S11.E20: Don't Call Me Shurley

[trxr4kids]

52 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

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.

I think that was true cannonicaly right up until they introduced Amara as God's sister. Now we have the anvillicious parallels between Sam & Dean, Lucifer & Michael, Abel & Cain. Chuck is clearly the younger sibling because the darkness/Amara came first. So what imo we're left with is, Chuck/god recreating at worst, instigating at least, his sibling conflicts on his unwitting creations to resolve his own inner conflict.

 

58 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

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

Oh trust me I do!

Edited May 9, 2016 by trxr4kids
punctuation and it still sucks

[catrox14]

7 minutes ago, trxr4kids said:

I think that was true cannonicaly right up until they introduced Amara as God's sister. Now we have the anvillicious parallels between Sam & Dean, Lucifer & Michael, Abel & Cain. Chuck is clearly the younger sibling because the darkness/Amara came first. So what imo we're left with is, Chuck/god recreating at worst, instigating at least, his sibling conflicts on his unwitting creations to resolve his own inner conflict.

 

Oh trust me I do!

So what you're saying is God needs a therapist even more than Dean and Sam

20 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

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?

I was rewatching last night and I think she was going to shoot Sam.

[trxr4kids]

Just now, catrox14 said:

So what you're saying is God needs a therapist even more than Dean and Sam

Chuck yes, he does but since he created therapy and therapists.........

[MysteryGuest]

Yes, SPN's God is a definite head case.  I'm not sure how they're going to turn him into someone worthy of respect, let alone adoration.  He created life, but seemingly just on a whim out of boredom or as a way to distract his sibling.  I didn't get even the slightest hint that he actually loves his creation.

[catrox14]

13 minutes ago, trxr4kids said:

Chuck yes, he does but since he created therapy and therapists.........

See this is an interesting question.

Where does creation vs evolution start to kick with his creation in the SPNverse.

Did he make them whole? Or did he just start with a basic messed up petri dish and it did it's own thing because he stepped away? 

[MysteryGuest]

I'd be surprised if they go there, Catrox.  I'm not sure just how much of an explanation we're going to get on anything, let alone creationism vs. evolution.  I'm assuming they'll stick with discussing what he's been up to over the course of the last decade when the world was on the brink...multiple times.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

5 hours ago, DittyDotDot said:

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.

I don't actually remember anything in Hammer of the Gods outright contradicting anything in known lore.  But then I'm not as well versed in Ancient Mythology as I used to be.  :)

guck hiding out does outright contradict several things in the Torah, Bible, and Qur'an.  ("Seek and ye shall find" etc.)

And you didn't find Don't Call Me Shurley preachy at all?  Really?   It was all kinds of preachy, IMO.  

[RulerofallIsurvey]

24 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

I'd be surprised if they go there, Catrox.  I'm not sure just how much of an explanation we're going to get on anything, let alone creationism vs. evolution.  I'm assuming they'll stick with discussing what he's been up to over the course of the last decade when the world was on the brink...multiple times.

I really don't have any faith that they'll address what he's been up to over the last decade other than what they already gave in this episode.  They've told us all they think we need to know.  guck traveled the world.  gave himself the ability to play guitar.  had girlfriends and boyfriends.  And now he's back.  Anything else is irrelevant.  ;)

Edited May 9, 2016 by RulerofallIsurvey

[catrox14]

5 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

I don't actually remember anything in Hammer of the Gods outright contradicting anything in known lore.  But then I'm not as well versed in Ancient Mythology as I used to be.  :)

guck hiding out does outright contradict several things in the Torah, Bible, and Qur'an.  ("Seek and ye shall find" etc.)

And you didn't find Don't Call Me Shurley preachy at all?  Really?   It was all kinds of preachy, IMO.  

Kali had an affair with the Trickster. That's kind of a big deal. But at least she survived. OHHH maybe the boys need to try and find her. She might help since she is the Goddess of Time, Creation, Change, and Destruction.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

1 minute ago, catrox14 said:

Kali had an affair with the Trickster. That's kind of a big deal. But at least she survived. OHHH maybe the boys need to try and find her. She might help since she is the Goddess of Time, Creation, Change, and Destruction.

But she didn't know that he was an Archangel and that doesn't outright contradict anything in lore since many of the ancient gods and goddesses (Kali included) were known to have many affairs, right?  Now, if they portrayed Athena as knocking boots with anyone who came along, that would be a problem, IMO, cause that would be a contradiction of known lore.  

[DittyDotDot]

30 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

And you didn't find Don't Call Me Shurley preachy at all?  Really?   It was all kinds of preachy, IMO.  

No, not preachy. Talky, monologue-y, but not preachy. To me preachy is telling me how to feel or think about things. I din't think they preached at me as much as bored the living shit out of me with all the whining and blathering on.

[trxr4kids]

14 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

They've told us all they think we need to know.

