S07.E04: Defending Your Life

[Demented Daisy]

Sam and Dean discover Osiris, a vengeful Egyptian god, is responsible for a series of gruesome murders; Osiris puts Dean on trial.

 

 

The season started off so strongly....

[AwesomO4000]

... and then this happened.

 

I never rewatch this episode and I try to pretend it never happened. A major lowlight of the season for me.

Edited August 12, 2014 by AwesomO4000

[catrox14]

I don't mind this episode. Dean and Jo get some closure :(.  And I've always like the actor playing Osiris. It was also nice to see Sam defend Dean :)

[DittyDotDot]

There's a lot of problems with this episode as I recall. What I mostly remember is thinking it would be an episode that they could finally deal with some of Dean's guilt issues, but in the end I felt like it was just a way to heap more guilt on Dean. So, maybe it's only a failure because I had different expectations--which is really my fault and not the show's, right?

[Amerilla]

An interesting concept, but it just didn't work. There was plenty of material to exploit, but it felt really flat. I did like seeing Jo again. And the legal profession probably didn't lose much when Sam turned back to hunting.

[mertensia]

It's only worth it for the bit between Dean and Jo. Also Sam telling Osiris: I'm going to serve as his lawyer. Deal.

I still don't understand why Osiris went after people who truly regretted their actions and not people who didn't. I mean all a sociopath has to do is say "Yeah not feeling the guilt over the mime massacre" and he's safe but some guy saying "I can't believe I lied to my boss about why I was late!" and is beating himself up over it is doomed.

[DittyDotDot]

I think you've finally hit on why I never understood Osiris @mertensia, why punish a guy who obviously felt guilty and was already punishing himself? No one was ever going to punish them more than they punished themselves--just like Dean.

 

I agree that the scenes with Jo and Dean are the best parts of this episode. Also, it's too bad that Dean got nabbed before he got to have some sexy times, he was due, IMO. ;)

[mertensia]

Well I am comforted that my cat is forever safe from Osiris. She's certainly never going to feel guilty!

[catrox14]

I always thought the idea was that Dean was guilty of having unnecessary guilt which lead to other people being hurt unnecessarily or that it lead to him hurting himself unnecessarily because he felt unwarranted guilt..... I think...

[trxr4kids]

Er that's an interesting point or points catrox and nicely sums up the problem with this one. The mental gymnastics one has to do to make it make some sort of sense.

[DittyDotDot]

On re-watch, this one doesn't work much better than I remember. I do like the bits with Dean and Jo and I think Osiris is an interesting character, but Sam feels really wonky--at least Dean feels like Dean, though.  I would've loved to see a couple other blasts from the past. Mostly though, the trial parts of the episode really lag, IMO, and grind the whole thing to a screeching halt. I don't know...its not offensive or unwatchable, just not really all that enjoyable when doing so, IMO.

[Demented Daisy]

Just finished this one and, yep, I hate it just as much as I always have.  Had Sam been able to convince Dean to let go of the guilt, it could have been excellent.  But nope.  Dean has to keep feeling guilty about Amy Pond, so he has to keep feeling guilty about everything.  Ugh.

[Goldmoon]

Saw this for the first time last night.  Boy this episode sucked. Dean facing the guilt he carries could have been so much more.

[GirlyGeek]

Well, it was like I'd never seen this episode.  No, really, I barely remembered it.
I wish it had stayed that way.  :/

Don't like this one.  After a good first 2 episodes, why this 3 episode stretch of suckage? (I'm assuming I'll still hate Shut Up Dr. Phil as much as I did the first time, lol).
Yes, the parts with Jo were good.  But the heaping of guilt on Dean was not (and some of the flashbacks had the reaction of me rolling my eyes rather than sympathy or seeing how Dean would feel guilty, which is what I assume they intended).  And, good for you, Sam... you don't feel guilty.  You're super duper well-rounded and a healthy individual.  I don't really understand it, but OK.  Somehow, after that conversation by the car (and nice directing having the brothers stand on opposite sides of the car, divided) Dean felt guilty *because* he still felt guilty, lol.

