Bergamot

The problem is not that Berens tries and fails in his script to make Sam the sole big amazing badass hero of the story, both Christ-like and John Wayne adjacent at the same time. The problem is that he tries at all. Why? Why, in a show that is about two brothers, both supposedly amazing and heroic characters, is there this manic, slavering devotion to only one of them, as clearly demonstrated in this writer's work? There is no rule of TV writing which requires that only one character must be chosen to be the badass hero, with everyone else in a supporting role. And it's not an isolated one-off problem. I have seen writers on the show work so hard in their episodes to show Sam as the heroic, brave, wise, compassionate, brilliant leader. While Dean, a wonderful and complex and truly heroic character, keeps getting marginalized as the comic relief whose only admirable quality is the depth of his devotion to his brother. So yeah, the fact that the writer can't exactly manage to carry off what he was trying to do is not a solace to me.

I agree, the fact that Jensen admits that he had to be talked into/talk himself into liking the ending does not fill me with joy and excitement. I think if it had been an awesome ending, he would have loved it immediately. I also think that the excuses he gave for not liking it at first, that he was "too close" to it and that he didn't like the finality, are just examples of the rationalizations he eventually used in order to talk himself into liking it. That doesn't mean that I won't like it myself -- who knows at this point. But I don't like this showrunner or these writers, so I am not feeling a lot of trust. Jensen did say that the original ending according to Kripke's five-year plan "would not make sense now." So I am hoping this means no repeat of 5.22.

I think so too. And I say this with hesitation, since I am not deaf and have no family or friends who are, so what do I know, but I can see how a deaf person would not see it as being "defective", but just as part of who they are.

Yeah, I have to say that it does seem a bit much. Dean had a even longer, more intense, although very strange and conflicted relationship with Crowley, but I would have thought it weird if he had been weepy and depressed over him when Crowley sacrificed himself. And it's not like it was for Sam when Charlie died, for example. Or it doesn't seem to me that it should be, from what we saw happen on the show. I feel as if his reaction might be more like a set up for Future Plot Points in episodes to follow, which is why is seems, let's say, un-organic to me. Rowena was actually a more interesting and complicated character, I think, than she is currently being viewed. It's like all her sharp edges have been sanded down and smoothed away so that she can be an acceptable object of grief for Sam. It is interesting now to think of how we first met her, when she had nailed hotel workers to the ceiling and was happily relaxing under their dead bodies. And how she then murdered a waiter in a horrible fashion for interfering with her lunch at a nice restaurant, and sacrificed as bait to save herself one of the women she had recruited. But then, Rowena never pretended to be anything other than what she was. She was not selfless or loving; she always acted to please and protect herself, and did whatever she needed to do to gain and keep power. Specifically, magical power. It was all she really cared about, all that was important to her: being a powerful witch. Rowena made it absolutely clear that she served magic above all else. As she told Sam at the end, "I don't care about anything enough to take my own life. Not you, your brother... not even the world. But I believe in prophecy. I believe in magic." That's why I like the speculation that Rowena could someday end up as the Queen of Hell. I think it does the character a disservice to have her set on a pedestal by the show as a redeemed soul who nobly sacrificed herself to save the world after bonding with Sam. I just don't like the idea of her death serving as an inspiration for Sam -- it sounds too much like "fridging" her. I would rather think of her as someone who in the end remained true to what she served, which (as she once told Sam) was Magic, not God. And someone who would maybe find a witchy way to come back, because Rowena always did!

Heartbreaking. The words he wrote about his son made me cry.

