t be willing to fall on for a good cause. That is why they are heroes. If the show wanted that stopped? Bring up the very good argument that bad stuff happens when you lose the balance between good and evil like that aka imagine all the evil souls being stuck on Earth. That is a perfectly agreeable reason to not complete such an endeavour. Hm, I can usually see which characters are writer surrogates/pets/avatars and how they rush to give THEM the big mytharcs so even the writers themselves seem to think of emo stuff as filler and lower-tier. And it shows in the writing for me. If this show was truly a series of books and I wouldn`t see the characters acted out? It would change a lot IMO.

I have to say I was sad to see Luke go. He was also the only one who even HAD a shot at beating Kai, I agreed with him there and he went out like a boss. I`m guessing that puts this merge business to rest because if Luke couldn`t win - and, like I said, I at least gave him a chance - Liv and Jo shouldn`t stand a snowball`s chance in hell. Not if they trained till kingdom come. Releasing Kai to save Liz? I can see that. Especially from Damon who is impulsive and as we have seen devoted enough to use crazy stunts for his loved ones. Which is actually something this group has always done and will always do so it didn`t bother me that Elena was okay with it. Anyone of them ever NOT being okay with such a plan would be a gigantic hypocrite. I mean, it`s not that the plan/execution was judge-worthy but none in the Fellowship would have a right to. What Damon is usually a bit better at is contigencies and planning. Releasing Kai is one thing, not planning better for his inevitable villain escape is quite another. Wait till he performed his task and then super-speed another needle with traquilizers into him or something. If it had failed because ~plot convenience~ fine but at least SHOW them trying.

I think the dialogue was really clumsy. Dark!Charlie could have put a qualifier on the statement, something like "these days, you are all good guy code" which would have acknowledged that the character wasn`t always purer than the driven snow. Come on. Equally with her remark to Dean on how Sam held him back, presumably from being evil. The way it was phrased made it sound like Sam doesn`t have a dark side and never did a dark thing and Dean is naturally inclined to be evil, only Sam holds him back. Now, even I don`t think that was the message Thompson tried to convey wholesale but that`s how the dialogue came across. If you want to parallel Charlie being split in two with Dean`s MOC storyline right now, then make it clear that the parallel is RIGHT NOW. And not for the entirety of the show. I did like the last scene between real!Charlie and Dean but her "I forgive you" was also a bit strange. Sure, she has a broken arm now but it`s not like an actual part of her didn`t have a part in that. How about an "I`m sorry, too"? The message of "forgive yourself" is all well and good but it has been two days. It`s not like Charlie taking responsibility for Dark!Charlie`s actions and apologizing would be terribly unhealthy. Same as the overly dramatic camera pans to "look at guilty!Dean, isn`t i horrible that he can`t let it go" were somewhat eyeroll-worthy. It is generally something the character struggles with, yes, but feeling guilty for two measly days is not out of order in the context. That is basic human decency. All that IMO waters down the point. What Dean needs is moderation not obliteration. If he still felt a crushing guilt after breaking Charlie`s arm - in a fight Charlie started, no less, and gave as good as she got - after two years, that would obviously be a "let it go already" scenario but the way they played it here seems like you should forgive yourself immediately and move on. Skip the accepting responsibility and apologizing to the people you hurt altogether. Like, really?

It is noticeably different than it was in the shows say first three or even four Seasons and not for the better IMO. And of course the variety of places to interact, twitter, tumblr, social media in general has grown in the last few years. Also not always in a beneficial way. Writer-fan-interaction on twitter? Oy. That said, battles trenches drawn in fandom are not unique to this show, just usually they are about romantic shipping. . I don`t consider favourite characters to be like children, though. In each show, I usually have one of them, hence the "favourite" part and I don`t want them left in the dust. Don`t think that is uncommon either. TV is a visual, in your face medium so everything that happens in the background or with less pomp/fanfare/flash automatically does come across as lesser IMO. Purposefully so. I don`t see why I should be content with "soup kitchen" when it comes to my favourite character when others get fine wine and dining. Spread the wealth around is what I say. It will never be completely balanced and if the imbalance is minor, I probably wouldn`t even notice but I could not NOT notice the Sam-as-the-lead-hero push with Dean in the little support role for years on end. In a way I consider it like a Series Finale to the first five years and as such, it is more important to me than the random run-of-the-mill eps. For example the entire second half as Season 8 was just as bad as that episode, with all trial episodes being atrocious in the same way. And comparatively, it was around 10 episodes to 1 but because of the placement and meaning, the one still wins the fight as "worst ever" for me. Maybe if a true Series Finale when that happens wipes the stain away, it lessens my loathing for that episode. Someone should have Thompson write the Charlie show, then have another writer invent a side character they fell in love with and have them come in to make Charlie look stupid and silly every single time. See if maybe a light bulb goes off then.