I just don't know... I think, if I were Sam, I'd still feel pretty damn guilty about lots of stuff.  If he's figured out, somehow, how to separate feeling "responsible" vs feeling "guilty", then good on him, but to me it kind of came out of left field. 

Ugh, I'm starting to feel dread.  I recall disliking SPN more and more beginning in the seventh season and I'm starting to recall why, despite how much I loved the opening episodes.  I start to really, really, dislike Sam (in general, not all the time) beginning somewhere in this season and I don't really recover until

Season 10, or maybe end of Season 9 with his "I lied" comment, and subsequent actions, of course.

[AwesomO4000]

Ugh, I'm starting to feel dread.  I recall disliking SPN more and more beginning in the seventh season and I'm starting to recall why, despite how much I loved the opening episodes.  I start to really, really, dislike Sam (in general, not all the time) beginning somewhere in this season and I don't really recover until

Season 10, or maybe end of Season 9 with his "I lied" comment, and subsequent actions, of course.

 

I agree with much of your post above - though I meant to more quote than like, because I actually feel the opposite from you on this. Except for this particular episode - which to me just doesn't make much sense, because if Sam feels so guiltless, why does he have hallucinations of Lucifer telling him what a failure he is etc.? - I actually felt better about Sam and Dean's relationship in this season (actually starting the second half of season 6) than I had in a while. The stretch of good stuff for their relationship starts happening for me at the end of "The Mentalists" where Sam and Dean

actually talk things out and come to a mutually beneficial understanding

- something that doesn't generally happen quickly on this show. The end of "Season 7, Time for a Wedding," Sam's concern for Dean in "How to Win Friends...," what he does in "Time After Time..." and the end of "Plucky Pennywhistle's..." also stand out for me.

 

I'll be interested to see if your opinion remains the same when you get to that stretch of episodes.

[GirlyGeek]

I'll be interested to see if your opinion remains the same when you get to that stretch of episodes.

I'm interested in that as well. In my recollection, season 7 is not good. But, I'm seeing as I watch that I don't remember much of these episodes at all.

Considering I was going thru some tough personal stuff during season 6 and 7, I think it was all overshadowed because of that. Now, in rewatch, I've been forming new opinions (at least on season 6).

I do hope I get new perspective so I can find this season to be more enjoyable than what I remember.

[DittyDotDot]

I just don't know... I think, if I were Sam, I'd still feel pretty damn guilty about lots of stuff.  If he's figured out, somehow, how to separate feeling "responsible" vs feeling "guilty", then good on him, but to me it kind of came out of left field. 

Ugh, I'm starting to feel dread.  I recall disliking SPN more and more beginning in the seventh season and I'm starting to recall why, despite how much I loved the opening episodes.  I start to really, really, dislike Sam (in general, not all the time) beginning somewhere in this season and I don't really recover until

Season 10, or maybe end of Season 9 with his "I lied" comment, and subsequent actions, of course.

 

Yeah, I remember thinking "You just don't feel it anymore? Good for you Sam,." I understand what they were going for, I just don't think they got there in the end. I think they were trying to show Sam feeling like he'd paid his dues and could move past some of his crap, but what a douchey way to express it.

 

Anyway, this episode is wonky and I like to pretend it doesn't really exist. If you remove it, I don't think it changes the narrative at all. That's so weird for me, up till S6, I usually find there's something in almost every episode I wouldn't want to live without. But, even though the Jo scenes were nice, I could easily live without them if it means this never happened. I think S7 improves a bit in a couple episodes, and even though it still has it's issues, I look back on S7 rather fondly...sometimes.

[GirlyGeek]

So, piggybacking off my post (above) from the last re-watch... Yes, I do feel differently.  Its funny how much your own life experiences can color how you receive an episode's theme/POV.  

I don't hate this episode during this re-watch as much.  Yes, it doesn't do much for me, but the extreme feelings about it aren't there.

I still dislike the head-hanging, beat down look that Dean has throughout the episode.  Its obvious we're being shown that he feels guilty for Amy.  But then the line "Well if you had to do it, then what's there to feel guilty about" and Dean's agreement to that line, just don't jive for me.  Did he not have to do it?  Then why did he?  Or, conversely, he DID have to do it... so is he feeling guilty because of lying about it?  I don't get the message.

