“Bitch” Vs. “Jerk”: Where We Discuss Who The Writers Screwed This Week/Season/Ever

[BlueSapphire]

Sam's been undermined in quite a few episodes himself.  He's been knocked out, tied up, left before having any real interaction with the guest stars, so the case can be made for him, too.

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, BlueSapphire said:

Sam's been undermined in quite a few episodes himself.  He's been knocked out, tied up, left before having any real interaction with the guest stars, so the case can be made for him, too.

But Dean has been seen as the dumb one or reduced to buffoonery more than once and Sam has never been regarded that way. Being knocked out or tied up isn't the same. Dean has actually been referred to as the "cute, dumb one" in an ep. Sure it was by the MOTW but it was still written as such. Sam has always been referred to as the smarter of the two. Acknowledgments of Dean's intelligence have only been by Sam, not others.

Edited March 10, 2017 by DeeDee79

[AwesomO4000]

3 hours ago, DeeDee79 said:

But Dean has been seen as the dumb one or reduced to buffoonery more than once and Sam has never been regarded that way.

I'm not entirely sure about that, at least not the dumb part. The buffoonery I agree with, mostly because Sam is generally regarded and referred to as the "prissy" one, so being silly wouldn't fit that. But dumb - even Bobby insulted Sam's intelligence at least once. And I'm pretty certain that Crowley has. And Crowley's not very subtle that he thinks Dean is the smarter of the two. I'm pretty sure he's inferred it at some point, but his nicknames for them are fairly overt. I don't think he chose "Moose and Squirrel" simply because of the height difference, because there are likely other height difference pairs he could have chosen, but because Bullwinkle is the more gullible of the pair.

And I think in the later seasons, Sam's supposed intelligence has been pretty downplayed at least in terms of his gullibility anyway - the episode last week being the latest example.

I actually don't recall the "cute, dumb one" line, so I can't comment on that or the context of it.

[mertensia]

I don't know if Crowley sees Dean as smarter -more dangerous,  and better at taking the third option, as TVTropes calls it, yes. Because while Sam more overtly wants Crowley dead, Crowley knows Dean's the one who will enter Hell to kill him. Implacable. That's the word I want.

[DeeDee79]

7 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I actually don't recall the "cute, dumb one" line, so I can't comment on that or the context of it.

It was in Ask Jeeves.

[Aeryn13]

I only read up on it because I won`t do two things: a) drink battery acid and b) watch more Perez` episodes. But we got the trifecta? The stupid buffoon, the guy who isn`t around when any action takes place and the doormat? Even one sounds skip-worthy, let alone all three.

So now Sam has gotten three big kills in the span of 4 episodes while Dean wanders around uselessly. Gee, sounds incredibly balanced. Even with the Mark of Cain Dean didn`t get BIG kills one on top of each other like this. 

[PAForrest]

10 hours ago, catrox14 said:

I don't get it

Dabb is the showrunner. He really has the final say over the episodes.

IMO that's your answer right there. Dabb was both "unofficially" and then finally "officially" in charge last year too. Carver was gone doing Frequency almost right away, and Dean unsurprisingly spent most of last season being sidelined from a lot of the action, especially in Dabb's episodes. The only difference this season is that Dabb's maybe not even trying to pretend anymore. I honestly believe the desire to sideline Dean and essentially replace him with Mary as much as they can is Dabb's intention - at least, that's how it feels to me right now and depending on where they go with Mary after this.

At this point I think if Dabb could eliminate Dean entirely from the show he would. Instead he has him used as minimally as possible, and even then he's often dumbed down, like he was last night. Something has to change pretty radically before the end of the season for me to feel otherwise - and then carry over to next season, and not fall back on doing the same thing all over again.

Right now Dean being useless affects my feelings about everything and everyone else in the show, in that I hate it all.

Edited March 10, 2017 by PAForrest

[BlueSapphire]

Not sure if this goes here, but do people really think if they tweet the writers and showrunner, they're going to get an answer?  Especially if said tweets imply hatred of a character and the actor who portrays him/her?

