S11.E20: Don't Call Me Shurley

[RulerofallIsurvey]

2 hours ago, 7kstar said:

As far as this show being Anti - Christian...it depends on which testament your into.  The old testament has God as mean and cruel and the new one makes him a little kinder and gentler.  Plus add the issue that not all Christian's faiths agree, you've got lots of wiggle room.  I never really care, since Supernatural isn't really following any faith and pokes at all of them.

It definitely follows more of a Judeo-Christian mythology than any other, imo.  What with the Angels being stronger than any pagan gods, for example.  However, the show is not quite as egalitarian as all that.  I've yet to see it poke fun of Islam. (<-someone please correct me if I'm wrong.)   

[SueB]

13 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Lol.  Well, I didn't really like the episode, but I actually did like your comments.  In fact, I think they may have helped me appreciate the episode a little more, so there's that.  :)

• I don't think it was anti-Christian.  But then, I've never been one that ascribed to the whole "Old Testament God" vs. "New Testament God" thing either.  Same God, imo.
• Dean can be a dick (so can Sam) and not be "bad" or "evil" because they aren't God.  They are just mere mortals.  And that's the way we roll.
• That's not actually the problem I had with guck.  It's not that he's "bad" or "evil", I don't think he was/is.  It's that he completely checked out for a few millennium and didn't care at all.  

I don't actually have a problem with this either.  It's very God-like.

I'll have to rewatch to be sure (and fast forward past all the guck/Metatron scenes) but I still don't think Dean purposely gulped the fog.  But I do like what you said about solidarity and Butch and Sundance.  :)

Yeah, I did feel that sense of hope at the end.  That was nice - something that has been missing from the show for awhile, imo.  So I'll keep watching to see where they go with that at least.  

Even if I still don't like guck.  ;)

That's good to know. 

As for Chuck not caring, I thought he checked out over an abundance of caring.  Hence the disappointment   I think the apathy was his schtick, not real  

Edited May 7, 2016 by SueB
What the hell, autocorrect?

[call me ishmael]

1 hour ago, SueB said:

That's good to know. 

As for Chuck not caring, I thought he checked out over an abundance of caring.  Hence the disappointment   I think the apathy was his schtick, not real  

I thought that Chuck also was indicating that he checked out because he realized that leaving things to nature and history to work out was a good thing.  There was an odd way in which he almost seemed like he was a Judeo-Christian God who wanted to be a Deist God.  I think for that reason that people who think that he and Amara will have to leave together at the end of the season are right (think the moment in Babylon 5 when the Vorlons and the Shadows finally left). Everything has been in Limbo for the last few seasons because everyone has been waiting for God to return and fix things.  But if the only way to keep Amara from destroying the world again is to have them both leave then you can have a season next year where everyone has to work out how to proceed on their own.  Of course God will have to do something to keep the Angels from getting carried away but if there isn't the hope that he will intervene (even if Dean doesn't believe, it is still possible in this universe as written so far) then everything can be pulled back from the brink and nothing is ever settled.  But if they both leave the universe....

[catrox14]

3 hours ago, SueB said:

That's good to know. 

As for Chuck not caring, I thought he checked out over an abundance of caring.  Hence the disappointment   I think the apathy was his schtick, not real  

That sounds like the worst job interviewee.

"My only fault is that I care too much".

UGH NOPE . Can God even care since he has no soul?

Dean and Sam can be dicks because they are human. They have faults. They make mistakes.

God is not human. God is God. I have no interest in a story about God being FOREVER ALONE and being so disappointed in his creation that he walked away?.

Forget God being disappointed in HIS creation, What about his creation being disappointed with God, namely CAS

[catrox14]

Sounds to me like God just wasn't really ready for the responsibility he  created out of his own loneliness. I

[catrox14]

Sooo, upon rewatch..

Some thoughts about the amulet and Dean.

Back in the "Point of No Return" Dean killed Zachariah and he looked right into Zachariah's face and the light did not force him to look away nor did it blind him but in s4 he had to look away when Anna blew up as did Sam. We saw Zach's light in Dean's eyes.

In the Vessel, Dean looked right into the light/energy was emanating from Delphine and the Hand of God. yet everyone else on the sub had to look away.