And all of this Dean-guilt is out of left field for me too.  Yes, I believe he carries this crap around and does blame himself for things outside of his control.  But, as a viewer, we haven't really seen that portrayed as of late, so it kinda seems wedged in to the episode.

And Sam, as the 'lawyer' basically feeding Dean lines rubbed me the wrong way too.  Dean's sitting in the witness chair, head hanging, guilty-looking and Sam is basically talking to him like a child "so you don't feel guilty so much as sad..."  Something about it just doesn't work for me.

I agree with other posters that Sam just felt off this episode.  And his whole talk at the end was really off putting.

[Hanahope]

I agree with others that this episode wasn't all that good.  I didn't get why Dean would feel guilty about so many things he had no control over.  I mean really. does he really thing that Jo wouldn't have become a hunter on her own, without him?  seriously?  And if he's so guilty about Amy, then why kill her?  Or is he just guilty because Sam thinks he let Amy go?  It really didn't make any sense.  If Dean was going to feel guilty about any "innocent deaths" there's a lot more others to choose from, like those killed in the police station by Lillith.

[DittyDotDot]

3 hours ago, Hanahope said:

I agree with others that this episode wasn't all that good.  I didn't get why Dean would feel guilty about so many things he had no control over.  I mean really. does he really thing that Jo wouldn't have become a hunter on her own, without him?  seriously?  And if he's so guilty about Amy, then why kill her?  Or is he just guilty because Sam thinks he let Amy go?  It really didn't make any sense.  If Dean was going to feel guilty about any "innocent deaths" there's a lot more others to choose from, like those killed in the police station by Lillith.

I'd say he doesn't feel guilty for killing Amy, but feels guilty for lying to Sam about it. That's pretty much what he said to the chick in the bar, anyway and Sam was all thanking him for letting her go at the top of the hour... . So, I get Dean feels guilty--he's basically a big ol' pile of guilt--but Osiris punishing people for feeling guilty didn't make much sense to me. Why punish someone who is already punishing themselves? The whole set up was wonky, to me. And, then the trial itself was even wonkier. 

Edited June 11, 2017 by DittyDotDot

[Katy M]

On ‎6‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 8:00 PM, DittyDotDot said:

I'd say he doesn't feel guilty for killing Amy, but feels guilty for lying to Sam about it. That's pretty much what he said to the chick in the bar, anyway and Sam was all thanking him for letting her go at the top of the hour... . So, I get Dean feels guilty--he's basically a big ol' pile of guilt--but Osiris punishing people for feeling guilty didn't make much sense to me. Why punish someone who is already punishing themselves? The whole set up was wonky, to me. And, then the trial itself was even wonkier. 

I pretty much agree with all of this. Dean feels guilty for lying to Sam.  I think he may also feel some guilt for orphanizing (it's a word now) Jacob.  But, Osiris should punish people who DON'T feel guilty.  OTOH, I do kind of like the idea that the "defendant" was in charge of his own fate.  That was kind of an interesting twist. 

I actually wrote a fanfic about this episode.  I don't remember if I kept in the part about it all being about Dean feeling guilty, but the trial was about the first thing dean felt guilty for, the thing he felt the most guilty for, and the last thing he felt guilty for.  Osiris was calling three witnesses.  Sam got to call 3 rebuttals.  They all had to be dead.

So, Osiris called a kid that was killed by the striga after Dean had gone to play video games.  Sam called Jake from Dead in the Water to rebut showing how Dean had saved so many more kids' lives since then.

He called John because Dean felt guilty about him selling his soul.  Sam called Samuel to prove that parents do all kinds of crazy things for their kids that their kids wouldn't want them to.

Then, of course, he called Amy.  Sam got upset about that, but finished the job.  He called Ruby to show that he wasn't the greatest judge of supernatural creatures being good.

[bettername2come]

I like that they let Sam use his pre-law knowledge. Good to see Jo again. Great acting by Jensen. You can see that guilt weighing down on him when Sam and Jo are on the stand. Osiris was a fun antagonist in the court scene, but he loses my sympathy making ghosts kill even when they don't want to. Poor Jo having to try to kill Dean. I am glad they got some closure.