I don`t think that will work because a trained fighter will be down to the point where in a real fighting situation instinct and muscle memory take over and there is no conscious reaction time. That is how you are getting good, to get that "need to think about it" time down to nothing. And he has gotten good. The reverse process would be kinda "unlearn how to swim". Um...nope. Now obviously, normally, that doesn`t mean you get kill crazy because you can come back to yourself when the thick-of-things part of the fight is over. For Dean, I think the Mark removes his ability to power down but, if suitably provoked, it should be impossible to him not to power up in the first place. He can`t, by will-power, stop the adrenaline from flowing. And once it does, it combines with the Mark in the deadly way. The only answer would be to remove himself completely from any possibility of provocation which, for reasons that the show can`t allow it, will obviously not happen. For all accounts and purposes, removing himself from temptation seems to be the thing he is trying next but

For me, it comes right from the show. Seldom have I seen a two-character show where they were any more pitted against each other in a zero sum way than this one. Granted, lots of two-character shows have a male/female lead so the dynamic is romance or at least UST which is different. But for the largest part, I haven`t gotten a team feeling at all. If the show does stuff like "Dean got to hell, then Sam goes to hell" and actually states onscreen that Sam`s hell will make Dean`s look like "Disneyland", I don`t see how it could be more of a competition. Dean getting the "you are not the brains of the outfit" comments whereas Sam got the "wow, you are a smart/deep cookie" stuff is once again pitting the characters against each other for the viewers. Add to that the Sam-always-having-the-mytharc and stuff like "it`s about you, it`s all about you"? Gee. X-Files started out with Mulder as the one who was "in" because of his kidnapped sister but Scully was brought into the story directly (and not just as his partner) in Season 2-ish and that was not a moment too soon. It doesn`t surprise me that the lines between Dean-fans and Sam-fans have gotten increasingly more sharp over the years and it is pretty much outright war now. The show has gone out of its way to cultivate that IMO. In larger ensemble shows this problem usually isn`t so pronounced because the storylines are spread around more. And even if I`m occasionally grumpy if/when my fave doesn`t get a good story at a particular time, it`s not like it never happens. Of course in genre shows (which I watch a lot of), I watch for the genre plot. I don`t WANT real life problems and emo angst. I watch genre to be spared that. I also don`t particulate need to relate to a character in the sense of "I can see myself in this". I want to see better. To have larger than life heroes to admire. See fighting badasses like I`m not one. And I want to see them struggle with stuff that will never play a role in my life. Because the latter? I know, Ì don`t need to watch it for entertainment, too. So again, for genre shows in particular, I do prefer the characters with powers/a destiny/superhuman aka the most removed from "mundane" that they can be. And of course I like to see them accomplish epic feats then. If a show goes the "save the world" route, then save the world. If a show only has one actual lead (compared to a main cast of more characters), then I`m prepared to see only that lead manage that over and over again. With a little help from the sidekicks but they are the lead. Those shows are mostly the ones NAMED after that character. If however I perceive there to be two or more leads, have them all take a turn. In Fringe, I prefered Peter but it was fine if at any given time Walter, Olivia or Peter got the big final win. It would not have been if only ever one of them or only ever the others but not Peter managed it. Tallying the "wins" is IMO also easy because that is basically what the narrative does. You go through the Seasons and follow who has the main plot and who is the main hero in the end in terms of saving the day. It`s not really different than having a favourite sports team or athlete. You go through their competitions and see how often they won. That tells you how successful they are. Can easily extrapolated to fictional characters. In terms of real world view, such a tallying is of course not that easy but the underlying idea of "meassurement by success" still applies. The simple tenet of "what (great) things did you get done yourself?" And if the answer was none - if someone else asked me or I asked myself - I would feel pretty bad about it. Everyone wants success after all. So, I want it for my favourite characters, too. Lasting happiness? Eh, that is all good and well for when a story ends so I`m not really after that while I watch. Sure, I got that. But I think it`s only a blame-shifting tactic then. It`s certainly easier to take all the credit in your mind but noone really wants the blame/responsibility for something going to crap. It`s more denial than anything IMO.