They certainly have, God calls Mistress Magda for phone sex, dates Sam's #1 fangirl presumably because she shrieks OMG a lot, so he's a masochistic narcissist. JMO of course.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

12 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

No, not preachy. Talky, monologue-y, but not preachy. To me preachy is telling me how to feel or think about things. I din't think they preached at me as much as bored the living shit out of me with all the whining and blathering on.

Huh. Okay. :shrug:  I thought it was both.  Preachy and boring as shit.  :)

[catrox14]

43 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

But she didn't know that he was an Archangel and that doesn't outright contradict anything in lore since many of the ancient gods and goddesses (Kali included) were known to have many affairs, right?  Now, if they portrayed Athena as knocking boots with anyone who came along, that would be a problem, IMO, cause that would be a contradiction of known lore.  

My understanding is that Kali did not knock boots with Loki because Shiva was her consort. I'm just sayin' Shiva would have been bummed. And really she was more powerful than any of the other Pagan gods and the Greek Gods and theoretically. SPN!God.

[call me ishmael]

1 hour ago, MysteryGuest said:

I'd be surprised if they go there, Catrox.  I'm not sure just how much of an explanation we're going to get on anything, let alone creationism vs. evolution.  I'm assuming they'll stick with discussing what he's been up to over the course of the last decade when the world was on the brink...multiple times.

I don't think they really need to go there.  There is plenty of precedents for the notion that God created the universe then steps back and let it run.  I think that is where they were going with Chuck and Metatron's conversation about nature.  But Metatron got God to decide to try to fix up the mess with his sister before he leaves.

[SueB]

3 hours ago, catrox14 said:

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

I had thought you were focused on how the Samulet has value to find God but what you were really saying is that what the 'authors' were saying was that Dean was wrong, regardless of why (brotherly bond or divining rod).

[Binns]

1 hour ago, trxr4kids said:

They certainly have, God calls Mistress Magda for phone sex, dates Sam's #1 fangirl presumably because she shrieks OMG a lot, so he's a masochistic narcissist. JMO of course.

Magda=Magdalena?

[catrox14]

1 minute ago, Binns said:

Magda=Magdalena?

Mary Magdalene?

[mertensia]

Actually I think Mistress Magda runs a call-girl service.

[Demented Daisy]

9 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Now, if they portrayed Athena as knocking boots with anyone who came along, that would be a problem, IMO, cause that would be a contradiction of known lore.  

What about Artemis?  In Remember the Titans (season 8, episode 16), Artemis helped Sam and Dean because she was in love with Prometheus.  

I suspect that the idea of a "missing God" came from Dogma.  God liked to take vacations and play skee-ball in New Jersey.  During one of his  vacations, he was attacked by the Stygian triplets in his human form.  He became trapped in his meat suit and the angels couldn't find him, which is why Metatron tapped Bethany.  In the end, a human, a muse, an apostle, and a couple of prophets save the day -- with an assist from God.

Love that movie.

[mertensia]

17 minutes ago, Demented Daisy said:

What about Artemis?  In Remember the Titans (season 8, episode 16), Artemis helped Sam and Dean because she was in love with Prometheus.  

Artemis having a lover or lovers isn't an idea original to Supernatural; Thorne Smith did it in his book The Night Life of the Gods back in the 1920s.

[Demented Daisy]

Yes, I know, we discussed it in the episode thread.  But that's not the point I was making -- RulerofAllISurvey has a problem with a contradiction of known lore.  So I asked if SPN's Artemis being in love with Prometheus was a problem, since it is also a contradiction of known lore.

The fact that someone else has also covered the idea is immaterial, IMO, because it's not part of the original lore, which is what we were discussing.

[Binns]

9 hours ago, catrox14 said:

Mary Magdalene?

Yea, I mean Magdalene. I'm sure that's not who it was but I thought it was an interesting choice of name. 

[Mulva]

On Thursday, May 05, 2016 at 11:53 PM, catrox14 said:

I kind of don't trust Chuck on that point because how could Chuck let Dean go on killing humans, beating up random assholes etc even if they are shitty humans? Dean only needed to keep the Mark to keep the world spinning he didn't need to be a demon. And IMO Chuck was pretty fucking cavalier about Dean's status and it's HIS fucking fault that the Mark even had to be a thing at all.

To me that said more about God than it does about Sam. I'm not sure we were supposed to agree with God on that point.

Well I certainly didn't agree with Chuck on that one.  Was Sam supposed to let Dean turn into an unstoppable, immortal killing machine?  How about Castiel, Rowena, and Crowley's participation in that spell.  Anyone of them could have said, nope, too risky, not going to do it, but they didn't.