[Katy M]

11 hours ago, bettername2come said:

I like that they let Sam use his pre-law knowledge. Good to see Jo again. Great acting by Jensen. You can see that guilt weighing down on him when Sam and Jo are on the stand. Osiris was a fun antagonist in the court scene, but he loses my sympathy making ghosts kill even when they don't want to. Poor Jo having to try to kill Dean. I am glad they got some closure.

I like this episode also, but that being the case oddly enough I can't understand the premise.  To me, it makes no sense to kill those that actually feel guilty for their actions.  That drunk driver was in AA, sober, felt bad for what he did.   You know he wasn't likely to do it again, but addiction being what it is, I won't guarantee that.  The dog fight guy had definitely seen the error of his ways and changed.  I don't know, but killing those that have no guilt and no compunction over doing the same thing again seems like the ones that should be killed. 

Spoiler

Which makes me wonder if this might not have been a more compelling episode in Season 9, when Dean said he would do the same thing again in regards to allowing Zeke to possess Sam.  Or, in Season 10, when Sam said he would use the Book of the Damned again even knowing it would let the Darkness out.

[Pondlass1]

I just felt the episode looked cheap...like they got the wardrobe for Osiris from the Dollar Store. Plus it didn't make much sense. Just more Amy Pond guilt trips for Dean. As others have pointed out - surely you go after those that don't feel guilty.  Dean beats himself up everyday.   He thinks he's 90% crap.

Dean was damn right to kill Amy. People only react because she was pretty and young and not monster-like. 

[RulerofallIsurvey]

I don't dislike this episode like it seems many others do.  I think it's rather boring, but not obnoxious.  

It occurred to me while watching the "Previouslies" which showed Dean telling Amy P "But people... They are who they are. No matter how hard you try, you are what you are. You will kill again."  Exactly.  And hunters keep killing them.  So why don't Monsters hunt Hunters?  I get why Hunters hunt Monsters - they kill humans.  But looking at it from the Monster side, Hunters kill off their (monster) kind, and killing humans to eat is probably no different than humans killing cows or chickens.  So why after all these years, did it take the Leviathans to finally organize a hit on Sam and Dean?  Really, Monsters could have a network, kind of like the hunter network.  'hey, I heard a nest of vamps got taken out in North Dakota, must be a hunter.  Let's get moving and track 'em down before they get any more of us."  

Red dirt - it's called clay, Sam.  Also, not really good for fruit trees, unless it's been heavily amended to improve the drainage.  The soil Ph is probably about right for apple trees though.

Sure Dean - you don't eat apples in pie, I guess.  Well, not after Sam brought you cake last episode.  

This might be weird, but I liked Osiris. 

I want to know what Sam said to the Rabbi to let him leave with the shofar.  

I don't have a problem with Sam's "I don't feel guilty" bit at the end.  I understood exactly what the show was going for and it made sense to me.  

[DeeDee79]

29 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

I don't dislike this episode like it seems many others do.  I think it's rather boring, but not obnoxious.  

It occurred to me while watching the "Previouslies" which showed Dean telling Amy P "But people... They are who they are. No matter how hard you try, you are what you are. You will kill again."  Exactly.  And hunters keep killing them.  So why don't Monsters hunt Hunters?  I get why Hunters hunt Monsters - they kill humans.  But looking at it from the Monster side, Hunters kill off their (monster) kind, and killing humans to eat is probably no different than humans killing cows or chickens.  So why after all these years, did it take the Leviathans to finally organize a hit on Sam and Dean?  Really, Monsters could have a network, kind of like the hunter network.  'hey, I heard a nest of vamps got taken out in North Dakota, must be a hunter.  Let's get moving and track 'em down before they get any more of us."  

Red dirt - it's called clay, Sam.  Also, not really good for fruit trees, unless it's been heavily amended to improve the drainage.  The soil Ph is probably about right for apple trees though.

Sure Dean - you don't eat apples in pie, I guess.  Well, not after Sam brought you cake last episode.  