[ILoveReading]

22 minutes ago, PAForrest said:

IMO that's your answer right there. Dabb was both "unofficially" and then finally "officially" in charge last year too. Carver was gone doing Frequency almost right away, and Dean unsurprisingly spent most of last season being sidelined from a lot of the action, especially in Dabb's episodes. The only difference this season is that Dabb's maybe not even trying to pretend anymore. I honestly believe the desire to sideline Dean and essentially replace him with Mary as much as they can is Dabb's intention - at least, that's how it feels to me right now and depending on where they go with Mary after this.

At this point I think if Dabb could eliminate Dean entirely from the show he would. Instead he has him used as minimally as possible, and even then he's often dumbed down, like he was last night. Something has to change pretty radically before the end of the season for me to feel otherwise - and then carry over to next season, and not fall back on doing the same thing all over again.

Right now Dean being useless affects my feelings about everything and everyone else in the show, in that I hate it all.

Now we know why that montage at the end of Regarding Dean felt like a good bye.  It was. 

[Aeryn13]

The writers can always ignore it like they pretty much every critical tweet. However, twitter is not their platform to get nothing but praise. Either their egos can take that or they can`t, doesn`t change things. 

[BlueSapphire]

Where is there any proof that Dabb is trying to eliminate Dean from the show?  I've seen the same kind of conspiracy theory stuff for years, just change the name of the show runner/writer.

[BlueSapphire]

But when there are accusations being flung around, that's not criticism, that's bordering on hate.

[ILoveReading]

8 minutes ago, BlueSapphire said:

Where is there any proof that Dabb is trying to eliminate Dean from the show?  I've seen the same kind of conspiracy theory stuff for years, just change the name of the show runner/writer.

As the season stands now, it would be extremely easy to write Dean out completely.  He has no tie to any story line.  The Men of Letters are far more about Sam and Mary.  Cas has the angel stuff and Crowley has Lucifer.  Dean is just taking up space.  He's not even really participating in the MOTW episodes as the majority of time Sam is the one interviewing witnesses and taking out the bad guys.  

Dean's not even really in the big brother role this season. 

Dean's just taking up space. 

Edited March 10, 2017 by ILoveReading

[Aeryn13]

They are being well-paid for IMO doing an incredibly shitty (for the most part) job so I have not an ounce of sympathy for them getting a "mean" tweet or two. It`s not even remotely like in other fandoms where I have seen showrunners get basically crucified and dragged for months/years on end. And even there some anger was valid, just the sheer amount of vitriol was overwhelming. In comparism, the SPN writers live in a protected little bubble.     

[Aeryn13]

Quote

Dean's just taking up space. 

Technically, not even that. He just wanders offscreen and then comes in when all the relevant parts are over. Jensen could have taken an uninterrupted vacation for the entire time it took to shoot episodes 12 - 15. 

[Pondlass1]

Not only is Dean not part of any action or storyline - he's also losing gray cells apparently.  

There would probably be complaints, but I honestly feel Jensen could have spent a month or so home with Danneel and the kids.  He's just chopped liver these days.  

[Katy M]

I'm not sure where to post this, because I'm not really interested in Sam/Dean wars but I've seen some (many) complaints about Sam getting the kills in the last few epis.  So, I have a theory why the writers may be doing that.  Sam needed a pretty major rescue at the beginning of the season. And, since he's the one trusting the BMOLs he may need one at the end of the season. So, he might be getting some kills in between so he doesn't look totally useless.  Or they might be making up for earlier seasons when Dean got most of the kills.  I was just thinking about this because I saw an old post on a YouTube video from season 8 where someone was complaining that Sam was useless and DEan had to keep rescuing him.  So, just my 2 cents.

[Pondlass1]

@Katy M It actually doesn't bother me that Sam got the hellhound kill again. What bothers me and what is becoming very noticeable is that Dean is peripheral to any storyline.  He's presence has no effect on anything.  Everything could have unfolded in this episode the same way without Dean being present.  

Can't use the twins as an excuse either.  Jensen was on screen. He was on location.  He just didn't do anything of any importance. Pretty wallpaper, I guess you'd call it.