That was a flashback, though, This is just normal!Dean in a teenager`s body, the situation lends itself far more to comedy. Maybe Glass is gonna throw in another bit from his own childhood. Granted, there will likely be some angst here and there but I don`t expect: touching, poignant or good really,

I`m European actually so my problem with the current message is not an American viewpoint. As it isn`t the show needing to be more anvillicious. Please god no, if any more anvils had fallen, no viewer would have survived it. IMO the general handling of the MOC and this episode in particular was as simplistic as they come. Charlie is literally split into good and evil Kirk-style (and that Star Trek episode actually had a valid point on that matter IMO) and look how her evil self currently mirrors Dean and tells him all about being evil, how good it feels, how much in denial he is. He started the last episode wanting his arm cut off or something because he basically developed a "killer instinct" in his mind so he is hardly in denial. We also already covered the "it feels good" ground last episode. If Dean wasn`t currently supposed to be "evil", he could show excessive force in a fight or hypervigilance and the narrative would judge it completely differently. Instead we get the "look at how dark he is" highlighting without any nuance or anything. I can`t even remember when I thought for the last time the show illustrated something evil. Must have been years ago. Performance and direction can do wonders sometimes but if the writing isn`t there, it isn`t there. As for Dean laying down the weapons or not wanting to hunt anymore, this is again probably something the writers would dismiss out of hand because then they would have to think creatively on how to use the character`s screentime. The show is still presumably about hunting monsters, not angsting around in the bunker. And I personally wouldn`t be interested in a "Sam hunts by his lonesome" episode either with random cuts to Dean doing nothing exciting. That is how the Cas-plots have been boring for years now. Of course, it would be relatively easy to follow the Buffy-formula of "if something terrible were to happen, history suggests it will happen to one of us" and have Dean dutifully stay at the bunker, only for that to suddenly come under attack and bye, bye peaceful time-out. Definitely a big mileage varies thing because Thompson can show no moderation with his Charlie crush and this episode suffered more than any other for it. I think Thompson approaches those scripts like Charlie was the main character with all that entails so in "and then Charlie does this and is badass there etc", he fills in the blanks with "because so-and-so does this". That this makes so-and-so look like they had their brain removed is of no concern. Because that would entail thinking of them as he thinks about Charlie. If some other writers gave Charlie the idiot stick, Thompson would notice immediately and recoil in horror. But since he is writing all her episodes, that will never happen. After the 200th episode, this was the second dud he delivered this Season for me. Too bad because his episode, incidentally the 11th as well, last year, was the only one I considered truly good out of all Season 9.

Apparently, Dean is always supposed to be let himself be beaten to death. If he makes a move to defend himself, it`s a sign how much of an evil person he is. Strangely, that is only the case for him lately.

That was atrociously bad. Felicia Day can not pull off dark. At all. And while I expected the anvils, I did not expect Dean being dumbed down SOOOO much to accomodate her. Thompson is embarassing himself with the Charlie character and coming out on top every single time, especially at the expense of the main characters. Again, Dean defending himself is presented as evil in some way. What a piece of crock. The "you have these awesome people in your corner" message would also mean something more if I felt they had been awesome at it so far. Instead of terrible. The control Dean did pull off until now, he IMO largely did himself. Which I like but way to belittle anything HE accomplishes. Some more and forever. In short: BAD.