Metatron, who is now human, had to wear special glasses when Chuck revealed himself as God because the light was too much and he had to shield his eyes from the light of the amulet.

Yet when the amulet glowed with God's light Dean (and Sam) it could look at it so it might have just been low wattage God's light.

BUT I had the thought that maybe Sam's surprise was simply because Dean was unzipping the pocket and found that amulet discovering Sam's secret stash or because God put it there but only Dean could see that it was glowing.

What if the Mark allows Dean to be able to look at the Light of God? Or perhaps it's because he is The Righteous Man. Since they brought back the amulet why not revisit the Righteous Man whilst we are at it?

[KirkB]

I don't think they're really trying to redeem Metatron. He can't be, really. Sam and Dean will never trust him. No one in heaven wants anything to do with him, so they're certainly not going to give him another chance. Even Chuck wasn't forgiving him, he's just overlooking his crimes because he needs Metatron for something and, more to the point, really doesn't care about what he did. I do think they wanted to show Metatron wasn't pure evil. He has a touch of humanity, like feeding the dog instead of himself. There was no one but the dog to see it so it's not like he was doing it for sympathy. In the grand scheme of things Metatron was, like many of the angels, a spoiled child trying desperately to get dad's attention. He also had a huge ego and believed himself to be more important that it turns out he was, at least if Chuck is to be believed. 

About the amulet. I watched the scene again. Based on what I saw as Jared and Jensen's acting choices, I got the sense that when Dean found it he was shocked to see it but Sam wasn't. Sam, I think, was surprised. I don't think Dean ever expected to see it again, he assumed it was gone. But I get the sense Sam knew it was still around because he had recovered it, he just didn't expect it to be in his pocket. I think Chuck took it from wherever Sam was storing it, showed it to Metatron, turned it on, then stuck it in Sam's pocket. 

[catrox14]

1 minute ago, KirkB said:

But I get the sense Sam knew it was still around because he had recovered it, he just didn't expect it to be in his pocket. I think Chuck took it from wherever Sam was storing it, showed it to Metatron, turned it on, then stuck it in Sam's pocket. 

I had the thought that maybe Chod/Guck took the wooden one from Sam's keepsake box and changed it to be like the original amulet, and put it in Sam's pocket.

[BlueMeanie]

I'm not sure why Metatron's redemption or non-redemption really matters much at this point in regards to how the other characters will react to him.  I don't see why he would even still be on the show again.  He's just an ordinary human now and God himself has confirmed he won't be an angel again.  What purpose could he possibly serve?

[DittyDotDot]

1 minute ago, BlueMeanie said:

I'm not sure why Metatron's redemption or non-redemption really matters much at this point in regards to how the other characters will react to him.  I don't see why he would even still be on the show again.  He's just an ordinary human now and God himself has confirmed he won't be an angel again.  What purpose could he possibly serve?

I'm no Marvatron-enthusiast at this point, but the dude does have a whole bunch of knowledge no one else, other than maybe God, has. I can imagine a whole bunch of things he could be useful for.

[catrox14]

Just now, BlueMeanie said:

I'm not sure why Metatron's redemption or non-redemption really matters much at this point in regards to how the other characters will react to him.  I don't see why he would even still be on the show again.  He's just an ordinary human now and God himself has confirmed he won't be an angel again.  What purpose could he possibly serve?

As much as I want that asshole dead, he's still got a metric butt-ton of knowledge as he was the Scribe of God. He's God's Editor right now too.

[BlueMeanie]

Yeah, but now they have God.

[DittyDotDot]

Sure, but can it hurt to have more knowledgeable people? Plus, I'm thinking God won't be around much longer.

However, being human hasn't stopped them from keeping Crowley or Cass around. I know God said, "Ain't gonna happen", but I wouldn't be at all surprised if Marvatron doesn't get his grace back now that he's been properly humbled. Probably won't happen right away though. Took Crowley over a season to get his mojo back and Cass has been depowered more than he's been powered over the last few years.

Edited May 8, 2016 by DittyDotDot
Wouldn't and won't are not the same word!

[catrox14]

2 minutes ago, BlueMeanie said:

Yeah, but now they have God.

