DittyDotDot
-
Posts
13.2k -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by DittyDotDot
-
-
18 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:
This brings to mind a question. Cas brought Sam back to help with the Alpha monster collection with the goal of Purgatory and all those souls in mind. So what if they had succeeded without needing Dean, and Cas figured out Sam done come back wrong. Would he have just put him back? Would he have gone to Dean then? Would Bobby have missed Sam eventually and decided to tell Dean?
I don't think Cass brought Sam back to collect the souls and Alphas; Cass brought Sam back for Dean and resurrected him long before he and Crowley hatched their little deal to get the souls in Purgatory. In fact, I don't think Cass actually wanted Sam involved, but couldn't stop him from working with Grampy Campbell without revealing himself and what he was up to to Sam. And, Sam wasn't actually actively involved with the plan. He went on some of the raids to capture the Alphas, but had no idea, nor cared, what Samuel was doing with them.
As to Bobby, I just think Bobby probably knew something was off about Sam, but didn't spend enough time around him to see just how off he was. I think he would've went to Dean if he had known how bad it was, though.
-
1
-
-
On 9/6/2018 at 1:37 AM, AwesomO4000 said:
In my head canon, she's a working gal, and Andy paid her with "borrowed" (i.e. stolen) money. I guess I just can't see him as doing what Webber did... which was so damn creepy. That scene with Webber and Tracy in the car where he asks her "you can fly, can't you?" and she answers "I think so," was one of the creepiest and dismaying scenes of the series for me. Well acted by both.
I concur. Every time I see the actor who plays Webber it always makes me shiver and utter, "Ugh, it's Andy's evil and extremely creepy brother!" Funny how that happens.
Also, I'm not even sure Andy was having sex with the woman in the window considering his hang up on Tracy. I always wonder if he just didn't use his gift to talk his way into her apartment just for a real bed, shower and breakfast? But, I guess it's all up to interpretation on that front.
-
1
-
-
On 9/6/2018 at 3:34 PM, AwesomO4000 said:
I have seen it argued that demons could maybe fix damaged or mortally wounded host bodies, but just don't because they don't give a crap, but I personally think it would be easier for them to heal their host bodies - and have a more "comfortable" host - rather than have to hop into another one.
Yeah, my personal belief is they can't heal the bodies they inhabit permanently, but can temporarily while they are in it--like Meg did in S1.
But, to the original question, to my knowledge we've never seen a demon resurrection--as in the demon being killed and coming back, not the demon resurrecting a body to possess again--like with Abaddon. But, then again, we never saw an angel resurrection previously until this season with Cass, so it's probably not out of the range of possibilities it could happen.
-
On 8/24/2018 at 8:19 AM, ukgirl71 said:
Don't suppose we could all take career breaks, go to Vancouver and take over the writers' room, even for six months?
Not if you're going to Vancouver--the writer's room is in LA.
-
On 8/23/2018 at 7:01 PM, DeeDee79 said:
I'm watching season 2 ( again! ) and I have what may be an unpopular opinion: I don't hate Gordon. He's absolutely paranoid and cutthroat but he's also somewhat sympathetic. When you take away his fixation on Sam it's not hard to see where he's coming from. With his backstory in regards to his sister's kidnapping and subsequent turning by vampires you can kinda understand his motivation and his inability to see beyond black and white with whether or not monsters deserve to live or should be put down immediately. He's not likable but his character is intriguing. It's largely due to Sterling Brown's portrayal IMO.
Yeah, I always think of Gordon as just being an extremist, as a few hunters we met early on were shown--one of the main reasons Dean was so worried about other hunters learning about Sam having those psychic powers. But back to Gordon, he wasn't actually wrong about Sam--and monsters in general--just took his actions too far in dealing with them. And, it totally made sense for his character. I was sad they couldn't keep him on the show a bit more, even though it was great Sterling had found other work.
On 8/24/2018 at 7:49 AM, Bobcatkitten said:Honest question, is there anyone Jensen has played off in Supernatural that he didn't have great chemistry with?
I never felt like he had chemistry with the actress who played Cassie. But, then again, I don't care for the actress and don't feel like she has chemistry with anyone in anything I've seen her in. And, as with @AwesomO4000, I didn't think Jensen and Julie McNiven (Anna) had any chemistry either, but I think the actress has had good chemistry in other projects I've seen her in.
Other than that, I can't think of anyone that didn't seem to click well on-screen with Jensen. He just seems to be one of those actors.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, TexasGal said:
How are Jared's leg even doing that?
Please tell me his back is leaning against that wall and he's not just balancing himself like that somehow?
Not that I don't believe Jensen could do it, but I think the photo was taken is crooked, so it's an optical illusion that he's leaning backward...in fact, if you straighten the image, he's actually leaning forward a tad.