This might be weird, but I liked Osiris. 

I want to know what Sam said to the Rabbi to let him leave with the shofar.  

I don't have a problem with Sam's "I don't feel guilty" bit at the end.  I understood exactly what the show was going for and it made sense to me.  

I agree it was pretty boring and it didn't interest me enough to actively like or dislike it. I did enjoy the actor that played Osiris in Iron Man so it was nice to see him here. The bolded part of your post would have been a much more interesting premise for season 12 than the dreck that we got. BMOL & American hunters banding together when the monsters organize and fight back!

[DittyDotDot]

1 hour ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

So why don't Monsters hunt Hunters?  I get why Hunters hunt Monsters - they kill humans.  But looking at it from the Monster side, Hunters kill off their (monster) kind, and killing humans to eat is probably no different than humans killing cows or chickens.  So why after all these years, did it take the Leviathans to finally organize a hit on Sam and Dean?  Really, Monsters could have a network, kind of like the hunter network.  'hey, I heard a nest of vamps got taken out in North Dakota, must be a hunter.  Let's get moving and track 'em down before they get any more of us."

I think you answered your own question here. Monsters keep to their own, it seems, so there is no monster network to pass information through. I think they were trying to network the monsters in S9 through Eve, but they still seemed to keep to their own species. 

Spoiler

I also think that's what they were thinking of doing with Bloodlines, showing a monster network operating in the US. It just didn't make a lot of sense in how they did it.

Edited September 23, 2017 by DittyDotDot

[Wayward Son]

On 28/07/2017 at 4:14 PM, Pondlass1 said:

Dean was damn right to kill Amy. People only react because she was pretty and young and not monster-like. 

Or people may not approve of what Dean did because Amy had extenuating circumstances, and let's be honest,  Sam and Dean both have done things that have ultimately led to the death of other people in their manic quest to save one another from death's door. She is no worse than either brother on that front.

And to be honest, your assumption that the only reason people disapprove of Dean murdering a woman and leaving her eight year old sonas an orphan is due to her looks borderline breaks the "be civil" rule IMO. Don't put words into other fans mouths please. 

Edited September 28, 2017 by Wayward Son

[RulerofallIsurvey]

On 9/23/2017 at 5:27 PM, DittyDotDot said:

I think they were trying to network the monsters in S9 through Eve, but they still seemed to keep to their own species. 

Wait, Eve was S6.  I know - 9's, 6's...you were looking at your monitor upside down, right?   ;)  

But what I don't understand is why the monsters haven't organized better, even within their own species, to protect their 'clans' or 'nests' or whatever and hunt down hunters (or at least be aware of if there is a hunter in the area) better.  9.20 aside.

Spoiler

Cause I'm not talking about them running a major american city.  

Putting this also in a spoiler tag, just in case:

Spoiler

On 9/23/2017 at 4:59 PM, DeeDee79 said:

BMOL & American hunters banding together when the monsters organize and fight back!

Well, yeah - I don't see why they couldn't have done both.  Had the monsters organize and fight back and Sam and Dean realize the BMoL aren't who they really want to work with after all.  It would have been more complicated (nuanced), but I think doable.  

[DittyDotDot]

1 hour ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Wait, Eve was S6.  I know - 9's, 6's...you were looking at your monitor upside down, right?   ;)  

Upside down, right side up...I've seen it both ways! ;)

Yeah, I meant S6.

1 hour ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

But what I don't understand is why the monsters haven't organized better, even within their own species, to protect their 'clans' or 'nests' or whatever and hunt down hunters (or at least be aware of if there is a hunter in the area) better.

Probably the same reason hunters tend to keep to themselves only occasionally working together when they need a little more muscle...they're paranoid and don't trust anyone! 

[catrox14]

2 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

Or people may not approve of what Dean did because Amy had extenuating circumstances, and let's be honest,  Sam and Dean both have done things that have ultimately led to the death of other people in their manic quest to save one another from death's door. She is no worse than either brother on that front.

And to be honest, your assumption that the only reason people disapprove of Dean murdering a woman and leaving her eight year old sonas an orphan is due to her looks borderline breaks the "be civil" rule IMO. Don't put words into other fans mouths please. 