What difference does that make? God won't tell his own secrets and he can easily go MIA again when he so chooses. As much as I loathe Metatron, he will give up info with the proper motivation as we saw when Cas beat the crap out of him. Whether Metatron's intel is actionable is a different matter but it does turn out that I was wrong and he wasn't lying about Amara being God's sister.

[BlueMeanie]

I stand corrected.  Maybe he'll move into the bunker.

[catrox14]

2 minutes ago, BlueMeanie said:

I stand corrected.  Maybe he'll move into the bunker.

There is no reason for him to move into the bunker. The boys aren't that stupid. Unless they chain him up in the sex dungeon. LOL.

[BlueMeanie]

I was joking.

[catrox14]

I wasn't! They could just keep him in the sex dungeon

[SherriAnt]

This is super fluff after reading all the smart and well thought out discussions going on, but I was wondering if the little sweetheart Sam rescued was Jensen's real daughter? He's got one just the right age! 

[catrox14]

10 minutes ago, SherriAnt said:

This is super fluff after reading all the smart and well thought out discussions going on, but I was wondering if the little sweetheart Sam rescued was Jensen's real daughter? He's got one just the right age! 

No that wasn't JJ. I highly doubt Jensen would have JJ in the show at her age.

[Omegamom]

Oh oh oh...I read it somewhere today...the little girl isn't Jensen's daughter, but is the daughter of someone else...trying to remember...either the daughter of one of the actresses in the first few episodes, or of one of the writers.

Damn, will have to go google...

Ahah!  There was a pro snowboarder who was the assistant director (AD, right?) of 1.02 during season one, and the little girl is her daughter.  It was in the J2 panel at Asylum 16.

http://sammyhale.tumblr.com/post/143993438342/j2-asylum-16-saturday-panel

Edited May 8, 2016 by Omegamom
Googling...then misremembering about season versus episode

[AwesomO4000]

13 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

I completely disagree. Before they made up this backstory, Sam couldn`t have cared less about it. He never showed any value to it whatsoever. And why should he? It was a grudge gift. If John had been there, he would have gotten it. Heck, maybe John showed up the next day with presents and Sam wished he could take it back and give it to him. Kids do that all the time. Dean attributed far more value to it for all these years IMO than Sam meant in that moment.

But John wasn't there. When Sam gave it to Dean, I saw the message being "I trust you to be here for me more than Dad." But even if Sam did later regret giving it to Dean and wishing he'd given it to John - I doubt it, but for the sake of argument - and even if it had little to no meaning for Sam for years, after the events of "A Very Supernatural Christmas" the amulet did have meaning for Sam, in my opinion. Sam remembered that day and everything Dean had tried to do for him in a different light now that he was older, and Sam's remembering was the reason that he decided to have a Christmas celebration for Dean even though it was going to hurt and he hadn't wanted to face that hurt. If I'm remembering correctly, when Dean came through the door, the camera from Sam's perspective focused a moment on the amulet. From then on, the amulet had a renewed meaning for Sam. It meant enough to Sam that he wore it after Dean's death, under his clothes, close to his chest. Sam thought that Dean would want it back when he returned to life, so he gave it back.

However if Sam had it all this time - For me, I think he did - he didn't think that Dean would want it back this time, so Sam kept it, because it still had meaning for Sam, and he likely kept it as a reminder or he hoped at some point it would show them where God was, or a combination of both. I more lean towards the former, because Sam himself had a great deal of doubt that God gave a crap about them right about the same time Dean did - as evidenced by Sam's conversation with Paul, the bartender in "99 Problems."

But as I said earlier, I was okay with Sam having it, because he didn't intend on Dean knowing about it or forcing Dean to take it back, and once Dean threw it away, Dean was done with it, so in my opinion, Sam had the right to take it back if he wanted.

[SueB]

6 hours ago, SherriAnt said:

This is super fluff after reading all the smart and well thought out discussions going on, but I was wondering if the little sweetheart Sam rescued was Jensen's real daughter? He's got one just the right age! 