I think that is gonna make the episode more boring and stale, though. What is the point now, lots of comedy filler about surly teenage!Dean? And if they even try equate Sam having to deal with it for maybe a day or two with Dean pseudo-raising a little brother, it will be insulting.

Yup, I do. In fact, I`m the complete opposite to you because for me it is ultimately the entire point. That`s why it means a great deal to me what kind of accomplishments a character is allowed to have, how they play out and how it compares in relation to others. And why episodes such as the Season 5 Finale are like a slap in the face for me. I mean, I already hated the concept of "yellow crayon" moments, when it was coined in Buffy it sucked but of course the trope was around before and I`m hard-pressed to think of a fictional piece where I ever liked it. But the way it was done in Supernatural? Wow, insult to massive injury. That`s also why I`m so disappointed with some of the moments Dean did get. The Eve kill was pretty good but it was a "buried in the Season somewhere" and not the Season Finale capper to a major arc about Eve being a major threat. That gets points deducted like woah. Same for Abaddon. Technically a good moment but the context needed to be better. The Leviathan kill WAS a Season Finale ender but wow, no build-up to the arc and could they have made the entire thing lamer? Purgatory was a great start-off point but the quick dismissal and Sam hop-skipping through it? Could have been an image of the writers singing "anything Dean can do, Sam can do better" and it would have conveyed the same to me. Now we have the Mark of Cain thing and it could be done with a little more powers, fanfare and epicness but it IS better than nearly everything else they gave the character before combined so I`m crediting it for that. I think comparatively that would have given Dean the same importance he had in the episode as it aired so would have find it equally as distasteful. What I would have needed? For Michael to be ready and willing to ditch Adam and take Dean as a vessel because "by the book" guy should have been hung up on his supposed "true vessel" too. For Michael to NOT under no circumstances meta-comment on how Dean was actually not a part of the story anymore. Thanks for that, Kripke, I have eyes, I can see how you just threw him to the side without it being lampshaded. And for Dean to be physically involved somehow. Have it be that he and only he can work the stupid rings to open the stupid portal. Meaning that without him there, even if Sam managed to take control, he would have no way to throw himself in the cage without Dean. Of course, I prefered Dean as Michael and them throwing into the pit together. That was the ending I wanted to see to that arc. If Sam is strong enough to beat Lucifer by will-power, Dean could have done so with Michael. And scene.

Again, no intent to offend. Just personally, when someone thanks ME for emotional support or something, I never take that to mean I get credit in whatever they accomplished because ultimately they did it and that should count for something. In a fictional setting it`s even more clear when a line of dialogue in that vein is genuine or when the writers just use it to throw a character a bone. Just like "I will not do it until all of you agree" from Sam. Yeah right, he was the vessel, the only one Death said could pull it off and was therefore important. The others had no part in that destiny so what were they gonna say really? You don`t tell the Chosen One "no". They had to learn that this was their problem in Season 4 apparently. And Sam ultimately proved that in the end he went with the "yes" over Dean`s "no" when they found Lucifer. Because the one with the actual power to make the choice will always make that choice. Telling people with no power to enforce it you will give them a vote in something is silly to me. There is no way it doesn`t look patronizing. At least be honest about "no power, no say". Because that will always shake out to be the reality of it. When Dean was a supposed Michael!vessel, THEN he had equal say. After that played out, he lost his vote. I don`t follow. He jumped on the grenade to protect the world. If Dean was there or not, that was his plan. Lets say, we follow my argument and Dean didn`t need to be there and Sam (with the car/toy soldier) could have pulled it off themselves, would he have not done so because Dean wasn`t around? I mean, Dean`s presence doesn`t have any bearing on Sam`s intent to save the world. The world is so much bigger than the two of them. And it would have been perfectly worthwhile for one or both to die for its save.