I didn't take it to mean that Pondlass was saying ALL viewers thought that about Amy, but more of a general observation about the optics of  killing a monster who looks like Amy Pond, the young, pretty, female, mother, innocent looking, not seemingly threatening but who is still killing humans,might be less palatable/worse infraction than if say it was Andy Pond, the father, who was maybe just as attractive as Amy but being male could be perceived as more of a threat, so it's more palatable to kill him. Or say Amy or (Andy) Pond was scary looking or unattractive and looked like a monster it might be considered a good thing to kill the monster. Not saying it's right or wrong just saying that's how I took Pondlass' remark. 

I think it would have been a lot more interesting if it had been Andy Pond, Sam's childhood male BFF rather than a former GF to see if the response to Dean killing 'Andy' Pond would have been any different. JMHO

[gonzosgirrl]

15 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I didn't take it to mean that Pondlass was saying ALL viewers thought that about Amy, but more of a general observation about the optics of  killing a monster who looks like Amy Pond, the young, pretty, female, mother, innocent looking, not seemingly threatening but who is still killing humans,might be less palatable/worse infraction than if say it was Andy Pond, the father, who was maybe just as attractive as Amy but being male could be perceived as more of a threat, so it's more palatable to kill him. Or say Amy or (Andy) Pond was scary looking or unattractive and looked like a monster it might be considered a good thing to kill the monster. Not saying it's right or wrong just saying that's how I took Pondlass' remark. 

I think it would have been a lot more interesting if it had been Andy Pond, Sam's childhood male BFF rather than a former GF to see if the response to Dean killing 'Andy' Pond would have been any different. JMHO

Oh yeah, it would have been different. Likely it would have been: Dean killed him out of jealousy that someone else was a BFF/brother to Sam. Heh, we're kind of lucky this episode didn't happen in the Dabb era or I'm 100% certain that would've been the case.

As for strictly the 'male' vs 'female' sympathetic monster, we kind of already had that in Metamorphosis, even though the rougarou did actively try to feed in the end.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

7 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Oh yeah, it would have been different. Likely it would have been: Dean killed him out of jealousy that someone else was a BFF/brother to Sam. Heh, we're kind of lucky this episode didn't happen in the Dabb era or I'm 100% certain that would've been the case.

Actually, I think that's more of a Carver Era trait, but mmv.  

[Katy M]

Here's my two cents worth.  I kind of lean towards what Dean said in Bloodlust.  "If it's supernatural we kill it.  That's our job."  I think it's easier than getting into a bunch of grey areas.  I mean, I do think it needs to have killed someone.  But, nine times out of ten, they're not even going to know about monsters unless they kill.  In Bloodlust, Gordon went to town because of the cattle mutilations, but IIRC Sam and Dean only went because of the decapitated vampires Gordon was leaving laying around

[Iju]

i'm only here to say one thing - i loved the eager look on sam's face as he became dean's "lawyer". he was so "loyal", idk the absolute correct word.

PS i don't find this episode as bad as a lot of people find it in this thread. whoops^^'

[Jeddah]

On 8/16/2018 at 6:39 PM, Iju said:

 

PS i don't find this episode as bad as a lot of people find it in this thread. whoops^^'

That’s how I feel about almost every episode! I love this show!

Edited August 18, 2018 by Jeddah

[Iju]

9 hours ago, Jeddah said:

That’s how I feel about almost every episode! I love this show!

i think my absence of this show for a while is what made me appreciate even the worst received episodes lmao

[Lunula]

This episode felt out of left field for me. On rewatch, I didn't hate the episode, but I don't love it and I think it was mostly because no one really addressed why an Egyptian god would show up out of the blue. I get the various demons popping up, or even the increased activity of "Eve's evil creatures" like vampires, but an Egyptian god? Why? Osiris is a fascinating character, in general, but it felt totally out of place for me other than a vehicle to show us that Dean feels guilty about some of his choices. Even that felt too heavy-handed for me in a show, and character, that is best when nuanced and subtle and was especially so when Sam jumped in to defend him and act his lawyer. 