While not JJ, I swear I saw a little "Jared" dimple in there as he was smiling at her and getting her out of the car.  It was so very very adorable.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

and once Dean threw it away, Dean was done with it, so in my opinion, Sam had the right to take it back if he wanted.

Sure, I have no problem with Sam keeping it. Though I highly doubt that was the plan, otherwise it would have come up way sooner. I just hate the notion of the show forcing it back on Dean with a "you were wrong to throw it away, wah". Fuck that. 

I think Robbie was the one who thought so because he wrote that basically in the musical with the fake thing and brought it back here without the plot really needing it.

[MysteryGuest]

I don't get that anyone is blaming Dean for tossing away the amulet.  I don't think Sam had an issue with it, other than maybe feeling bad that his brother was at such a low point.  For me, that's why Sam would have kept it...hoping that maybe things would get better and Dean would want it back, because of what it meant to him.  If anyone needs to feel bad, it's God, since he turned the damn thing off.  Just another example of how he's fucked with the Winchesters.  They could have had all the faith in the world in him, but he didn't want to be found.  That's on him.

[MYFAKETVBOYFRIEND]

On ‎5‎/‎7‎/‎2016 at 1:21 AM, Omegamom said:

Remember, Metatron said Chuck was "Method acting".  Some method actors immerse themselves totally in their roles...so God, portraying Chuck the prophet, acted as Chuck even when he was alone.  Just a theory...

I still would have preferred a real Chuck, and God donning his likeness at the end of Swan Song.

That's exactly what I was hoping for-I'm not thrilled he was God all along-it makes him a douche for wanting to watch the destruction of the world.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

5 hours ago, MysteryGuest said:

he didn't want to be found.

This is why I really do not like spn's guck.  If they are using Judeo-Christian mythology - and they are - although more on the Judeo side I think, less Christian, since the only reference I can recall to Jesus was Lillith? calling him "that hippie from Nazareth - then this 'god doesn't want to be found' is total crap.  No where in all the history of God did he not want to be found.  Heck, no where in the history of any other gods, Greek, Roman, Hindu, etc, did they not want to be found.  

Edited May 8, 2016 by RulerofallIsurvey
redundancy

[rue721]

3 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

This is why I really do not like spn's guck.  If they are using Judeo-Christian mythology - and they are - although more on the Judeo side I think, less Christian, since the only reference I can recall to Jesus was Lillith? calling him "that hippie from Nazareth - then this 'god doesn't want to be found' is total crap.  No where in all the history of God did he not want to be found.  Heck, no where in the history of any other gods, Greek, Roman, Hindu, etc, did they not want to be found.  That's total crap.  

 

Not "more Judeo," imo. To give you an idea of how not-Jewish this show's mythos is:  Judaism doesn't even have a Hell.

 

I think the way they deal with religious concepts on this show is mostly as though they're just another part of American mythology/urban legends.

[Binns]

Just now, rue721 said:

 

Not "more Judeo," imo. To give you an idea of how not-Jewish this show's mythos is:  Judaism doesn't even have a Hell.

 

I think the way they deal with religious concepts on this show is mostly as though they're just another part of American mythology/urban legends.

I agree. To me it's like the Greek pantheon. They started out maybe a little different with Sam talking about praying and that kind of thing, but it quickly went somewhere else when the angels came into play. 

[DittyDotDot]

11 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

This is why I really do not like spn's guck.  If they are using Judeo-Christian mythology - and they are - although more on the Judeo side I think, less Christian, since the only reference I can recall to Jesus was Lillith? calling him "that hippie from Nazareth - then this 'god doesn't want to be found' is total crap.  No where in all the history of God did he not want to be found.  Heck, no where in the history of any other gods, Greek, Roman, Hindu, etc, did they not want to be found.  

But that's what this show does, takes "lore" and twists it around to suit their own needs. If you're looking for an actuate telling of the Bible, this isn't the show to find that, IMO. On this show, Christianity is just another urban legend where the legend isn't always acurate.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

50 minutes ago, rue721 said:

 

Not "more Judeo," imo. To give you an idea of how not-Jewish this show's mythos is:  Judaism doesn't even have a Hell.

Forgot about that.  True, to an extent. Bu doesn't it depend on which branch of Judaisim?  There is mention of Sheol in the Old Testament, which is translated as some as "the pit" which became Hell in Christian mythology.  