Edited March 10, 2017 by Pondlass1

[DittyDotDot]

1 hour ago, BlueSapphire said:

Not sure if this goes here, but do people really think if they tweet the writers and showrunner, they're going to get an answer?  Especially if said tweets imply hatred of a character and the actor who portrays him/her?

It's unfortunate some people have to be rude and hateful because there is such a thing constructive criticism. When the vast majority of folks use the opportunity to shout louder than the person shouting next to them, it's really hard to hear anything all. I wouldn't be surprised if most of what gets said the the writers just gets ignored or tucked away as "crazy people." Kind of defeats the purpose, if you ask me. 

One of the many reasons I don't care for twitter or most social media.

Edited March 10, 2017 by DittyDotDot

[ILoveReading]

From @SueB in the ep thread
 

Quote

 

1) & 2) As you stated in the Bitch/Jerk thread: 

If you mean "called it" from the perspective that Sam since we saw the Hell Hound attacking Sam (in the promo), Sam got the kill while Dean was elsewhere -- you did say that.  But "Sam gets to do everything" is inaccurate.  Sam got the kill.  And I DO think it's fair to say that Sam has gotten bigger kills in the last few episodes than is typical of a season.  There was a detailed statistics gathered a while ago on number of kills by character - I'd hazard a guess that Dean is still "in the lead".  But "got to do everything" depends, IMO, on your POV regarding the point of this episode. It's also important that Sam and Dean were separated on this hunt so that the over-arching plot could make progress (see next paragraph).

I thought Dean "wandering in the woods" WAS actually important for explaining his decision at the end of the episode.  From a Crowley, Dean perspective, Dean is once again observing Crowley and telling him he's gone soft. Crowley puts the notion that maybe DEAN has changed (the boys HAVE changed... it tied right back to Dean's rationale for accepting working with the Brits.  This scene established two important things: Dean (and Sam) work with people they don't trust and Dean has a more nuanced view of the world than the Brits.

 

I ask that you please go back and re-read what I wrote earlier as I expressly stated its not about statistics, screen time or lines its about feelings and on a Dean front this episode left me feeling empty.   Not getting the kill was just icing on the cake in this episode.  I don't like buffoon Dean at the start of this ep, I didn't like how easy Dean gave in and I didn't like that Dean just wandered aimlessly.  Episode 12 wasn't about the kill it was about the weapon.

I've never stated otherwise that anything I post is other than my opinion, so when I said "I called it" about Sam and the hell hound and Sam doing everything, from my POV that is exactly what happened.  If you don't agree thats fine.  We see everything different.

As for the conversation with Crowley its nothing we haven't seen before, its not new.  We've seen Dean compromise his beliefs and attempt to keep the peach long before this episode.  There was the stuff with the cage.  Dean didn't not agree but he knew Sam was going to do it anyway so he did his best to support him.  We saw it back in episode 4 with Ruby.  Dean really didn't like her but he gave her the benefit of the doubt.  The plan to get the demons and angels together in Heaven and Hell was Sam's idea and Ruby was a huge part of that plan.  Dean had accept working with her,.  When Ruby proved untrustworthy he was still supposed to support and conditions meant nothing and conditions meant nothing.  Which is why the whole "we work with them, but only under these conditions" is also meaningless.  You (general you) might mean them in that moment, but as we saw Sam was extemely eager to answer the phone.

As Im really over Dean being taught a lesson at this point.

So I maintain MY POV that Dean, rolled over, learned his lesson and really had nothing to do in this ep. 

We'll agree to disagree and leave it at that.

Edited March 10, 2017 by ILoveReading

[Myrelle]

If they don't like what they read, then they should stay off or ignore the criticism. I think they do the latter-whether it's constructive or not. I think that they revel in the praise they get there, and little more. I don't have a whole lot of respect for them being on there with the fans. I think with this show, their time could be better spent honing their craft and getting to know the characters that they're supposed to be writing and the histories of them and of the writing for the show, in general. 12 years worth of characterizations and storylines and plot lines would involve a shit ton of research, IMO and if they were doing their jobs right and to the best of their abilities. Enough to keep them busy enough for years, again IMO. Others can check in on the fandom and report to them, if they feel it's that necessary and if they truly care about the feedback. And if they do care about the feedback, they need to take it all into account-the good, the bad and the ugly-because that's exactly what you're going to get on twitter and tumblr, whether you like it or not. JMO, of course.