As to Jared's legs...I've got nuttin'! ;)
-
1
-
-
On 8/17/2018 at 1:40 AM, Iju said:
natflix caps say cass, does the TV caps spell it with one S?
It's a long-standing debate and joke within the fandom. The writers--and Misha himself--uses Cass while fandom uses Cas.
-
On 8/17/2018 at 5:24 PM, Iju said:
i don't understand their grandfather (yuck, more blood connections) and their confusion on their non inclusion on being the "men of letters" (which, btw, is so angeringly vague) when it was well known that john knew less than 0 about anything supernatural. or maybe henry didn't know he'd left john yet and left him to have a normal life. if that's the case then i'll drop it.
Yes, at the top of the hour, Henry tells wee John that he'll tell John about his MoL pin someday, but Henry never returns to fulfill that promise. So John never learns about the supernatural until after Mary dies.
-
On 8/15/2018 at 12:13 PM, Bobcatkitten said:
Right, but is it a new movie? I was just confused because it seemed a bit dated.
No, it's not newly shot, but I know they had financing problems, so it could be newly released. I believe it was being shot around the same time Rich and Rob were doing "Kings of Con"--2014 or 2015? It was done by Clif, Jared and Jensen's bodyguard, and his brother, as I recall.
On 8/16/2018 at 12:58 PM, catrox14 said:OMG, that was fun. I can't say I liked one better than the other, they both have their joys, but Death delivering pizza made me laugh so hard! And, Ellen and Ash and...so many pasts and presents. What a treat!
-
1
-
-
On 8/5/2018 at 10:53 AM, WatchrTina said:
Well, I cheated and skipped ahead in my Midsomer Murders marathon to get to the episode that Sam is in. It's an homage to Hamlet complete with a dead father, a mother who marries her late husband's brother, a brooding son (Sam), feigned madness, and murder.
Yeah, I remember the whole episode being a modern day Hamlet, with a play within the play, to boot! They do quite a few homages on the show. It's not the most complex show, but I enjoy certain aspects of it.
In a sort of tangential aside: a couple episodes after Sam's episode--The Axeman Cometh--has James Cosmo who, in this episode, is a pretty good image of what I imagined older Jamie to look like when I read the books.
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, Pingaponga said:
I do have two questions. At the end, Roger asks Claire about, I think, the people who adopted his ancestor who was the child of Geillis and Duncan - is that right? And was that the young couple/baby on the ship?
I don't remember the conversation you're asking about, but, yes, the couple with the baby on the ship were Roger's ancestors--Geillis and Dougal's son, his wife and his child.
SpoilerIf you keep reading, they'll pop back up in a later book.
20 hours ago, Pingaponga said:And my second question. I understand why they think they need gemstones to travel through the standing stones. Geillis’s research had turned up that fact, and everyone has lost a gemstone while travelling through time. But why did Brianna think Roger’s arrival meant she wouldn’t be able to travel back to the 1900s? She said something about needing someone she loved to be at the other end to help her travel. But when Claire first went through the stones, it was a complete accident on her part and she sure wasn’t thinking of anyone or any particular time when she went through. When Claire went back to the 1900s she went “for” her baby and to Frank, and when she returned to the 1700s it was “for” Jamie. But wasn’t the very first time sheer fluke? I’m confused.
They don't really know how the stones work, not exactly, but it does appear there is both a physical (gem stones and certain metals) and mental aspect (thinking of where you want to go) to being able to steer successfully while traveling. Remember Roger's first attempt failed because he was thinking of himself as a lad and started traveling back to that time--which apparently you can't travel back to a time when you already existed. So, IMO, Brianna is wrong that you need someone on the other side, but I do think you need to think of where you want to end up and having someone you think you're returning to might make that easier.
BTW, I'm not so sure it was a total accident Claire ended up where she did. It does seem like 200 years is the default one travels if they aren't focused, but there had been lots of talk about Frank's ancestor over the days before she traveled and the night before Frank had talked about the Highlander ghost who is presumably Jamie's ghost. So, I do think it likely that Claire could've been thinking of these things when she traveled which could've drawn her to that time when both Jamie and Black Jack existed, as well.
20 hours ago, Pingaponga said:But Roger. Oh Roger. You travel all that way, and through so much time and hardship, and insist on leaving Brianna right away to obtain gems so she and you can return home? What the hell is the rush? She has yet to see her mother, let alone meet her father, and as far as the two of them know they are going to have to take a boat back to Scotland and get to the standing stones before even attempting to return to their own time. No matter what, they won’t be needing the gems in the next two months, at least. There is absolutely no logical reason why he has to get those gems from that person now. And that’s the fault of the author for not explaining why Roger feels there will be absolutely no other opportunities to obtain gems.