47 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

But that's what this show does, takes "lore" and twists it around to suit their own needs. If you're looking for an actuate telling of the Bible, this isn't the show to find that, IMO.

Trust me, If I were looking for an accurate telling of the Bible, I sure as hell wouldn't be watching anything on TV for it.  That is not why I started watching the show at all.

Quote

On this show, Christianity is just another urban legend where the legend isn't always acurate.

IMO, urban legends aren't real.  And even on this show, early on legends like Hook man, etc were shown to not be as believed in the legend.  Now, you're probably thinking, yes, that's what I just said and aligns perfectly.  Except consider the fact that they just made god/chuck real. So it's no longer an urban legend.  

I should clarify: I would be as put off if they took Greek mythology and completely up-ended everything we know about it also.  Made Gaia something that went against every we've ever heard.  It's not just 'putting a different spin' on it.  It's proposing something for which there is absolutely no reference whatsoever.  

Edited May 8, 2016 by RulerofallIsurvey

[DittyDotDot]

But the show made the Hookman real too. The legend told at slumber parties to scare young children wasn't real, but, there was a man with a hook who tried to kill people the legend was based on. IMO, it's the same with God, there is a God, just not the God depicted in the Bible. IMO, that's the show's basic premise: these things are real, just not in the way we've always been told they were. I just don't see how making God a sad little hermit is really all that inconsistent with any other legend the show has tackled.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

But it wasn't really Hookman.  It was a ghost, wasn't it?  So, No.  IMO.  Not the same thing.

Quote

 just not the God depicted in the Bible. 

So, not the God who created the earth, etc?  Yeah, not that God that at all.  (Even though they've said it is/was).  They want both.  They want to say, it's that God.  But the Bible got some things wrong.  Which I'd actually be okay with.  As long as they don't contradict something which has always been shown to be true throughout history.  (God always wanted to be found.)

I'm sure we are just looking at it from different sides of the glass.  Or not.  You don't have a problem with it.  I do.  That's okay.   Different strokes, and all...

Edited May 8, 2016 by RulerofallIsurvey

[catrox14]

1 hour ago, MysteryGuest said:

I don't get that anyone is blaming Dean for tossing away the amulet.  I don't think Sam had an issue with it, other than maybe feeling bad that his brother was at such a low point.  For me, that's why Sam would have kept it...hoping that maybe things would get better and Dean would want it back, because of what it meant to him.

IMO this ties back to Fan Fiction and how it fits into the narrative and text of the Winchesters  11 year saga. The thing that always really bugged me in Fan Fiction was the amulet and Chuck returning. I thought it was portending things I DID NOT WANT for many reasons I stated in the Fan Fiction thread.

Much of the discussion back in Fan Fiction thread centered around what parts of the episode count as "textual canon" and affect the overall Winchesters Saga.  At that time I think  it was mostly decided it was a one off unimportant to the narrative or that only things not a part of Marie's play were not part of the overall narrative but with the events of 11.20 I have to consider everything in the episode as intentional and part of the narrative. 

I always thought Marie was the avatar for Robbie Thompson(much like Chuck was the avatar for Kripke) in addition to her being a self-identified Sam-girl. So yes I do think that with the final endorsement by Chuck at the end of the episode wss the show implying that Dean was wrong to trash the amulet. But again I settled on it being a one-off but not anymore.

The reappearance of the original amulet in Chuck's hand and then in Sam's pocket for Dean to remove it, I take as confirmation that Marie telling Dean back in FF that he was wrong is confirmed.

Could Chuck returning the amulet to Sam's pocket to put it in Dean's hand be God admitting he was wrong? Maybe but I doubt it because God doesn't think he was wrong and he's really only decided to do because he needs to deal with HIS sister.

Just as an aside, I recommend going back and reading the Fan Fiction thread. It's pretty funny how most were just sweet summer children thinking it was a one off fan lovefest and we would probably never see the amulet or Chuck again if we didn't see by the end of s10.  I was right to be worried (for me this is not yet something I'm enjoying for the same reason I didn't like what I thought it meant in FF. I was just off by a season. LOL

[DittyDotDot]

8 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

But it wasn't really Hookman.  It was a ghost, wasn't it?  So, No.  IMO.  Not the same thing.