[SueB]

@ILoveReading 

I did quote your post on not caring about stats... I understood that. That's exactly why I quoted your paragraph on what you said mattered.  So, I'm disappointed I gave the impression I didn't understand that.  I had not, however, yet read the other post you referred. I think we were posting at the same regarding topic #3.

But I'm happy to agree to disagree.

Edited March 10, 2017 by SueB

[ILoveReading]

8 minutes ago, SueB said:

@ILoveReading 

I did quote your post on not caring about stats... I understood that. That's exactly why I quoted your paragraph on what you said mattered.  So, I'm disappointed I gave the impression I didn't understand that.  I had not, however, yet read the other post you referred. I think we were posting at the same regarding topic #3.

But I'm happy to agree to disagree.

I think we are misunderstanding each other.   It was this part of your post, as to why I felt you misunderstood my my post.

Quote

There was a detailed statistics gathered a while ago on number of kills by character

It doesn't matter who is in the lead.  At this point, the final kill is part of a much larger problem with how I feel about the writing for Dean's character this season.

yes, happy to agree to disagree.

[catrox14]

12 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

Now we know why that montage at the end of Regarding Dean felt like a good bye.  It was. 

Not gonna lie, I had a similar thought.

[catrox14]

There are factions on all sides who offer constructive, harsh criticism and sometimes abuse. It's part and parcel of putting oneself on social media. They can ignore whatever they want.

[rue721]

13 hours ago, BlueSapphire said:

Not sure if this goes here, but do people really think if they tweet the writers and showrunner, they're going to get an answer?

I think sometimes they do get an answer! @SueB has gotten responses to some of her tweets, IIRC.

Personally, I don't know how the writers should handle it. On the one hand, it's probably a good thing to know how your work is being perceived. On the other, they can't just pander. The fans getting pandered to wouldn't even like it, let alone anybody else. So I dunno.

It's probably difficult for writers to read enough to get a sense of what fans think about their work without reading so much that they start writing in response to fans in some sense -- they're bound to trigger the Observer affect in themselves, I would think.

Now I'm imagining everyone tweeting and bitching about my work. Which is basically bookkeeping. LOL. It would be like some kind of crowd sourced staff meeting, I guess. What a nightmare.

Do you think the producers ever bring up online fan reactions with the writers or actors as a way of getting leverage with them? I think about the guy who played Cole and how he got such a frosty reaction, and I wonder if the producers decided to cut him loose because of it (and if so, if they were frank with him about their reasoning). I get the sense that maybe writers and actors keep abreast on their own time, but it doesn't actually get brought up at work. But I dunno.

[DeeDee79]

I'm curious since I got into fandom late; was Kripke more invested and interactive online in regards to what the fans liked/disliked? I'm asking after reading that Bela and Ruby who were apparently created for a more diverse cast of characters were written off due to negative fan reactions. I've had a mostly meh attitude towards this season as a whole and observing fandom opinion on this site and elsewhere I'm definitely not the only one. I just wonder if the writers would take heed to overall fan observations or if that was just Kripke's thing because Supernatural is his baby.

[catrox14]

7 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

I'm curious since I got into fandom late; was Kripke more invested and interactive online in regards to what the fans liked/disliked? I

Kripke used to read and I think even occasionally post at TWoP.

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, catrox14 said:

Kripke used to read and I think even occasionally post at TWoP.

Yes, I remember reading this also. I'm just wondering if he was the only one..

[SueB]

Robbie was definitely on-line and knew the 'score' with fandom.  Bobo and Davy are on-line as well and get feedback.  I can say that within the last couple of years, the CW promo-monkeys had a misleading promo and people really ripped on Berens.  He took an attitude that he would not respond to pre-episode criticism because promos were misleading.  And it was.  And of course no one actually apologized to him.