I saw where the writer of the episode was quite proud that she was following the "new canon!" that was established a couple of episodes ago. Well, good for her. Just ignore the fact that the show has something going for it that very few other shows will ever have: 14 seasons of world building and established history and characterization and oh, yeah, CANON. Ignore the ways that the writers could use this as a strong foundation for the final season in so many satisfying ways. (And no, bringing back random characters for brief "convention" appearances does not count as doing this.) Sure, you just go ahead with your shiny "new canon" -- doesn't matter if it doesn't even make sense. How pointless is it to even have a Heaven versus a Hell, if it is so simple for people like Eileen to accidentally end up in Hell? But whatever. And as Katy says, let's not even ask why Bobby and John are still in Heaven now. Or are the angels going to come knocking on their doors up there with a notice of eviction, which states that under New Canon Regulation 5.2, they must be relocated back to Hell? It is kind of insulting to the viewers, who have watched the show faithfully for so long, for the writers to act as if they can just shrug and say, "Yeah, well, new canon."

No, of course not. But for me, it's not about the choice being made by the characters within the story. It's about the choice being made by the writers as to which character gets resurrected, whether it is a meaningful choice in terms of telling the overall story and not just a gimmick. Yes, I have to agree. To me it is feeling more like a Supernatural convention with various characters popping in for an appearance, than an actual story that holds together or moves me. Like, everyone applauds and cheers, and then we all line up for photo ops and autographs. But this isn't supposed to be a televised convention; it is supposed to be the show itself and it is supposed to mean something.

LOL! Sorry! I agree, though. And that music behind the big fight scene at the end -- I guess it was supposed to be all dramatic and exciting, but it was AWFUL.

I didn't realize that Dean was not going to be part of this episode, except minimally. It's a situation that automatically equals a minimally interesting episode, for me. I hope that this means there is an episode coming up that is mostly Dean. I know. It makes the loss of anyone basically pointless and meaningless. And this resurrection bugs me especially because they could do nothing to help Kevin. Not that I dislike Eileen, either the character or the actress. But she was just not significant enough a character, in the larger scheme of things on the show, for her to be the one and only soul saved after being sent to Hell. (Unless, I guess, she ends up as Sam's happy ending, as some are speculating.) I did like the moment when Dean says to Eileen, "It's about time," and she responds with this big, mischievous, urchin grin. It made me smile. I do like this actress. There has been some horrible background music for this season, hasn't there? I mean, some incredibly bad, scene-ruining stuff. I wish it would stop. I have not missed Castiel, and I thought his part of the episode was boring and a waste of time that could have been spent on better characters.

I think maybe I assumed she was talking about Dean because she had already said that Chuck's plan was for her to seduce Dean after being rescued by him. And just a moment before, she had made it clear that it was Chuck's idea for Dean to "bond" with the victim and that he had specifically crafted the dialogue for their bonding moment. And also, because of the way that she nodded toward Dean and emphasized the word "you" when she said "with YOU". I guess she could have meant "you and Sam", but I agree with Aeryn, to me it wouldn't seem to fit into what we saw of the conversation. It wouldn't bother me too much, to be honest. Just so long as she didn't say, "his obsession with Sam", I'm good. (As a Dean fan, my expectations are pretty low, I'm afraid.) But in this case, I am assuming that she meant Dean. I agree that it is ridiculous. Chuck is powerful and omniscient enough to create the whole scenario of the episode, but still needs Lilith to figure out for him where the gun is?

Ouch! But well said. It makes me hurt too to see what has become of my show. Yes. And it illustrates quite well what a really, really bad idea it was to make the whole final season focusing on Chuck the hack writer as God. Here the writers are trying to make fun of Chuck's writing as boring and stupid and unoriginal, and here I am as a viewer saying "Excuse me? What about the parts that you guys wrote? So what's your excuse?" I know Dabb thinks he is being clever and cute with this, but if I am not sure which parts are supposed to be dumb writing by Chuck and which parts are actually dumb writing by the real scriptwriter, then the whole thing becomes pretty pointless. The show's writers are just not good enough writers to write a clever story about a bad writer. I'm not sure at this point how powerful Chuck is supposed to be. It just seemed kind of bizarre to me that he could raise a powerful demon like Lilith from the Empty and force her to follow his script against her will, that he could force the werewolf brothers to commit murder/suicide as "foreshadowing" (or were those characters not "real? Who knows? Who cares?) -- yet he is not powerful or omniscient enough to know where the gun is and pull it out of the glove compartment if he wants it. I guess maybe we are supposed to assume that he could have, but was just entertaining himself with his story. Well, okay. At least one of us was entertained? I will say that this version of Lilith was well acted, and I enjoyed her sarcasm and eye-rolling reactions. And it was good to see Demon Dean again, if only for a brief moment! Not a great episode for Yockey to say good-bye with. But he did write some good ones, in my opinion, and I will always be grateful for "Nihilism", which I loved. I wish him well.