It was the real Hookman though--the ghost of the preacher was where the legend got started--on the show. Just like Bloody Mary, that was Bloody Mary--even though she was also a ghost--just the show's version of Bloody Mary. The Greek, Norse and other gods they've depicted are also the real gods within the framework of the show, but not necessarily the Gods depicted in traditional folklore.

God on this show is no different, IMO. He is a legend that's been told and translated so many times no one really knows what the real story is anymore. That's why there's so many different religions based on the same God. This is just Supernatural's version of God, but it's no different than how they made their own version of Hookman, IMO.

[catrox14]

46 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

 

orgot about that.  True, to an extent. Bu doesn't it depend on which branch of Judaisim?  There is mention of Sheol in the Old Testament, which is translated as some as "the pit" which became Hell in Christian mythology.  

Trust me, If I were looking for an accurate telling of the Bible, I sure as hell wouldn't be watching anything on TV for it.  That is not why I started watching the show at all.

IMO, urban legends aren't real.  And even on this show, early on legends like Hook man, etc were shown to not be as believed in the legend.  Now, you're probably thinking, yes, that's what I just said and aligns perfectly.  Except consider the fact that they just made god/chuck real. So it's no longer an urban legend.  

I should clarify: I would be as put off if they took Greek mythology and completely up-ended everything we know about it also.  Made Gaia something that went against every we've ever heard.  It's not just 'putting a different spin' on it.  It's proposing something for which there is absolutely no reference whatsoever.  

 

They kind of did that already with Kali in Hammer of the Gods and then with Zues, Artemis and Prometheus. 

I don't think of SPN!God as whatever God the real world thinks of God as but I still think it's a poor choice to go full God here just like going full God's sister was wrong. That's just my opinion.

I still have in the back of my mind that this is still not being played straight. That there is something else at work here. And since Metatron said he saw the bar as God's construct...well what else is God's construct and not really....real? 

[DittyDotDot]

57 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

I should clarify: I would be as put off if they took Greek mythology and completely up-ended everything we know about it also.  Made Gaia something that went against every we've ever heard.  It's not just 'putting a different spin' on it.  It's proposing something for which there is absolutely no reference whatsoever.  

Sorry, didn't see your edit. They have done this. Many people were very offended with how they depicted the Gods in Hammer of the Gods. And the episode with Zeus and Artemis bare little resemblance to who they were in folklore except for their names and that they were Gods. To me this is the show's standard operating procedure and one of the main reasons I got hooked into this show. I don't need another telling of the same legend I've heard and read previously, but really like to see them twist it around and make it their own.

Now, I'm not saying they've necessarily done this well with Chuck/God or that they've generally done this well over the last few years, just saying that I don't think it's inconsistent with what they've done in the past. But I'm not offended by it as long as they don't preach at me and try to tell me what to believe in my own spiritual life.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

23 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

That's why there's so many different religions based on the same God.

Actually, there are only three religions based on the same God: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.  Now, within those religions there are different interpretations of some things, sure.  But IMO, the basic God is all the same.  Furthermore, in none of those religions, any where, is God, or Jesus, or Allah ever known to hide out and not want people to find Him, like guck did.

[DittyDotDot]

1 minute ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Actually, there are only three religions based on the same God: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.  Now, within those religions there are different interpretations of some things, sure.  But IMO, the basic God is all the same.  Furthermore, in none of those religions, any where, is God, or Jesus, or Allah ever known to hide out and not want people to find Him, like guck did.

Like I said, if you want and actuate portrayal of legends and folklore, this is not the show to get that. IMO, none of their legends have been what the original legend depicts. But, YMMV, as they obviously do. 

[RulerofallIsurvey]

27 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

Like I said, if you want and actuate portrayal of legends and folklore, this is not the show to get that. IMO, none of their legends have been what the original legend depicts. But, YMMV, as they obviously do. 

Yep!  As do yours.  :) And like I said, if I wanted an accurate portrayal of the Torah, Bible, or Qur'an, I sure as hell wouldn't look to anything on TV for it.  Obviously we are looking at it from different sides.  You don't have a problem with it.  I do.  That's okay. 