So, there's some definitely aware, and they have responded. But it's limited because any time they say ANYTHING there's an attack from some faction that's not pleased.  Mostly they just "like" or "retweet" -- that seems to draw less ire.

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, SueB said:

Robbie was definitely on-line and knew the 'score' with fandom.  Bobo and Davy are on-line as well and get feedback.  I can say that within the last couple of years, the CW promo-monkeys had a misleading promo and people really ripped on Berens.  He took an attitude that he would not respond to pre-episode criticism because promos were misleading.  And it was.  And of course no one actually apologized to him.

So, there's some definitely aware, and they have responded. But it's limited because any time they say ANYTHING there's an attack from some faction that's not pleased.  Mostly they just "like" or "retweet" -- that seems to draw less ire.

Thank you for the info! I'm not on twitter so I have no idea what goes on regarding fandom interaction. Do you recall the episode that had the misleading promo?

[DittyDotDot]

8 hours ago, DeeDee79 said:

I'm curious since I got into fandom late; was Kripke more invested and interactive online in regards to what the fans liked/disliked? I'm asking after reading that Bela and Ruby who were apparently created for a more diverse cast of characters were written off due to negative fan reactions. I've had a mostly meh attitude towards this season as a whole and observing fandom opinion on this site and elsewhere I'm definitely not the only one. I just wonder if the writers would take heed to overall fan observations or if that was just Kripke's thing because Supernatural is his baby.

Kripke used to pay attention to the online "buzz" and would respond quite a bit. Though, when Krpke was running the show there wasn't twitter and all the social media there is now. Many of the writers belonged to sites like TWoP, too.

TBH, I think Kripke was more able to actually interact with fandom than the current crew. Not because they don't want to interact with fandom, it's just the sheer volume of it can be overwhelming and hard to filter through it all.

[Wayward Son]

On 10 March 2017 at 0:00 AM, DeeDee79 said:

@Myrelle I agree with your last two posts. While I make no apologies for Dean consenting to Gadreel possessing Sam The Purge speech was horrifying. The writers basically had Sam tell Dean that everything he had ever done was motivated out of a place of selfishness and the need to not be alone. Furthermore Dean is shown not apologizing and stating that he would do it again if he had to. TPTB did what they had to in order to make him look as dickish as possible so that Sam's "hard truths" would be applauded by the fans. Fans of the show and the characters should have been saddened by the rift between the brothers not cheering on Sam shitting all over his brother. Sam's anger and disappointment could have been stated without deliberately trying to hurt Dean as much as possible with his speech. I have never seen Dean speak that way to Sam and before anyone says it the scene in The Prisoner at Charlie's grave isn't the same. Dean was afflicted with the anger and aggression from the Mark and a loved one had just been murdered; not the same kind of situation. Anyone that got any enjoyment out of that other than an appreciation of how Jensen portrayed Dean's reaction just doesn't like the character and wanted to see him hurt. My opinion; no one has to agree.

I don't think one needs to be a Dean hater to feel Sam was (mostly) justified in what he said to Dean here and that the parts that weren't true were understandable due to the extreme anger he felt. What Dean did to Sam in early season nine was horrific and possibly the darkest thing we've seen any main character do to another. It's for that reason I don't understand the argument that the purge speech was much more horrifying than the ordeal Dean had put Sam through prior to this. Sam was the victim in all of this not Dean. 

To sum it up 

What Sam had just been put through thanks to Dean

• Hurt and betrayal from finding out the person who you trusted most has been lying to you for months and collaborated in what was essentially a supernatural form of rape. 
• The trauma that comes with being possessed for months. An act the show has always likened to both rape and torture due to the loss of self-autonomy involved.
• Guilt from knowing his body  was used to kill a very close friend. 
• Anger from hearing the person who had put you through all of this brassily stating they would do it again. A statement that shows contempt for Sam's right to self-autonomy and highlights the utter selfishness of Dean's action. If Sam makes the decision he is ready to die rather than face possession and Dean goes against this then Dean is doing it for Dean not Sam. 