 

While we're on that vein, IIRC, the spell called for Rowena to sacrifice someone she loved, she told the others that the only person she loved lived 300 years ago.  At that point, Sam left, having no idea that Oscar was still alive and 5 minutes away.  Then Castiel kidnapped Oscar, brought him to the site, and turned him over to Rowena to be murdered.  Sam had no knowledge of this.  Last time I checked, Cas had a mind of his own and presumably had a moral compass.  Meanwhile, Sam finds Dean, and instead of Dean or Death informing Sam that removing the mark would release the darkness, Dean tried to talk Sam into letting himself be killed, so I really don't get how it's all Sam's fault.

As for Chuck being god, I have mixed feelings.  It's about time he showed up, but it contradicts everything we saw in S4/S5.

[DittyDotDot]

23 minutes ago, Mulva said:

While we're on that vein, IIRC, the spell called for Rowena to sacrifice someone she loved, she told the others that the only person she loved lived 300 years ago.  At that point, Sam left, having no idea that Oscar was still alive and 5 minutes away.  Then Castiel kidnapped Oscar, brought him to the site, and turned him over to Rowena to be murdered.  Sam had no knowledge of this.  Last time I checked, Cas had a mind of his own and presumably had a moral compass.  Meanwhile, Sam finds Dean, and instead of Dean or Death informing Sam that removing the mark would release the darkness, Dean tried to talk Sam into letting himself be killed, so I really don't get how it's all Sam's fault.

Didn't Crowley kidnap Oskar and bring him to Rowena and Cass? And thought Death told Sam that removing the Mark would incite "far greater evil than any of us have ever known."

I don't think it's all Sam's fault, but he had his part to play just like everyone else did, IMO.

[Mulva]

14 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

Didn't Crowley kidnap Oskar and bring him to Rowena and Cass? And thought Death told Sam that removing the Mark would incite "far greater evil than any of us have ever known."

I don't think it's all Sam's fault, but he had his part to play just like everyone else did, IMO.

Of course he had a part to play, I'm just sick and tired of Sam getting the entire blame while everyone else's part is forgotten.

[KirkB]

13 hours ago, MysteryGuest said:

Yes, SPN's God is a definite head case.  I'm not sure how they're going to turn him into someone worthy of respect, let alone adoration.  He created life, but seemingly just on a whim out of boredom or as a way to distract his sibling.  I didn't get even the slightest hint that he actually loves his creation.

Oh, not doubt he's a head case. The state of the universe pretty much shows that. As for being worthy of respect? Only in the sense that he can obliterate you with a thought if you don't give it to him. As for his loving his creation or not, I think he did, once upon a time. Wasn't that the whole reason Lucifer turned on him in the first place? Because dad liked the new kids (humanity) more than his firstborn (the angels)? It's just that as he watched his creation grow up and kill and destroy in his name again and again that he became disenfranchised and frustrated. He left because he apparently thought they should clean up their own messes. He's come back now, apparently, to say goodbye to his creation because Amara is going to eat them all. Unless Metatron and the Winchesters (not I sentence I ever thought I would type) can convince him to help. 

I wonder though. Most everything Amara has been doing was to get her brother's attention. He clears aware her poison fog, brings everyone it killed, directly or indirectly, back to life, and bodily arrives to talk to the Winchesters, yet she doesn't come running? Him hiding out in his own personal bar construct with Metatron is one thing, but surely she would notice his presence on Earth?

Edited May 9, 2016 by KirkB

[Mulva]

On Saturday, May 07, 2016 at 0:21 PM, shang yiet said:

No, Sam has his dignity. He is not going to root in the trash after watching Dean throw it away right before his eyes just because Dean's feelings got hurt in Dark Side of the Moon.  And Dean can wait a long time before getting another present from Sam. Still think it was dickish of Dean to throw it away.

Yeah, I didn't get the impression that Dean threw the Samulet away because it failed to help Cas find god.  He threw it away in front of Sam to deliberately hurt Sam for having the gall to have a few good memories that didn't involve him.  Ooh, how dare my brother feel excited about going to college!  How dare he have dinner with friends!

[Binns]

2 minutes ago, Mulva said:

Yeah, I didn't get the impression that Dean threw the Samulet away because it failed to help Cas find god.  He threw it away in front of Sam to deliberately hurt Sam for having the gall to have a few good memories that didn't involve him.  Ooh, how dare my brother feel excited about going to college!  How dare he have dinner with friends!

Oh, wow, I don't see this at all. Interesting take. 

[RulerofallIsurvey]

4 hours ago, Demented Daisy said:

I suspect that the idea of a "missing God" came from Dogma.  God liked to take vacations and play skee-ball in New Jersey.  During one of his  vacations, he was attacked by the Stygian triplets in his human form.  He became trapped in his meat suit and the angels couldn't find him, which is why Metatron tapped Bethany.  In the end, a human, a muse, an apostle, and a couple of prophets save the day -- with an assist from God.

Love that movie.

Dogma is a great movie.  God does not go "missing" voluntarily in the movie - and is still shown to love and care about her creation, including humans.  I didn't get that from guck.