Yes, I agree. I was so shocked by this that I asked in my first post on this episode if I had heard correctly, because I could not believe it. I can only come up with three options. The first one is that the writer of the episode is so incompetent that he didn’t intend to for the character to convey what I heard. That Sam saying they would do the same thing for Jack as the father did for his son means something different from what those words mean. The second option is that the writer of the episode doesn’t see anything wrong with what the parents, and specifically the father, did in this episode. That he actually thinks it was admirable, because it is okay to do anything evil to innocent people as long as it is for Jack your child. In which case, in my opinion there is not just something wrong with this person’s writing, but with his moral compass. The third option is the writer knows how awful this would sound, and that it is the intention of the writers, for some reason of their own, to make us see the Winchesters as monsters. In which case, I have to wonder why I am bothering to watch the show. Because I love the show and want to watch it until the end, I am trying to lean toward the first option. Even though it is really sad that poor writing is the best option I can come up with.

I have really disliked the character of Becky since her first appearance, and I didn't like her any better in this last episode. Part of it is the way the actress has portrayed her, although she toned it down this last time. I have never seen the actress in any other role, but as Becky, I found it tiresome the way that she was constantly popping her eyes wide open, or dramatically narrowing them, or squinting sideways with a scowl, to supposedly convey some emotion. Just, enough already with the constant face-pulling and mugging and eyebrow-wagging! And part of it was the writing for the character, in which she came across to me as shallow and selfish and smug and unpleasant. I'm sorry she didn't like herself, but you know what? I didn't like her either! And she got off way too easy for what she did in that stupid episode where she roofied Sam in order to get in bed with him. But the thing that I dislike the most about Becky is that the writers for this show seem to think that we are automatically going to love and support Becky as a character because she is a fan, just like us! I mean, gosh, look, she loves fanfiction and collects show merchandise, Just Like Us!! Sorry, but I find it insulting that the writers think it is so easy to get around us by using that kind of stuff. And personally, I don't feel that I have anything in common with someone who needed intensive therapy to grasp the concept that there is a difference between a fictional character and the actor who plays him. The fact is that as a fan, I feel totally invisible to Dabb and his writers, which would be fine if they didn't seem to be paying attention to certain other fans. They are constantly talking about "what the fans want" and "what the fans will think", and I don't know who they are looking at when they make these types of judgments, but it is not me. For me, it was a breath of fresh air when Jensen was talking about bringing Benny back for this last episode, and he described him as one of his favorite characters ever, instead of calling him a "fan-favorite". I mean, some may love him and some may not (Benny does happen to have been a favorite of mine), but at least Jensen had the decency to not announce this appearance as that of a "fan-favorite". I am really tired of that phrase being used by the showrunners -- usually in reference to some character that I never wanted to see again or don't even remember. I am really tired of them trying to tell me what I want and what I like about the show. Because I don't think they have a clue.