What Dean had been put through thanks to Sam

• Inevitable hurt as a result of a few harsh remarks from Sam. 

So Im sorry but I don't accept the argument that Sam's words were the horrifying thing in all of this. There were no words that Sam could have said that would ever compare to what he'd just been put through.  

As for The Purge vs The Prisoner. I would agree that the influence of the Mark of Cain is a factor that separates the two situations. However, the death of Charlie was not. After all, not only had Sam also just lost a close friend (Kevin), but he had the additional burden /guilt of knowing that it was his body used to kill him. 

[DeeDee79]

5 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

I don't think one needs to be a Dean hater to feel Sam was (mostly) justified in what he said to Dean here and that the parts that weren't true were understandable due to the extreme anger he felt. What Dean did to Sam in early season nine was horrific and possibly the darkest thing we've seen any main character do to another. It's for that reason I don't understand the argument that the purge speech was much more horrifying than the ordeal Dean had put Sam through prior to this. Sam was the victim in all of this not Dean. 

To sum it up 

What Sam had just been put through thanks to Dean

• Hurt and betrayal from finding out the person who you trusted most has been lying to you for months and collaborated in what was essentially a supernatural form of rape. 
• The trauma that comes with being possessed for months. An act the show has always likened to both rape and torture due to the loss of self-autonomy involved.
• Guilt from knowing his body  was used to kill a very close friend. 
• Anger from hearing the person who had put you through all of this brassily stating they would do it again. A statement that shows contempt for Sam's right to self-autonomy and highlights the utter selfishness of Dean's action. If Sam makes the decision he is ready to die rather than face possession and Dean goes against this then Dean is doing it for Dean not Sam. 

What Dean had been put through thanks to Sam

• Inevitable hurt as a result of a few harsh remarks from Sam. 

So Im sorry but I don't accept the argument that Sam's words were the horrifying thing in all of this. There were no words that Sam could have said that would ever compare to what he'd just been put through.  

As for The Purge vs The Prisoner. I would agree that the influence of the Mark of Cain is a factor that separates the two situations. However, the death of Charlie was not. After all, not only had Sam also just lost a close friend (Kevin), but he had the additional burden /guilt of knowing that it was his body used to kill him. 

I understand your viewpoint but I don't agree for the reasons stated in my post in which I also stated that it was my opinion. We can agree to disagree.

[Wayward Son]

I forgot to say in my last post but this weeks episode has swayed me to joining in with those who've said this season seems to be overly favourable to Sam. The only good thing I can say about his portrayal is that (for me at least) Dean is back to being portrayed as a person I can actually care and root for. 

Edited March 11, 2017 by Wayward Son

[DeeDee79]

1 hour ago, Wayward Son said:

I forgot to say in my last post but this weeks episode has swayed me to joining in with those who've said this season seems to be overly favourable to Sam. The only good thing I can say about his portrayal is that (for me at least) Dean is back to being portrayed as a person I can actually care and root for. 

So before this season you didn't root or care for him?

[Wayward Son]

18 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

So before this season you didn't root or care for him?

My general thoughts / feelings on Dean throughout the years would be... 

Seasons 1-7: Loved him just as I love Sam and Castiel. That isn't to say I think he was perfect (but then I don't think that of the other two either) but overall he was a character I could feel invested in. 

Seasons 8-9: Hard to like to outright hateful. I just found the characters overall behaviour throughout those two seasons hard to relate to. For me he was written petty and manipulative at best to outright abusive at worst. 

I actually stopped watching the show mid season 9 because of the way the writers had made me feel about Dean. That and I was utterly tired of the poor writing and bro on bro angst. I only started watching again last summer (just before season 12) when a friend assured me a lot of the issues I had with the writing at that point had disappeared during eleven. 

Season 10: I begun to relate to him again or at least found him tolerable. Maybe the fact that I watched the season for the first time after a two and a half year break allowed me to watch more objectively or maybe it was his struggles to maintain his humanity against the MOC. I dunno all I know is the issues I had with 8-9 Dean were lessened here. 