3 hours ago, Demented Daisy said:

What about Artemis?  In Remember the Titans (season 8, episode 16), Artemis helped Sam and Dean because she was in love with Prometheus.  

Yes, I know, we discussed it in the episode thread.  But that's not the point I was making -- RulerofAllISurvey has a problem with a contradiction of known lore.  So I asked if SPN's Artemis being in love with Prometheus was a problem, since it is also a contradiction of known lore.

The fact that someone else has also covered the idea is immaterial, IMO, because it's not part of the original lore, which is what we were discussing.

There is in fact a myth from the 1st century CE about Leto and Artemis petitioning Zeus for to allow Herakles to release Prometheus.  Zeus was so moved by the goddess' tears, that he allowed it.  

So...I supposed one could ask/wonder why Artemis was so concerned about Prometheus (and not others who suffered) that she would cry and petition for his release if she were not at least some what in love with him.  It might be an expansion (interpolation?) of known lore, but it does not, IMO, outright contradict any known lore.

ETA: of course it's more difficult with Ancient lore because there is so much of it that spans several centuries. Most of the Ancient Greek stories we think we know today probably aren't even as they originally were, since the Romans adopted them and changed them to suit their own beliefs.  There are very few original sources left.  And it's not conveniently all written down in one (or two) books like the Torah, BIble, and Qur'an.   :)

Edited May 9, 2016 by RulerofallIsurvey
got my myths confused.

[Wynne88]

Quote

Yeah, I didn't get the impression that Dean threw the Samulet away because it failed to help Cas find god.  He threw it away in front of Sam to deliberately hurt Sam for having the gall to have a few good memories that didn't involve him.  Ooh, how dare my brother feel excited about going to college!  How dare he have dinner with friends!

I thought that the manner in which he threw it away was deliberately hurtful - by dangling it over the garbage for a few seconds before he released it, I felt he wanted to be sure Sam saw him throwing it away.  In Dean's defense, though, he had had a rough year, the angels were dicking around with him, and what he saw of Sam's supposed heaven was just the last straw.

[DittyDotDot]

22 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

ETA: of course it's more difficult with Ancient lore because there is so much of it that spans several centuries. Most of the Ancient Greek stories we think we know today probably aren't even as they originally were, since the Romans adopted them and changed them to suit their own beliefs.  There are very few original sources left.  And it's not conveniently all written down in one (or two) books like the Torah, BIble, and Qur'an.   :)

The Bible, as we know it today, is a translation upon a translation of a language that's no longer spoken today. It's been re-authored just as the old oral traditions of the Greeks and Romans were.

[Omegamom]

Now, see?  This is why interpersonal communication can get so messed up so easily.  All of us saw the same thing, and got different things from it.

That year was so bad for the boys.  Sam was being told that he was fated to be Lucifer's vessel, and he wasn't going to be able to fight it.  Dean was being told that it was his destiny to be Michael's vessel.  The Apocalypse was coming.  They'd seen War at work, up close and personal.  They'd dealt with Famine.  They'd seen Lucifer raising Death.  Jo and Ellen were dead.  Bobby was in a wheelchair.

Their only hope, such as it was, was to find God (they thought).  And the only way to find him was through the amulet.  And then God, through Joshua, tells them sorry, nope, not gonna do it, I'm done with it all.

Hope turns to bitter, bitter ashes.  They're on their own.  The Apocalypse is coming, and there's nothing they can do.

I saw that pause it on Dean's part as a sort of weary, bitter, "dammit...we had hope and now it's dead" kind of thing.  And since their hope was trashed, he trashed the symbol of that hope.

Others see it differently.  Like I said, it's a wonder we can communicate with our loved ones at all, thinking we're showing one thing when the other person sees it completely differently.  ;-)

[RulerofallIsurvey]

6 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

The Bible, as we know it today, is a translation upon a translation of a language that's no longer spoken today. It's been re-authored just as the old oral traditions of the Greeks and Romans were.

Yes there was a lot of re-authoring of the books of the Bible over the years, particularly the Old Testament, before the 'final' transcript as we know it was solidified.  However, there are translations of the Bible which go back to the oldest surviving source material - in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek and are translated directly from that. (Actually, I believe that Greek and Hebrew are still spoken, just not widely.) That being said, it's still closer to the original source material than anything we have currently of Greek and/or Roman (or even older - Babylonian, ex.) origin.  

So what's your point?  You said YMMV and I agreed.  I've said that I'm okay with the fact that you disagree - and no hard feelings!  You have your opinion and I have mine and on this topic, it seems never the twain shall meet.  You are not going to convince me or prove that you are right.  You simply can't.  Let it go!  Let's move on...

[Demented Daisy]

21 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

So what's your point?  You said YMMV and I agreed.  I've said that I'm okay with the fact that you disagree - and no hard feelings!  You have your opinion and I have mine and on this topic, it seems never the twain shall meet.  You are not going to convince me or prove that you are right.  You simply can't.  Let it go!  Let's move on...