I don't mind MotW episodes filling in major arcs at all, sometimes it's a nice break - but in the end, this one was too heavy-handed and forced for me.

[Katy M]

On ‎9‎/‎23‎/‎2017 at 4:25 PM, Runswithscissors said:

I want to know what Sam said to the Rabbi to let him leave with the shofar.  

I need it to save my brother.  I'll bring it right back (puppy dog eyes). If that didnt' work, he punched him.

[Lemuria]

On 1/15/2019 at 1:54 PM, Lunula said:

I didn't hate the episode, but I don't love it and I think it was mostly because no one really addressed why an Egyptian god would show up out of the blue.

Not only that:  What kind of a god of justice is this, if he goes after the people who feel responsible and remorseful over what they may have done (or, as in Dean's case, Everything Since The Beginning Of The World) but does not go after those who don't feel remorseful?  One of the most idiotic premises, IMO, in a show full of them.

Edited January 16, 2019 by Lemuria

[The Companion]

Wow, I loved the first 3 of this season, but this one fell flat. I felt like the writing was off for both of the guys. Osiris was an interesting concept, even with his flawed version of justice, but I hated the execution. I also hated the way they had Dean give up. In trial and beyond. I loved that they had him reaching a breaking point earlier in the season (and what beautiful work) but I don't feel that it was or is guilt that has him burnt out. Not sure if that makes sense. The Bobby voicemail. Waiting for the other shoe to drop. Those aren't guilt. They are grief and exhaustion and loss of hope. I have identified so hard with him this season as someone who also employs the squash those emotions and sprinkle dark humor on top when trauma comes calling method to life. So to highlight guilt was a weird choice and it would have made way way way more sense to pick that thread upwith Sam who we have seen struggle with guilt for the actions of Souless Sam and who now remembers everything. And it seems weird that his guilt was centered on getting Sam back in to the life. I think, at this point, the guilt for that is probably pretty faded. After all, the YED was always coming for Sam. I could have bought a scene where he feels guilt for not finding a way to save Sam. Even though it wasn't his fault and Dean actually saved Sam from the fate of being Lucifer's puppet, I would have bought a scene where Dean is watching his brother struggle and feeling guilty for not protecting him. 

Speaking of Sam, what the hell was that last scene? Guilt is such a basic human emotion. Having Sam claim not to feel it was creepy and made you wonder if Souless Sam was back. At least have him echo Jo that death gave him perspective. The logical response to Dean's question, though, was that Osiris was targeting people in the bar and/or maybe could only judge one at a time.

The only redeemable part of this was Jo/Dean. Speaking of which, why did she break the window? Am I missing something? He would have been just as dead in an explosion with the salt and cracking a window might let out the gas. It was odd. The whole episode was odd. 

[Katy M]

27 minutes ago, The Companion said:

The only redeemable part of this was Jo/Dean. Speaking of which, why did she break the window? Am I missing something? He would have been just as dead in an explosion with the salt and cracking a window might let out the gas. It was odd. The whole episode was odd. 

The salt circles did appear to be useless this episode.  The other guy could also have been equally shot over the line, I would have thought.  Jo did reach into Dean's pocket and take his lighter, though.  Maybe she didn't have a ghost lighter.

[The Companion]

2 hours ago, Katy M said:

The salt circles did appear to be useless this episode.  The other guy could also have been equally shot over the line, I would have thought.  Jo did reach into Dean's pocket and take his lighter, though.  Maybe she didn't have a ghost lighter.

Don't you hate it when you leave your ghost lighter in your other ghost pants?

[MagnusHex]

I've started noticing a pattern with these last two episodes: it gives us a groanworthy moment with Dean, but it gives the few Sam fans out there (that like him more than Dean) a nice moment that either redeems Sam as a character or just makes him look that much more well-written. Sam's final moment this episode where he finally admits that he's feeling better about his life is easily one of my favorite moments on the show, period. Plus, I like that Padalecki is given an opportunity to show his acting range for once instead of letting Ackles hog the spotlight like always. It's just weird but also cool how Sam's character has matured a lot more this season while Dean's character took a regression instead of being the usually level-headed and rational one. Sam is the heart and Dean is the head of the team, but this season so far, Dean's head is somewhere stuck up his butt.