I`m sorry if I offended you, I didn`t mean to say that raising a family is a small or meaningless feat, far from it. But in say, the usual speeches in Award acceptance where the winner goes, I couldn`t have done it without bla bla, I don`t think that means the person they couldn`t have done it without also wins the Oscar or the Pulitzer or the Nobel-Prize. If a fireman runs into a burning building and saves two people, it is something the fireman did and noone else. Beating Lucifer was something Sam did. As much as I wished Dean had a role there, I can`t wish it into being onscreen. What I saw him do was drive a car and then get beaten up. After that he was just on the ground, not doing anything. Sam did everything of note. I do require a character to DO something (or not do it if we have a "kill all those people or die yourself" scenario) to count as contribution in any given situation. The reason he gave for going to that field was pretty much "he should at least see a friendly face - me - before dying and I`m dying with him then". Narratively speaking, the hero would go to a fight to at least TRY and turn it around, to save the world, to think beyond himself. The sidekick might go for nothing else but the express reason of "because I`m the sidekick and I should be on the ground next to the hero, after all, what would I be there for without them?" So for me, the heroic thing to do would have been a) I will go there and try to prevent the fight or b) if there is no hope of stopping it, I will at least do my damnedest to help the part of the world that survives.

I enjoy the new Finn but to me he has basically gotten a personality transplant after Esther resurrected him. Granted, we didn`t see a lot of him back on Vampire Diaries but Kol managed to gain a personality in a few scenes (if that was an appealing one is another matter). However Original!Finn, pardon the pun, WAS dull as dishwater. I could easily see why his siblings voted him off the vampire island at first. Compared to an Elijah who threw a couple coins into a cafe, to have a few vamps burst into flames, ripped out hearts left and right, invented the "when making deals with me, it behooves you to be extremely literal because I am, too" and genuinely had a great balance between ruthlessness and prim and proper, Finn was background noise. Elijah was also the only 1.000 year old vampire that came across to me as such. Everyone else, including Mikael, lacked that feeling of gravity.

Which completely reduces him to Sam`s sidekick, if his entire purpose in life seems to be revolving around Sam and caretaking for Sam. And when it`s convenient for the writers, they use exactly that to trash the character for not "letting Sam go" and not "treating Sam like a grown-up". `For me that`s having their cake and eating it, too. Of course, I generally believe a person`s accomplishments are just that: accomplishments of that person and noone else. And while you can be nice or polite and give a little "I couldn`t have done this without you" pat on the head to another, it doesn`t mean that other person shares those accomplishments. Not if they didn`t do equal or at least part of the actual work. And being the "wind beneath someone`s wings" is doing no part of it. Sam had the memories, Sam had the feelings, Sam had the strength etc. When Dean killed the YED, Ghost!John did a valid onscreen part to help. It literally couldn`t have happened without him so he deserves credit. Whereas just as Sam gets ZERO credit for Dean killing Zachariah, Dean gets zero credit for Sam defeating Lucifer. The only difference is that in context one episode weighs a thousand times more story-wise than the other. If it was just some random kill within the Season or even within the arc, I still wouldn`t credit Dean for it but it wouldn`t be that much of a bother. They couldn`t even do the one tiny thing and have Dean`s motivation in going there to be making one last-ditch attempt to save the world. Nope, he goes there because he has no mind or purpose or worth that extends beyond "Sam`s brother". How incredibly pathetic did that look?

The phone-call was fantastic. Finn pontificating about how he wants to bathe in Klaus` blood basically and Klaus doing an adotable little head-bob and sporting a cheerful smile on his face. It was made doubly funny by the fact that he is usually the one giving those speeches. And while the Finn character got an interesting personality-upgrade from his TVD days, I had to snigger in the end when he basically revealed a major case of older-sibling-jealousy. "Why did you have those monsters after meeeeee". Meanwhile the one thing all his younger siblings could agree on was that he was so dreadfully dull, he belonged in a box for 900 years. I was impressed by the new actress for Rebekah. She had the speech patterns and mannerisms down pat. Her grousing about her stupid new mortal body made me laugh. Because the character has wished so long to be human and it seemed she never took the downsides into consideration, it was all romanticized and rose-coloured. Oh, and I love Elijah knowing the answer to every stupid question in the game. I imagine playing trivia games with one of the Original siblings or even an older vampire would just suck