Whoa, hang on there.  She's trying to engage in discussion and I think it's rather rude of you to tell someone to "let it go" or to "move on". If you no longer wish to discuss something, then I suggest you not respond, rather than tell someone else not to.

But mileage varies, of course.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

7 minutes ago, Demented Daisy said:

Whoa, hang on there.  She's trying to engage in discussion and I think it's rather rude of you to tell someone to "let it go" or to "move on". If you no longer wish to discuss something, then I suggest you not respond, rather than tell someone else not to.

But mileage varies, of course.

I apologize to DITTYDOTDOT if she thought my comments inappropriate.  I was not trying to be rude.  I was trying to find an amicable way to end the conversation rather than just 'not responding' - which I actually think is kind of rude.  (Kind of like walking away when someone is still talking to you.)

But as you said, mileage varies. 

Edited May 9, 2016 by RulerofallIsurvey

[DittyDotDot]

38 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Yes there was a lot of re-authoring of the books of the Bible over the years, particularly the Old Testament, before the 'final' transcript as we know it was solidified.  However, there are translations of the Bible which go back to the oldest surviving source material - in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek and are translated directly from that. (Actually, I believe that Greek and Hebrew are still spoken, just not widely.) That being said, it's still closer to the original source material than anything we have currently of Greek and/or Roman (or even older - Babylonian, ex.) origin.  

So what's your point?  You said YMMV and I agreed.  I've said that I'm okay with the fact that you disagree - and no hard feelings!  You have your opinion and I have mine and on this topic, it seems never the twain shall meet.  You are not going to convince me or prove that you are right.  You simply can't.  Let it go!  Let's move on...

My point was that we don't know what the source material of the Bible is any more than we know what the source material of the Greek legends. Just like with history, legend and lore changes with the changing attitudes of the time. There is no one story that's intact and there's no story that's never been told before. IMO, this idea that God abandoned his creations is not new.

BTW, I'm sorry, I didn't realize I was trying to convince you I was right and you were wrong; I thought we were having a discussion where two people exchange ideas. I didn't realize either of us were right or wrong. I just like talking about stuff.

Edited May 9, 2016 by DittyDotDot

[catrox14]

I think the impression that Dean did it purposefully to hurt Sam arose from the OVERLY LONG dramatic dangling of the amulet before Dean dropped in the trashcan. I really never thought that pause was supposed to imply anything about what it meant to Sam in that moment but more of just being SUPER DRAMATIC. Not trying to imply that Dean did it to hurt Sam or that Sam cared at all about it himself.

I always thought his sad puppy face was because he was upset that Dean and Cas had given up; that Dean was no longer convinced there was any hope;  worried that Dean was going to say yes to Michael and that Dean was worried that Sam was going to say yes to Lucifer.

I've never had the impression that Sam was ever particularly reticent to voice his grievances, displeasure, anger, aggravation with Dean's actions to Dean himself over the years. So for me, since he never said squat about it in literally 6 years in the show's timeline that he didn't care about it either. And it's hard for me to think the show cared about it either since it was never once referenced by anyone or shown after s5 until FF.  

There is a part of me that wants to be believe that Robbie just pulled off the greatest troll ever. Like maybe he was sick of hearing about the amulet and was thinking "Y'all are out of your collective mind because you just HAD to know one way or the other what happened to it, so here is a story around it. But I'm not actually going to tell you where it was and y'all can fight about that now too. And oh BTW Chuck is God and he's bi.  Long live Charlie...peace out, bitches" (that's a Charlie thing I'm not calling anyone here a bitch)

But seriously, I think they knew they had to bring in the amulet because they were bringing in Chuck as God and Robbie understanding this obsessive fandom (present company included) would immediately dissect how the fuck Chuck could be God if the God GPS failed 6 years ago. So he kind of had no choice but to bring it back. And yes, I  really do think he was trolling by not saying where it really was. 

See SHOW, SEE THIS amulet debate is just another reason you should have left God out of the equation altogether!

Edited May 9, 2016 by catrox14
clarifying thoughts

[catrox14]

57 minutes ago, Omegamom said:

saw that pause it on Dean's part as a sort of weary, bitter, "dammit...we had hope and now it's dead" kind of thing.  And since their hope was trashed, he trashed the symbol of that hope.

My meta head!canon is that Jensen did that himself as his own personal ceremonious killing off of his personal nemesis because it literally chipped his teeth and he hated wearing it. Little did he know that his relief of getting rid of his own personal nemesis would result in 7 years of fandom angst about what it meant or didn't mean. 
 

[MysteryGuest]

3 hours ago, Mulva said:

Yeah, I didn't get the impression that Dean threw the Samulet away because it failed to help Cas find god.  He threw it away in front of Sam to deliberately hurt Sam for having the gall to have a few good memories that didn't involve him.  Ooh, how dare my brother feel excited about going to college!  How dare he have dinner with friends!