That's what I thought as well. In addition to the reasons you give, I believe if we were supposed to think that Chuck was writing the episode we were watching, knowing this show it would have been made very obvious. Something like what we saw back in "The Monster at the End of This Book", where we would see Chuck typing something very specific, and then watch that scene actually happen. As for Sam's dream, I am not sure yet what it is supposed to indicate, other than the fact that there is a *connection* between Sam and Chuck. I guess we are just going to have to wait and see. It could have been something from one of Chuck's "failed drafts" that Michael talks about in "Nihilism": "God -- Chuck -- is a writer, and like all writers, he churns out draft after draft. My world? This world? Nothing but failed drafts. And when he realizes that they're flawed, he moves on and tries again." So anyway, I am thinking that the dream was nothing that Chuck was currently planning, but something that he had previously done a rough draft of, and then discarded. Because of that I doubt it was revealing something specific about what is going to happen this season. (Which is a shame, in my opinion, because it was really cool.) As for Becky, I have never liked her as a character, and sorry, but that includes her appearance in this episode. Even though they were trying to soften her, to me she still seemed like a shallow character, and her family life interactions came across to me like something straight out of a bad sitcom. Every time she appears on the show I hope that it is the last time we see her, so I would love it if Becky was gone for good, but I doubt I will be that lucky. I would especially hate it if she had some important part to play in the series finale, supposedly representing "The Fandom". Ugh. But my further thoughts on Becky are not episode-specific and maybe belong in the Bitterness and Unpopular Opinions thread.

Casseiopeia, I just wanted to say that I really appreciate all your posts in this thread and in the Supernatural Media thread! I don't know how you find all these nuggets that you share with us, but I really enjoy reading them. Thanks for doing it.

Yes, I like the fact that his wanting to keep on saving people and hunting things doesn't mean that he is not, as you say, still angry about being screwed by Chuck. And I liked what he said about how they owed it to the people they had lost to keep going, to keep putting one foot in front of another. LOL, Aeryn! This is so true! I didn't think about it so much at first, but it does seem odd. Especially his bitterness about having to "carry the weight" for the normal people. I honestly thought that this was something Sam had come to terms with years ago. Maybe the writers are not just bringing back characters like the Woman In White and Bloody Mary from the beginning of the show; maybe they are also going to regurgitate and rehash all the old issues from back then. Like, in one episode they can talk about why Sam went to Stanford, and then in the next one they can argue about who was John's favorite.

I think one reason that this episode did not work for me as well as it did for some was that I felt the show wanted me to sympathize at the end with Billy's parents, and I didn't. I did feel for Billy himself; it was brave of him to admit that he could not control his bloodlust, and to offer himself to be killed before he could hurt anyone else. But I did not like at all the way that the parents were presented as people to be sympathized with -- and even admired? -- for what they did. The writer of the episode made this very clear by having Sam compare himself and Dean to the father, and say that they would have done the same thing for Jack. (I would like to think that what they meant here was that they would die for someone they loved. Which is not exactly a big revelation.) Anyway, to die for your child? That's something I could understand. But to kill innocent people for them? When the father was telling Dean that only someone with children would understand what he did, I was thinking, how about seeing how the parents of the dead girl feel about that? I thought that the parents were as monstrous, in their own way, as their son. They knew that their son had killed the first cheerleader, and chopped up her dead body to cover up his crime. They kidnapped an innocent girl and were draining her of her blood in order to feed him. When they were found out, the mother was ready to kill the Winchesters in order to cover up what was going on. And in the midst of all this, they were still totally focused on getting their son into Yale, as if that goal made this all okay. Sure, just wash the blood off your hands, have another glass of wine, and get back to doing whatever it takes to get your son into an Ivy League school. But gee, what else were they, as devoted parents, supposed to do? I don't know, but not what they did. Sorry, but this part of the story bugged me, especially because the writer made a point of the comparison to Sam and Dean.