It seems like they are all super-brainwashed. Even Kai who is completely psychotic and cares about nothing and noone wants to do that stupid merge. Sorry, I haven`t liked every major villain on the show but at least each had a goal I could logically follow, early!Damon wanted the tomb open, Katherine wanted to be free of Klaus, Klaus wanted to break the curse that kept his werewolf side dormant and then make a hybrid army to fight his Psycho!Dad, Silas wanted to die for real, Markos wanted to break the curse that kept the Travellers from settling down anywhere. I understood what they wanted and even why they wanted it. Why does Kai wanna merge? "It is the way of our coven" is not an explanation btw. I mean, surely, he is not gonna be the leader then? Like seriously, they couldn`t reject him on account of being psycho? What I could understand is if he wanted to merge with another witch to have magical power himself for the rest of his life since any he siphons eventually runs out. But that is not what he says, that is seemingly not what he does, no he wants to do that uber-stupid twin-merger. That makes no sense whatsoever which considerably weakens this story. The only explanation I can think of that everyone in this Gemini coven has been brainwashed since birth into this obsessive need to do the twin merge and believe in the twin merge. And one generation passes that on to the next. However, that is the flimsiest motivation for any goal on the show ever. And that is saying something.

Dean has been in the position Sam is now in for years and Sam is a grown up who protested multiple times against their childhood dynamics of little brother/big brother or even pseudo-parent/child. Well, this isn`t only freedom and equality, it comes with some burdening stuff as well. So if he wants the good, I damn well expect him to go out of his comfort zone with the bad, in this case ultimate caretaking, as well. So I honestly don`t get how Dean is basically not a good person anymore but Sam is a bouncy-bouncy baby who gets the utmost slack. I don`t think he would say that because I don`t think it would something he would think of implementing either. Maybe, maybe I can let the doofusness of "lets walk Claire to the car by our twosome, Dean should stay last in the house" go, but did we learn anything from it back at Bunker-ville? No. It`s super-easy for Dean to walk in on an unwatched Metatron and shut themselves in. That went sideways, too. So did we finally learn anything from THAT? No. Because lets send him to talk to Claire alone. Sure, noone expected the axe-murder plot but someone should have waited in the car or maybe Cas could have hid in the bushes and eaves-dropped. If the Claire-situation would have gone sideways, too, I`m pretty sure we would have gotten another moment by Sam and Cas with a shocked "OMG, Dean, how could this happen?" That`s what I meant by my actual addiction scenario. I genuinely put most of the responsibility for getting clean on the addict but if the support person isn`t even putting the pills away from the open table, it makes me head-desk. Heck, if they had the First Blade back at the bunker, they would probably put it in a safety spot right in front of Dean`s eyes and then make him promise to not get it and touch it and give him a speech how he shouldn`t and he is strong enough to not do it. Faith in a person is nice and all but they could just as well dangle it over his bed and then act shocked when this fool-proof plan didn`t work. Say about Dean what you will but in this same situation he would at least try and hide the damn thing for realz.

I`m now picturing Dean clad in an adorable little beekeeper-suit and fidgeting, being all "I`m not sure, what do you think?" to the others.

But Dean already came to that realization without Sam. He said he can`t control it, at least not all the time. I`m not asking for Sam or Cas to take total responsibility, hell no, and technically I like appealing to Dean`s strength and showing a belief that he CAN make it. However, at the moment it plays out like if it WAS a lifetime movie about addiction that the support person doesn`t even think so far as take the liquor or the pills out of freaking eye-sight. I mean, is this seriously too much to ask? "Do not leave Dean alone in room with bad guys" and "do not give Dean easy access to Metatron alone" are not rocket science. Instead we get braintrust ideas like "Dean, would you mind talking to the teen who thinks you are a killer monster? What could do wrong, huh?"