Edited May 8, 2016 by RulerofallIsurvey
no hard feelings!

[SueB]

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

IMO this ties back to Fan Fiction and how it fits into the narrative and text of the Winchesters  11 year saga. The thing that always really bugged me in Fan Fiction was the amulet and Chuck returning. I thought it was portending things I DID NOT WANT for many reasons I stated in the Fan Fiction thread.

Much of the discussion back in Fan Fiction thread centered around what parts of the episode count as "textual canon" and affect the overall Winchesters Saga.  At that time I think  it was mostly decided it was a one off unimportant to the narrative or that only things not a part of Marie's play were not part of the overall narrative but with the events of 11.20 I have to consider everything in the episode as intentional and part of the narrative. 

I always thought Marie was the avatar for Robbie Thompson(much like Chuck was the avatar for Kripke) in addition to her being a self-identified Sam-girl. So yes I do think that with the final endorsement by Chuck at the end of the episode wss the show implying that Dean was wrong to trash the amulet. But again I settled on it being a one-off but not anymore.

The reappearance of the original amulet in Chuck's hand and then in Sam's pocket for Dean to remove it, I take as confirmation that Marie telling Dean back in FF that he was wrong is confirmed.

Could Chuck returning the amulet to Sam's pocket to put it in Dean's hand be God admitting he was wrong? Maybe but I doubt it because God doesn't think he was wrong and he's really only decided to do because he needs to deal with HIS sister.

Just as an aside, I recommend going back and reading the Fan Fiction thread. It's pretty funny how most were just sweet summer children thinking it was a one off fan lovefest and we would probably never see the amulet or Chuck again if we didn't see by the end of s10.  I was right to be worried (for me this is not yet something I'm enjoying for the same reason I didn't like what I thought it meant in FF. I was just off by a season. LOL

I can't see how this confirms Marie's comment. She was talking about the brotherly relationship, not the Samulet as a God diving rod. And at the time Dean threw it away, it WAS useless as a diving rod because God had turned it off. 

So, is your argument that since it was in Sam's pocket where Dean found it, that God placed it there (as opposed to just dangling it mid-air or something) as a rebuke towards Dean for throwing it away?  

I just find that as, at best, a potential interpretation (even if I don't see it, you do so that's an interpretation)  but not 'confirmation'. 'Confirmation' IMO is something explicit. Like 'Chuck is God', 'Amara is his sister'. These are consistently (as of last episode) presented facts. For the show to have 'confirmed' Marie's POV, I would need Chuck to say to Dean 'you never should have throw it away' AND provide the rest of the sentence 'because it was a symbol of your brotherly bond.' THAT was Marie's point. Not that it still had Supernatural qualities. 

 

I suppose Im nitpicking on the word 'confirmed' because I think perspectives are just that -perspectives. Facts are of a different nature. 

Edited May 8, 2016 by SueB

[trxr4kids]

Best Jan Brady voice: All I hear all day is about how great the samulet is and where has it been...... samulet, samulet, samulet!!! stomps foot ; )

[Jediknight]

2 hours ago, DittyDotDot said:

Like I said, if you want and actuate portrayal of legends and folklore, this is not the show to get that. IMO, none of their legends have been what the original legend depicts. But, YMMV, as they obviously do. 

Yep, Zeus was already mentioned, but had that been accurate he would have looked at the trap the boys made, laughed in their faces, walked out of the trap, and proceeded to stomp the crap out of them.

[catrox14]

Quote

I suppose Im nitpicking on the word 'confirmed' because I think perspectives are just that -perspectives. Facts are of a different nature. 

quoting myself 

Quote

The reappearance of the original amulet in Chuck's hand and then in Sam's pocket for Dean to remove it, I take as confirmation that Marie telling Dean back in FF that he was wrong is confirmed.

 

I put IMO at the beginning of the entire post. I figured that was sufficient to show all that followed IS MY OPINION. I also used " I take as" or  'I think" to show that is me - catrox14- interpretation of the events. I thought my entire post was pretty clearly my interpretation and I presented my rationale as to why I see the way I do.