It's been a while since I read it, but, as I recall, Roger knew where this person he was stealing the gems from was going to be on a certain date and then this person was supposedly sailing back across the ocean. So, if Roger was going to get the gems, this was his only opportunity. However, I agree with you that it was really silly. It seems it would've been more prudent to go with Brianna and meet the in laws instead of heading off on a foolhardy errand that had little chance of succeeding anyway. More likely he end up dead, IMO, but what do I know! ;)
21 hours ago, Pingaponga said:And “I’m here to claim my wife!”? Wtf? Who would say this to the father-in-law one has never met?? It seemed completely out of character.
Don't even get me started... . ;)
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Hana Chan said:
This is seriously going to get rocks thrown at me, but.... I just don't care about Michael/Dean. There... I said it.
It's not only repetitive since we've had Lucifer/Sam and Lucifer/Castiel (not to mention DemonDean) but I'm so over the whole crisis in Heaven nonsense that anything having to do with angels is going to get me to yawn. I'm glad for Jensen since this is something that he wanted to do, but I really wish that the show would put Heaven and Hell on the back burner and give us something really meaty to enjoy.
(*ducking rocks*)
Hey, I have a shield we can both hide behind! ;)
-
3
-
-
4 minutes ago, Hanahope said:
I'm not sure if SyFy will stream the entire show, or if you can get via Netflix or other, but I recommend 12 Monkeys. There are 4 seasons, but its a show with a real ending, and a satisfying one at that. It starts off based on the movie, but definitely goes beyond that plot. Great characters, both heroes and villains, and pretty much all plotlines resolved.
I haven't gotten around to it yet, but it was available on Hulu when I added it to my queue a couple months back.
-
2 hours ago, Jakes said:
Kripke pulls another minor miracle--after TIMELESS has been cancelled for the second time...NBC just announced against all odds that the show gets a 2 hour series finale episode around the holidays.
Wow, that man really made quite the deal at the crossroads, didn't he? ;)
-
4
-
-
7 hours ago, WatchrTina said:
Wait, what? I watch that show devotedly on my local PBS station but I've never seen any of them in it. I only started watching within the last couple of years so maybe they were all on in earlier seasons. I guess now I'll have to go back and watch the older episodes on Netflix.
Tobias was in, I think, a S3 episode and Sam was in a S10 episode. I recognized Tobias right off, but it took me a bit with Sam. The early seasons, especially, have a lot of familiar actors in them from many shows I've watched over the years.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, PreBabylonia said:
I never thought it looked cheap myself, but I highly recommended it to my best friend and lent him my Season One dvd. He just couldn't get over how cheap the effects were, and couldn't see past it. I enjoyed it from the pilot and fell madly in love with it when Crichton goes a bit off the rails (think the season two premiere). As a longtime reader, I don't focus on special effects but character and then plot. I think the ones that are more literal focus first on the settings and production.
That's what I was kinda getting at. I wasn't saying that Farscape looked cheap overall--and, I'm quite certain it wasn't given all the puppetry involved--but in comparison to the look of Babylon 5, I think it was much less polished in that area. However, I bought into the Farscape's universe much easier than I did with Babylon 5.
-
I started watching Midsomer Murders recently on Netflix and was pleasantly surprised with not only a young Sam Heughan at one point, but also a young Tobias in an earlier episode--with a young Orlando Bloom too boot. This show is a treasure trove of actors you've seen on other projects!
-
1
-
-
16 hours ago, Hybridcookie said:
Just finished a Battlestar Galactica rewatch and my UO is that I liked the ending. I liked the ending of Lost as well
I did too. With both these shows, I felt the endings fit each show appropriately; they wrapped up most their main story arcs and gave the characters their due, and I was satisfied when it was all said and done. However, I never watched either of these shows in real time. I'm not sure how I'd feel about the endings if I had spent five years watching the show as opposed to five months and was really invested in differently.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, PreBabylonia said:
Interesting. I always thought of Babylon 5 as pure cheese, and when friends told me they didn't like the genre at all so wouldn't try my Farscape, I would tell them, "no, it's not like a B movie, not a crappy show like Babylon 5." I love so many sci-fi and fantasy shows, but Babylon 5 strikes me as a cheap show that they made to capitalize on the popularity of the genre at that time.
I watched Babylon 5 straight through, for the first time, over the course of a few months not long ago. I had a similar problem with it that I had with the first season of The Expanse--I could never fully get into the show because I could never fully buy into the universe they lived in. It's an enjoyable enough show, IMO, but I didn't feel like the 5-year story was actually all that well told when it was all said and done--I rather felt like someone was taking themselves far too seriously most of the time--but I stuck with it because I did enjoy a couple characters.
TBH, I think Farscape looks cheaper than Babylon 5 but I never had a problem buying into their universe. It was one of the most creative shows I've ever watched and it sucked me right in from almost the first episode.