Gamble was a self-proclaimed Sam-girl and I consider Season 6 a Sam-Season, first half got some ridiculous stanning fantasies with Soulless!Sam, the Sex-god and Uber-Badass out of the way and the second half he was back to the Woobie-behind-the-wall. For Dean, they didn`t even bother to invent a storyline where it would make sense that he organically came back, he just kinda resumed sidekick-dom, occasionally Lisa/Ben were thrown in to make character jabs, he was rusty and Deansel. In the second half it got a tiny bit better but storyline-wise? Still nothing. The "detective" role Death mentioned led nowhere and was only brought up in Season 7 to blame the character for it going nowhere. And while hookers forgot to ask for pay from Soulless!Sam, possessed!Lisa had to throw in a line about him being a lousy lay. It was so pathetic "the guy I want to bang" and "the guy I can`t stand" by the writer, my middle finger was in risk of being permanently stuck in a certain position. Season 7, I`m not sure Gamble had much creative control anymore. Maybe about the idiotic Amy Pond plot that dragged the first half of the Season down but arc-wise, they really didn`t even bother to include the Winchesters. You had the Leviathans as the main mytharc and technically Dean and Sam were onscreen as well but those two had bukis to do with each other. I will give the Season this: it was just boring and not overly offensive.

The Season 3 and Season 4 Finale were those when noone won. At least not the Winchesters. In the Season 3 Finale Sam might have just watched but Dean did get ripped apart. It wasn`t a "hero" moment for either one. Same in Season 4, Sam freed Lucifer (and at least got the Lilith kill) and Dean just ran in after the fact. Again, a loss on all sides. So those Finales don`t count for me in terms of weighing them against the Season 5 one. And the entire "Sam`s redemption" in Season 5 fell flat for me because he didn`t redeem himself for what I think he needed to redeem himself for. Increasingly through Season 4 on the demon blood he got more arrogant. And it was that hubris that led him to freeing Lucifer. So when I think a character flaw is pride and that they thought they were the big kahuna? The last, the very last thing I want is the imagery of how they actually ARE the big kahuna and everyone they had looked down their nose at in arrogance having to acknowledge that. Sam thought Dean was weak and pathetic in Season 4 and certainly not up to par to save the world? Well, what do you know, the "redemption" for that had pathetic little Dean kneeling on the ground in his sidekick pose and gazing up in awe at Sam the super-saviour. So basically, arrogant!Sam was right and everyone else was wrong. Urgh. The re-did that with the trials in a way. "You are a great hunter, Dean, smart, and not a grunt". Dean screws up a hunt and needs to be saved by Sam, then knows noting about the lore for the next few episodes and calling him a grunt would be an embarassment to grunts.

I love Klaus as a character over on the Originals but he has as much in common with Dean as a fish has with bicycle IMO. Maybe I could see some parallels with Elijah, Klaus` older brother. And that guy has a ruthless side as well. At this point in the show Dean has not done anything, not one little thing that makes puts his status of a good person or a hero in question. I guess I just have very different lines for that. For example torture in and of itself? Sometimes it IS necessary, especially in those fictional universes they present. If an enemy was captured and needed to dish out very time-sensitive intel yet wasn`t inclined to do so? Say, the old "I have a child buried alive somewhere and the oxygen runs in in one hour and I`m not gonna tell you where, muhaha" and the good guys WOULDN`T use all necessary force, including torture? I would judge the shit out of them for that. Hope your morality is fricking worth it. I also count the MOC as an altered state. If "it wasn`t really him" was a good enough excuse for Sam and a good enough excuse for Cas, I fail to see why it isn`t for Dean. He tries to control it as best as he could. So he couldn`t stop himself from going in to Metatron. I`m not gonna overly blame him for that. Cain couldn`t stop himself from much, much worse for thousands of years. And Cas and Sam KNEW Dean was hanging on a knife`s edge, he had already told them both, they had seen evidence so IMO DEAN has tried to do stuff within his capabilities to migitate the problem. Apparently he told it to people who like to leave the barn door open, hope for the best and then come running and scream "OMG, what happened" when the horses run out. Thing is, Dean doesn`t have other people to tell. The problem is that usually those people? Would be Dean himself. And yes, there would probably be lots of accusations of "he is too smothering" if he heard the "I can`t control myself" and locked the other person in the room. But it would kinda get results. But right now Dean can`t be Dean for himself. That`s just not possible. He can not be the guy with the supernatural problem and the Dean of Seasons 1-9.5 in trying to deal with that simulteanously.