To me it's all a matter of how one views the role of Marie and Chuck and whether they are avatars for Robbie Thompson's opinion about the amulet. Thompson wrote all three episodes involving a version of the amulet.

It was a symbol of brotherly love and a tool to find God in s5. But then when Dean realized he may have different view of their brotherly love and saw it was useless to finding God and that God didn't care (In Dean's mind IMO) he was done with it.

To me, having two different in-show writers (Marie and Chuck) put the amulet back into Dean's hand after Marie scolded Dean for throwing it away is tantamount to saying Dean is was wrong regardless of why he didn't want it, regardless of whether Dean accepts it's presence now.

[catrox14]

1 hour ago, trxr4kids said:

Best Jan Brady voice: All I hear all day is about how great the samulet is and where has it been...... samulet, samulet, samulet!!! stomps foot ; )

Blame it on Robbie Thompson. If he never brought it back we wouldn't be talking about it now.

[SueB]

11 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

quoting myself 

 

I put IMO at the beginning of the entire post. I figured that was sufficient to show all that followed IS MY OPINION. I also used " I take as" or  'I think" to show that is me - catrox14- interpretation of the events. I thought my entire post was pretty clearly my interpretation and I presented my rationale as to why I see the way I do.

To me it's all a matter of how one views the role of Marie and Chuck and whether they are avatars for Robbie Thompson's opinion about the amulet. Thompson wrote all three episodes involving a version of the amulet.

It was a symbol of brotherly love and a tool to find God in s5. But then when Dean realized he may have different view of their brotherly love and saw it was useless to finding God and that God didn't care (In Dean's mind IMO) he was done with it.

To me, having two different in-show writers (Marie and Chuck) put the amulet back into Dean's hand after Marie scolded Dean for throwing it away is tantamount to saying Dean is was wrong regardless of why he didn't want it, regardless of whether Dean accepts it's presence now.

Fair.  I couldn't really appreciate that you genericized the criticism (wrong independent of rationale). But I understand your POV better.  Thanks. 

Edited May 8, 2016 by SueB

[MysteryGuest]

I think Marie was just reminding Dean of what the amulet used to mean to him, before it came to represent God, or the lack of God.  It was about his brother and their relationship, and that's still what's most important to him.  

I don't know why they chose to have God say to Metatron, "you'll never guess where it's been all this time", if they had no intention of telling us.  I assumed because they then went on to show it in Sam's pocket, that we had gotten our answer.  So if that's not the answer, and they don't plan to address it in a coming episode, then it was just poorly written dialogue.

To me, SPN God has always been played as the absentee father.  The parallels with John Winchester were always played up.  The angels constantly complained about God being MIA, and that most of them had never even had a glimpse of him.  So a God who doesn't want to be found definitely seems to be his MO.

[catrox14]

Just now, SueB said:

Fair.  I couldn't really appreciate that you genericized The criticism (wrong independent of rationale). But I understand your POV better.  Thanks. 

I'm sorry I don't know what you mean? I literally don't understand this sentence. Help?

[catrox14]

2 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

I think Marie was just reminding Dean of what the amulet used to mean to him, before it came to represent God, or the lack of God.  It was about his brother and their relationship, and that's still what's most important to him.  

I don't know why they chose to have God say to Metatron, "you'll never guess where it's been all this time", if they had no intention of telling us.  I assumed because they then went on to show it in Sam's pocket, that we had gotten our answer.  So if that's not the answer, and they don't plan to address it in a coming episode, then it was just poorly written dialogue.

To me, SPN God has always been played as the absentee father.  The parallels with John Winchester were always played up.  The angels constantly complained about God being MIA, and that most of them had never even had a glimpse of him.  So a God who doesn't want to be found definitely seems to be his MO.

Yeah, that line about "You'll never guess where it was" is just a complete troll. Nothing more. Nothing less. I highly doubt they will ever answer the question.

[MysteryGuest]

Something else that doesn't make sense to me in this episode is that if Amara had sent the cop with a message for Dean about how he was going to survive her latest attack, why did she try to shoot him?  That made no sense to me, unless Amara has the power to bring him back to life?