I have to say that I never interpreted it this way, either, but we all have our own perspectives.  

[SueB]

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

My meta head!canon is that Jensen did that himself as his own personal ceremonious killing off of his personal nemesis because it literally chipped his teeth and he hated wearing it. Little did he know that his relief of getting rid of his own personal nemesis would result in 7 years of fandom angst about what it meant or didn't mean. 
 

I suspect you are right.  I mean, that there was a deliberate pause and drop into the garbage can may have been in there... but the exact movements and duration of the pause are likely pure Jensen.  Smashing him in the face so frequently over 5 years... I would have considered smashing it with a hammer after the scene was over - because revenge on an inanimate object that hurts you doesn't have to be logical to be cathartic.

I always looked at the gesture as mutilayered: What he thought it meant (family) is not what he thinks Sam feels (at this moment, after those memories), it apparently doesn't help to find God, and God just told him to buzz off.  Dean is really rocking the "bitter" at that moment.  It was a necessary low point to get us to believe (and I REALLY believed) that he was ready to say "yes" to Micheal.  I thought it worked wonderfully from a dramatic standpoint while simultaneously ripping my heart into shreds (for Sam, who I felt was misunderstood by Dean and for Dean who was so devastated).  And S5 Winchesters don't talk.  That's a relatively new development. 

I also support Dean not putting it back on over his neck because 1) it glows (unless God turns it off or leaves), 2) he and his brother are in a different and better place IMO than in S1-5 and Dean doesn't need the reminder of the past, 3) Dean's 37... that jewelry is too young for him IMO, and 4) the thing is irritating in a fight scene. 

Edited May 9, 2016 by SueB

[RulerofallIsurvey]

1 hour ago, DittyDotDot said:

BTW, I'm sorry, I didn't realize I was trying to convince you I was right and you were wrong; I thought we were having a discussion where two people exchange ideas. I didn't realize either of us were right or wrong. I just like talking about stuff.

I'm going to address this first, since I previously said I was trying to end the conversation - and here I am responding again!  But since you have responded, I feel like it would be rude for me not to answer.  Please understand in what I am about to write, I am honestly attempting to not be snarky or rude.  This is just my perception, but perhaps it will help you understand why I wrote what I did earlier.  

IMO, an exchange of ideas involves some give and take.  I.E, even in a discussion in which neither party can agree much, there is usually some point on which they can agree - or at least acknowledge that the other party made a fair point, even if one still disagrees.  I haven't felt that way in this discussion.  Perhaps you did not mean to, but it felt very much like you were trying to prove a point, prove me wrong for having my opinion, and not simply defending your POV.  Perhaps you felt the same from me.  If so, I apologize.  I was/am just trying to defend my POV.   And it didn't honestly feel like our discussion was going any where.  

And by the way, IMO, You are Right.  And So Am I.  You are right for you.  And I am right for me.  That's pretty much all I've been trying to say.

Quote

My point was that we don't know what the source material of the Bible is any more than we know what the source material of the Greek legends.

Scholars actually know much more of the original source material of the Bible than the Greek legends, especially the New Testament.  A large portion of the Old Testament also.

2 hours ago, DittyDotDot said:

Just like with history, legend and lore changes with the changing attitudes of the time. There is no one story that's intact and there's no story that's never been told before.

I've heard the theory that there's no new story under the sun.  Not sure that's true either.  At least, I don't think it can be proven. :)

Quote

IMO, this idea that God abandoned his creations is not new.

I'm not so sure about this either.  Maybe the idea from a human pov is not new because that's how people have felt from time to time?  And I certainly don't know all legends and myths throughout the ages.  But I can't think of one off the top of my head in which this is actually true.  Even in Greek and Roman legends, as selfish as the gods were, they didn't completely abandon their creation, I don't think.  I could be wrong.  

However, even if I am wrong about the Greek/Roman gods, it's really a moot point, since the god SPN is presenting, is essentially the Judeo-Christian God.  That God has never been shown to abandon Her/His (Herm?) creation and/or not care about the fates of the faithful and/or hide out and not want His/Her 'children' to find Herm.  So, yeah - I have a problem with the characterization.  

1 hour ago, MysteryGuest said:

I have to say that I never interpreted it this way, either, but we all have our own perspectives.  

I thought it was a bit of both.  Like SueB said:

1 hour ago, SueB said:

I always looked at the gesture as mutilayered:

[MYFAKETVBOYFRIEND]

6 hours ago, Binns said:

Oh, wow, I don't see this at all. Interesting take. 

I didn't see it that way at all. I felt he was disappointed and disgusted that it didn't work.

4 hours ago, Omegamom said:

saw that pause it on Dean's part as a sort of weary, bitter, "dammit...we had hope and now it's dead" kind of thing.  And since their hope was trashed, he trashed the symbol of that hope.