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, Joe Hellandback said:
So I never watched Supernatural, my housemate liked it but I never took to it. However I'm a big fan of Torchwood Boy on YouTube and he reviewed an ep called 'Fanfiction' which really intrigued me. Therefore I have 2 questions, firstly what is 'destial'? (I know what 'Wincest' is, the brothers taking over from Buffy/Joyce/Dawn and The Charmed Ones for that particular fetish genre). Secondly who is the guy who turns up at the end that everyone makes a big deal off?
Destiel would be a segment of fans who ship the character of Dean and Castiel.
Fan Fiction was the 200th episode where they tried to cram a bunch of previous history of the show in as possible. So, the guy who shows up at the end is
SpoilerChuck, the author of the Supernatural books about Sam and Dean's lives the play is based on. He first was introduced as a prophet and then later was revealed to be God.
-
58 minutes ago, Sew Sumi said:
IIRC, Roger went back to the family in 1980, then they all traveled back together at the end of #8.
No. As I recall, after Bree and Mandy found Jem in the cave--and after the conspiracy nuts attacked them at Lallybroch, Bree and the kids were planning to travel back to the 1770s and make their way to the Ridge. However, they got pulled back to the 1740s instead and met up with Roger in the past--probably because one or all of them were thinking of Roger at the time and he drew them to him. I was under the impression they traveled from the 1740s to the 1770s directly, but now that someone pointed it out, it really wasn't explained was it?
But, yeah, I think they basically figured out how to travel more precisely by accident.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, toolazy said:
Well, Joe knows that there is something special about Claire - he mentions her uncanny diagnostic skills at one point. So he's sort of primed to accept it.
That's true. Claire is all sorts of strange in both the future and the past. ;)
-
3 hours ago, Whodunnit said:
Random question;
Does anyone know when Owen Mills (sheriff Jody Mills' son) died and what he died of?
Originally, I mean. Not when he became a zombie in 2010.
I thought it was some sort of cancer, but perhaps I misremember.
I can't remember it ever being stated what he died of, just that he died...hmm, Maybe I should rewatch Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid to refresh my memory?
-
12 hours ago, ruby24 said:
When did Brianna tell John that they were time travelers? Claire says that she told him at some point (even though he doesn't believe it), but did that take place offscreen (or off page?) Because I don't remember Bree telling him that.
Also, when did Claire tell Joe Abernathy the truth? Because he seems to know, but I don't remember her ever telling him either. And I would've liked to read that conversation, because how and why does he just believe it?
I believe it was Brianna who told Lord John they were travelers. It was when Roger, Brianna and the kids were preparing to head back through the stones and Brianna sees Willie for the first time. She makes a deal with Lord John to tell her the truth about Willie if she tells him the truth about where they come from and where they were going back to.
I believe Claire told Joe in Voyager when she returned to Boston to get her affairs in order before heading back through the stones.
As far as I recall, neither of these conversations were written. There was the lead up for the conversation with Lord John and then it skipped to John sitting under a tree contemplating what she'd told him. Similarly with Claire and Joe, as I recall, but no tree.
-
1
-
S06 Discussion
in Supernatural
Crowley claimed it was he who brought Sam back, and held the idea of sending Sam back over them to get Dean to hunt Alphas for him. However, Cass went and got Sam out of the cage before the conspiracy started--it was after Cass and Dean had the talk in the car at the end of S5 where Dean said something to the effect that where was his reward...all he got was a dead brother. So, I think Cass did it for Dean, more than anything, with a healthy dose of hubris mixed in. But he missed a bit and Sam ran off. So, not knowing what to do about that, Cass went to Heaven and found out Raphael was running things and wanting to get the apocalypse back on the rails. That's when he made his deal with Crowley and someone resurrected Grampy Campbell--I don't believe Crowley had that much juice, but maybe between both Cass and Crowley they could make it happen.
So, Grampy Campbell was brought back specifically to hunt down the Alphas, and he used Sam as a hunter, but Sam didn't know any of the details of why or anything. I personally believe Cass would've preferred Sam stay out of it altogether--less likely his deal with the King of Hell would be found out and/or Dean be brought into it all--but Cass had no control over that part. So, in a way Sam was part of the conspiracy in the sense he went on some of the hunts, but he wasn't really an active participant in the sense that he knew what was going on. And, he was resurrected before Cass made the deal with Crowley.
I would guess that Cass did know Sam didn't tell Dean he was alive, though. I mean, Sam ran off while Cass was standing there watching and he had to know Sam was working with the Campbell's since they were working for Crowley and Cass was working with Crowley... . But, to be honest, I think Cass was fine with Sam not telling Dean because it would've brought Dean back in and then Cass would've been found out--as he was in the end.