Season 11-12: The character has become someone I can root and care for again. Probably not to the same extent as Cas and Sam thanks to the damage done by 8-9, but I can at least relate to where he is coming from most of the time and enjoy his scenes again.

Edited March 11, 2017 by Wayward Son

[DeeDee79]

16 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

My general thoughts / feelings on Dean throughout the years would be... 

Seasons 1-7: Loved him just as I love Sam and Castiel. That isn't to say I think he was perfect (but then I don't think that of the other two either) but overall he was a character I could feel invested in. 

Seasons 8-9: Hard to like to outright hateful. I just found the characters overall behaviour throughout those two seasons hard to relate to. For me he was written petty and manipulative at best to outright abusive at worst. 

I actually stopped watching the show mid season 9 because of the way the writers had made me feel about Dean. That and I was utterly tired of the poor writing and bro on bro angst. I only started watching again last summer (just before season 12) when a friend assured me a lot of the issues I had with the writing at that point had disappeared during eleven. 

Season 10: I begun to relate to him again or at least found him tolerable. Maybe the fact that I watched the season for the first time after a two and a half year break allowed me to watch more objectively or maybe it was his struggles to maintain his humanity against the MOC. I dunno all I know is the issues I had with 8-9 Dean were lessened here. 

Season 11-12: The character has become someone I can root and care for again. Probably not to the same extent as Cas and Sam thanks to the damage done by 8-9, but I can at least relate to where he is coming from most of the time and enjoy his scenes again.

This is interesting but it also makes me sad. I love Dean and I hate how between seasons 8-10 he was written as cold bordering on insensitive at times when it was needed to insert conflict between him and Sam. I feel that they have done a lot to tear down the character over the years for the sake of drama but Jensen's portrayal makes him a character that I continue to enjoy despite the way that he's written sometimes. Incidentally Sam wasn't written any better than Dean during season 8.

Edited March 11, 2017 by DeeDee79

[AwesomO4000]

2 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

I forgot to say in my last post but this weeks episode has swayed me to joining in with those who've said this season seems to be overly favourable to Sam. The only good thing I can say about his portrayal is that (for me at least) Dean is back to being portrayed as a person I can actually care and root for. 

Well, I guess it depends on what viewers consider as favorable. For me, I don't care as much about the monster killing. I care about character, so for me, what they are doing now with Sam is more what I like to call "damning with faint praise." * So they have Sam kill some monsters - see what a badass he is? - but at the same time they have him make non-sensical (to me) decisions concerning the BMoL, seem to ignore obvious signs something is wrong, spout weird non-truths, and lie to Dean for apparently no real reason except to make Sam look bad, and set him up to get the "Sam  is wrong and/or makes the stupid choice again" ending.

Heh. When Aeryn13 and I agree on something - namely that Sam's "I'm in" at the end of last week's episode made no sense - then I'm pretty sure that I'm not imagining things, because our agreeing on something like that hardly ever happens. I think it's happened maybe 3 times ; ) .

* It's something I accused the Carver era of quite a bit. They'll give Sam one small thing and then hit his character with doing something awful in the very next scene/episode/whatever.

[MysteryGuest]

52 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Well, I guess it depends on what viewers consider as favorable. For me, I don't care as much about the monster killing. I care about character, so for me, what they are doing now with Sam is more what I like to call "damning with faint praise."

It isn't about kills for me, either, but it is about Jared and Jensen having meaningful, interesting scenes to play without bastardizing their characters.  Having Sam sign up with the BMOL after that fiasco we witnessed last week (directly on the heels of the prior job that almost got them all killed, due to their bad intel), just makes zero sense.   Then they have him compound that by lying to Dean for weeks about it, knowing how upset they both were about being lied to by Mary.  It makes Sam look like an asshole, and makes Dean look like a wimp for just rolling over and accepting that everyone is going to lie to him.  It's not a good look for either one of them and could have been easily avoided with a little bit better writing. 

I understand that Sam and Dean aren't perfect.  That's been pretty well established over the last 12 seasons.  But they are still the heroes of this show, so why do the writers always insist on making them look bad?  