This is how I saw it as well.

[AwesomO4000]

2 hours ago, catrox14 said:

I think the impression that Dean did it purposefully to hurt Sam arose from the OVERLY LONG dramatic dangling of the amulet before Dean dropped in the trashcan. I really never thought that pause was supposed to imply anything about what it meant to Sam in that moment but more of just being SUPER DRAMATIC. Not trying to imply that Dean did it to hurt Sam or that Sam cared at all about it himself.

I always thought his sad puppy face was because he was upset that Dean and Cas had given up; that Dean was no longer convinced there was any hope;  worried that Dean was going to say yes to Michael and that Dean was worried that Sam was going to say yes to Lucifer. 

For me one of the compounding factors in my interpretation was that before giving the amulet back to Dean, Castiel says "It's worthless." To Cas as a God finder it definitely was worthless. However for Dean it wasn't supposed to be just a God finder. At the beginning of the season, despite everything that had happened recently between him and Sam, Dean didn't want to even give the amulet to Castiel at first, even if it could help Castiel find God. Dean's words after agreeing to give it to Cas are first "Don't lose it" and then "Great, now I feel naked." To me that Dean in "Dark Side..." demoted the amulet to a God finder when back then he couldn't have given a crap about Castiel's mission and already believed that God didn't give a crap - Dean even told Castiel as such when he argued against giving Castiel the amulet - meant to me that something else had also changed in order for Dean to also see the amulet as "worthless."

Sam was in the hospital room when Dean didn't want to part with the amulet, so he knew how Dean felt about giving it up. After coming back from heaven, Sam was trying to convince Dean that together they still could do this, they could fight this together. It's after Sam says those words - "I don't know, but we'll find it. You and me, we'll find it." that's when Dean throws the amulet away (in the trash even - which talk about symbolism of "it's worthless") - without saying anything or even looking at Sam. If Dean had said something, anything along the lines of "Not even God cares, Sam," before he threw the amulet away, or maybe just tossed it aside onto a nearby table, even, I would've thought that it was about Dean losing his faith in that last hope. But that's not what happened. So my interpretation was that Dean had not only lost hope in getting God's help, but was showing that he'd lost hope in him and Sam against the world as well... just as Dean had asked after one of the memories in heaven...

Quote

Dean: I mean, we’re supposed to be a team. It’s supposed to be you and me against the world, right?
Sam: Dean, it is!
Dean: Is it?

So for me it wasn't just the dramatic pause but the dialogue in heaven, Castiel's "It's worthless" (and Dean agreeing by taking the time to deliberately throw it in the trash), and Dean's timing of the toss - after Sam had tried to give the message again that it was him and Dean against the world and Dean not saying anything to that plea - that gave me the impression that it was more than just the loss of that last hope of God's help - which was admittedly something new for Dean, considering his earlier stance* - but also Dean showing Sam he'd also lost hope in them, too.

* In heaven even, Sam had been extremely surprised that Dean was even on Castiel's find God train. He'd said "last time I checked you wanted to break God's nose," so this was something new even for Sam in terms of Dean's attitude.

Quote

I've never had the impression that Sam was ever particularly reticent to voice his grievances, displeasure, anger, aggravation with Dean's actions to Dean himself over the years. So for me, since he never said squat about it in literally 6 years in the show's timeline that he didn't care about it either. And it's hard for me to think the show cared about it either since it was never once referenced by anyone or shown after s5 until FF.

I agree with SueB that season 5 Winchesters didn't talk much. The dynamic was touchy, considering that Sam was in prove himself mode. He usually tried hard not to rock the boat until he thought that he had to - for example "Fallen Idols." And when Sam did share his feelings, he sometimes wasn't sure what to expect - such as at the end of "Good God Y'All" when he was anticipating a fight after he said what he thought.

As for Sam not saying anything, I can see why he didn't. He didn't figure that Dean would want it back, and he wouldn't have wanted Dean to know he'd not respected Dean's choice. Also he didn't have anyone really to confide in about it. I suppose there could have been a scene of Sam holding on to it at some point - likely season 7 would've been the time - but Sam had the scarred had then, and i suppose his Lucifer hallucinations would've made fun of it and/or Sam might've worried that he'd slip and Dean would see it.

That would be assuming Sam even had it, but since we don't know that for sure, who knows? I could be wrong and Sam may not have cared at all about the amulet.

4 hours ago, Omegamom said:

Their only hope, such as it was, was to find God (they thought).  And the only way to find him was through the amulet.  And then God, through Joshua, tells them sorry, nope, not gonna do it, I'm done with it all.

Hope turns to bitter, bitter ashes.  They're on their own.  The Apocalypse is coming, and there's nothing they can do.

I saw that pause it on Dean's part as a sort of weary, bitter, "dammit...we had hope and now it's dead" kind of thing.  And since their hope was trashed, he trashed the symbol of that hope.