I don't mind Jo returning, and Osiris' whole schtick had so much potential for a plot (not to mention how we are finally upping the stakes to making mythological gods a regular MotW now), but unfortunately, that potential was squandered because the show wants to drag Amy's plotline out. This episode would have been given a 4.5/5 at minimum if Amy was put on the stand and Sam has to struggle with being betrayed by the end. As it is, bringing Jo back just for what might as well be a filler episode that failed to address Dean's guilt over lying to Sam in any shape or form, I sentence you to a...

2/5

The 2 is for Sam, both for his speech at the end and him being a lawyer. No points for dragging out what was a poorly written scene from last episode's ending.

On the bright side... next episode: SPIKE AND CORDY. OH MY FUCKING GOD FINALLY LETS GOOOOOO

Edited May 5 by MagnusHex

[FlickChick]

Sorry, have to disagree with you on this one. Every time I do a season/series re-watch, I skip this episode as I find it a total bore. I also have to disagree about Jensen Ackles' "hogging" the spotlight. He simply does a helluva job with any material he's given. After all, he doesn't write the script. But we'll agree to disagree.

[MagnusHex]

13 hours ago, FlickChick said:

Sorry, have to disagree with you on this one. Every time I do a season/series re-watch, I skip this episode as I find it a total bore. I also have to disagree about Jensen Ackles' "hogging" the spotlight. He simply does a helluva job with any material he's given. After all, he doesn't write the script. But we'll agree to disagree.

He didn't write the script, but he did still hog the spotlight, intentionally or not.

Anyway, I'm not surprised about your comment, seeing how the fandom feels about Sam and Jared compared to Jensen. I still stick by my comment and have no intention of backing down.

This season should be fun though for anti-Dean fans.

Edited May 6 by MagnusHex

[BabySpinach]

How does one hog the spotlight if they have no creative control in the directing, writing, or editing? Is Jensen supposed to purposefully act worse for the sake of his co-stars?

And disagreement is not an attack. No one's asking you or expecting you to 'back down'.

[Affogato]

18 hours ago, BabySpinach said:

How does one hog the spotlight if they have no creative control in the directing, writing, or editing? Is Jensen supposed to purposefully act worse for the sake of his co-stars?

And disagreement is not an attack. No one's asking you or expecting you to 'back down'.

‘Hog the spotlight’ is done by acting. Moving into the light while someone else is having their monologue and making funny gestures behind their back (which attracts the audience’s attention)  as one  exaggerated example.  

[ahrtee]

1 hour ago, Affogato said:

‘Hog the spotlight’ is done by acting. Moving into the light while someone else is having their monologue and making funny gestures behind their back (which attracts the audience’s attention)  as one  exaggerated example.  

Which only works on stage (with one "spotlight") or a one-camera setup, and no director or editor to decide if it's distracting, taking away from the scene, or disturbing the flow of the story.  With multiple takes and camera angles, nothing gets into a scene except what the director wants.  

ETA: And if the director chooses a take that focuses on one actor (think: camera on Dean's reaction to Sam shooting Madison, rather than Sam's POV) that's not hogging, that's the director's choice.  And nothing against  Jared's acting abilities.  He's still the focus of the story.

Edited May 7 by ahrtee

[Affogato]

1 hour ago, ahrtee said:

Which only works on stage (with one "spotlight") or a one-camera setup, and no director or editor to decide if it's distracting, taking away from the scene, or disturbing the flow of the story.  With multiple takes and camera angles, nothing gets into a scene except what the director wants.  

ETA: And if the director chooses a take that focuses on one actor (think: camera on Dean's reaction to Sam shooting Madison, rather than Sam's POV) that's not hogging, that's the director's choice.  And nothing against  Jared's acting abilities.  He's still the focus of the story.

Yes, it is a stage term.
 

Not quite true about film and tv. An actor can mute his performance to let someone else shine. Or not. So X may be the lead but the editors may subtly prefer the takes that have more Marilyn and less Norma Jean.