Yes, this is what I thought too. I was thinking that this point in time, Chuck, although still possessing God powers, can no longer do "anything", even though he told Becky he could. ("Oh, Becky. I can do anything.") Because of how he is damaged, he can't simply move on to another world. And I could be wrong, because the show hasn't been clear about it, but I don't think he can even write a script for Dean and Sam right now. When he was writing his first rough draft for Becky, the one she thought was not very original, I didn't think that he was writing the story of this episode. For one thing, he did not sit down at Becky's computer and start writing until the story of the episode was well underway. For another, one of her critiques was about the villain's lame monologue delivered while Dean and Sam are tied up, and that didn't happen. But most of all, if Chuck could just sit down and write something to happen to Dean and Sam, why would he be moping about having a "falling out" with the Winchesters? Why would he even care what the Winchesters thought of him? Why wouldn't he just write a different story to happen to them to cheer himself up? I don't think he can right now. Although we now see that he does have an idea for how he would like this season to end. I think that maybe he just doesn't have the power right now to make it happen.

I loved the opening scene too! So dark and desperate. (And not a fangirl or fanfiction metaphor in sight -- sorry, but I'm so tired of all the heavy-handed meta.) I wish the whole episode had been about that AU. In fact, I wish the whole season could be -- that's the kind of story that the show deserves for its final season. I have always loved Benny, and I was happy that the actor could come back to do that scene! I hope I heard something wrong, and that someone can correct me. Did Sam say that he and Dean would have done the same thing for Jack that those parents did? The parents kidnapped an innocent girl to allow their vampire son to feed on her! It was a twisted and evil thing to do. If the show wants to say that Sam and Dean would have done the same thing, that's real character assassination as far as I'm concerned.

Terrific. The news about this season just keeps getting better and better. Oh well, par for the course. My happy place right now is thinking about Jensen meeting with people in a few weeks to talk about future projects!

This was my understanding of the situation as well. Maybe the writers decided that these facts allowed for too much sympathy for Dean and insufficient guiltlessness and woobiness for Castiel. Obviously a situation that could not be allowed to stand, right? So they are going to have to come up with something else. Whatever. Hopefully this storyline will not drag on forever. The sooner it is over the better.

gonzosgirrl commented in the Spoiler thread: I agree, I think Jensen did the best he could. Personally I think it was so unfair that Jensen was put in this position. If he had ignored the situation completely, he would have been attacked for not caring about Jared, or not caring about the fans and their concern. If he framed it as a very serious and upsetting matter, the "No Big Deal" fans would have been angry with him - why is he being so hard on poor Jared, what's the big deal, why isn't he supporting his friend? If he framed it as something not to worry about, because everything will be okay, as I think he was trying to do, other fans would say that he wasn't taking it seriously enough. The fact is that he should NEVER have been put into the position of being the one to frame it for the public in the first place. But because everyone else has chosen to remain silent, he was. However, we do not actually know how he personally feels about the situation. And I am okay with that. Jensen deserves privacy to deal with things that happen in his personal life just as much as other people.

Sorry, bethy, I understand your reaction, but I agree with gonzosgirrl here. I am not sure where to put the rest of my comment, so I guess I will take it to the SuperNormal thread.

Well, I am relieved to hear something. I was starting to wonder when we didn't hear anything at all.

One thing that bothered me about "Lilith's Crook" or Horn, or Vacuum Cleaner, or whatever you want to call it, is what a lazy plot device it was. Are we supposed to believe that Lilith was in sole possession, for all that time, of a magical object that could give her godlike powers -- perhaps even make her Chuck's equal -- and never bothered to use it for herself? Because I don't believe it. And they made it clear in the episode that all the demons knew about it -- Bel said that Lilith never had to use it, because it was enough that they knew she had it. Well, Lilith was destroyed years ago. No other demon tried to steal it? Not even Crowley? And I guess Lucifer wasn't interested? It wasn't that impossible for someone to get at. I know they needed to invent a magical McGuffin to allow them to fight back against what Chuck had done. But the show could have at least come up with a McGuffin that made sense in regard to the history of the show. I guess attempting to achieve plausibility would have been too much work.