Still sort of ouch for me for Sam, since Sam obviously hadn't given up hope just yet - as Sam had just told Dean before Dean threw it away. So I agree with SueB that it was multilayered bitterness.

Quote

Others see it differently.  Like I said, it's a wonder we can communicate with our loved ones at all, thinking we're showing one thing when the other person sees it completely differently.  ;-)

Isn't that the truth. As I said above, a simple statement from Dean as he threw it away would've made a difference in meaning to me.

[Bessie]

I gotta go with Awesom0 on this one. It never even occurred to me that Dean viewed the amulet solely in terms of a god-seeking missile.  It's really fascinating reading all these different interpretations!

Bringing back the amulet was pure fan service. It was completely unnecessary. Knowing now, that it was Thompsons swan song, it makes more sense that it was in the episode. 

[catrox14]

47 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

agree with SueB that season 5 Winchesters didn't talk much. The dynamic was touchy, considering that Sam was in prove himself mode. He usually tried hard not to rock the boat until he thought that he had to - for example "Fallen Idols." And when Sam did share his feelings, he sometimes wasn't sure what to expect - such as at the end of "Good God Y'All" when he was anticipating a fight after he said what he thought.

Yeah totally different for me.

It sounds like you think Sam was actually afraid of Dean.

[catrox14]

Thinking about why Chuck mentioned demon!Dean.

It's really bugging me because there is no reason for Chuck to bring up demon!Dean as a reason why the world would be spinning because it's factually incorrect. Dean had the Mark before he became a demon and he had it after. So working under the assumption that it's not a mistake it has to be for a reason.(Unless they are trying to say that Dean was demon all along? But I don't think that's the case.)

It seems pretty callous of Chuck to think it's all good for Dean to live with a twisted soul that made him a cruel and uncaring Killy McStabberman with a side of creeper Karoake Party Dude. So either Chuck is truly the biggest dick in the universe and he did not care about Dean's (Righteous Man's?) soul being destroyed by HIS Mark as long as he didn't have to deal with his sister OR maybe demon!Dean was serving a purpose beyond MoC!Dean. God doesn't seem to care that humans can become demons or maybe he wants demons on Earth to keep a balance of light and dark. 

MoC!Dean did not really want to kill. He looked for ways to NOT kill so he was miserable not killing and was miserable after he killed because none of it was in his control.

But as a demon with a twisted soul, he DGAF if he killed and he seemed to have control over who he killed even if it was random demons and shitty humans.

Perhaps being a demon was the only way Dean was going to survive the Mark and not entirely lose his mind. Maybe Chuck is pissed that Sam for removing that survival mechanism. I dunno.

Just a random thinky thought.

Edited May 9, 2016 by catrox14

[AwesomO4000]

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

Yeah totally different for me.

It sounds like you think Sam was actually afraid of Dean.

Decided I better take this to the  "All Episodes Talk" thread...

[SueB]

7 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Thinking about why Chuck mentioned demon!Dean.

It's really bugging me because there is no reason for Chuck to bring up demon!Dean as a reason why the world would be spinning because it's factually incorrect. Dean had the Mark before he became a demon and he had it after. So working under the assumption that it's not a mistake it has to be for a reason.(Unless they are trying to say that Dean was demon all along? But I don't think that's the case.)

It seems pretty callous of Chuck to think it's all good for Dean to live with a twisted soul that made him a cruel and uncaring Killy McStabberman with a side of creeper Karoake Party Dude. So either Chuck is truly the biggest dick in the universe and he did not care about Dean's (Righteous Man's?) soul being destroyed by HIS Mark as long as he didn't have to deal with his sister OR maybe demon!Dean was serving a purpose beyond MoC!Dean. God doesn't seem to care that humans can become demons or maybe he wants demons on Earth to keep a balance of light and dark.

MoC!Dean seemed to struggle and not want to kill but in the end he couldn't stop himself but it fucked with him and he was miserable towards the end.  But as a demon with a twisted soul, he DGAF. Perhaps being a demon was the only way Dean was going to survive the Mark and not entirely lose his mind. 

Just a random thinky thought.

I think God felt Dean being a demon was an okay outcome if the universe survived.  I think 'didn't give a f*ck' is more than what was expressed. That could be EXACTLY how he feels, but he didn't say that explicitly. But he was relatively okay with it as opposed to the destruction of the cosmos. 

Edited May 9, 2016 by SueB

[catrox14]

9 minutes ago, SueB said:

I think God felt Dean being a demon was an okay outcome if the universe survived.  I think 'didn't give a f*ck' is more than what was expressed. That could be EXACTLY how he feels, but he didn't say that explicitly. But he was relatively okay with it as opposed to the destruction of the cosmos. 

My use of DGAF was about Dean not giving a fuck about killing because he was a demon. Not about Chuck.