[Wayward Son]

2 hours ago, DeeDee79 said:

This is interesting but it also makes me sad. I love Dean and I hate how between seasons 8-10 he was written as cold bordering on insensitive at times when it was needed to insert conflict between him and Sam. I feel that they have done a lot to tear down the character over the years for the sake of drama but Jensen's portrayal makes him a character that I continue to enjoy despite the way that he's written sometimes. Incidentally Sam wasn't written any better than Dean during season 8.

 It is sad! I'll always resent Jeremy Carver for making me feel hate towards a character that was one of my absolute favourites on TV. 

However, while I still strongly disapprove of his actions in season nine I'd say I'm in an overall good place when it comes to  Dean these days. I feel sorry for him this season for instance and dislike the crappy apology he was recently forced to give Mary, but I'll not start ranting about that in here. 

@AwesomO4000

Quote

Well, I guess it depends on what viewers consider as favorable. For me, I don't care as much about the monster killing. I care about character, so for me, what they are doing now with Sam is more what I like to call "damning with faint praise." * So they have Sam kill some monsters - see what a badass he is? - but at the same time they have him make non-sensical (to me) decisions concerning the BMoL, seem to ignore obvious signs something is wrong, spout weird non-truths, and lie to Dean for apparently no real reason except to make Sam look bad, and set him up to get the "Sam  is wrong and/or makes the stupid choice again" ending.

Heh. When Aeryn13 and I agree on something - namely that Sam's "I'm in" at the end of last week's episode made no sense - then I'm pretty sure that I'm not imagining things, because our agreeing on something like that hardly ever happens. I think it's happened maybe 3 times ; ) .

* It's something I accused the Carver era of quite a bit. They'll give Sam one small thing and then hit his character with doing something awful in the very next scene/episode/whatever.

 

@MysteryGuest

Quote

It isn't about kills for me, either, but it is about Jared and Jensen having meaningful, interesting scenes to play without bastardizing their characters.  Having Sam sign up with the BMOL after that fiasco we witnessed last week (directly on the heels of the prior job that almost got them all killed, due to their bad intel), just makes zero sense.   Then they have him compound that by lying to Dean for weeks about it, knowing how upset they both were about being lied to by Mary.  It makes Sam look like an asshole, and makes Dean look like a wimp for just rolling over and accepting that everyone is going to lie to him.  It's not a good look for either one of them and could have been easily avoided with a little bit better writing. 

I understand that Sam and Dean aren't perfect.  That's been pretty well established over the last 12 seasons.  But they are still the heroes of this show, so why do the writers always insist on making them look bad?  

Oh yeah I agree with you both about how not sensible SAMs choice was. This is one instance where this Sam boy is firmly on Dean's side. It doesn't make sense, makes him look stupid and is clearly just for the sake of the plot rather than true to the character. 

Edited March 11, 2017 by Wayward Son

[DeeDee79]

4 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

It doesn't make sense, makes him look stupid and is clearly just for the sake of the plot rather than true to the character. 

Yes indeed. Sam is all about hunting evil not just monsters and he stressed that point to Dean repeatedly in the early years until he took on the same mantra. Instead of letting Mary sway him to the BMOL they should have had a talk with her about all of the good supernatural creatures that they've encountered over the years which would have given her something to think about outside of the black & white Campbell method of hunting.

[FlickChick]

22 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Yes indeed. Sam is all about hunting evil not just monsters and he stressed that point to Dean repeatedly in the early years until he took on the same mantra. Instead of letting Mary sway him to the BMOL they should have had a talk with her about all of the good supernatural creatures that they've encountered over the years which would have given her something to think about outside of the black & white Campbell method of hunting.

In order to do that, the writer (Perez) would have to know about the Campbells' penchant for black/white hunting and that the Winchesters have run into non-evil supernatural creatures, and in order to know that, Perez would actually have had to research something. Therein lies the rub. Oh, and he would have to know that Sam isn't an idiot.

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, FlickChick said:

In order to do that, the writer (Perez) would have to know about the Campbells' penchant for black/white hunting and that the Winchesters have run into non-evil supernatural creatures, and in order to know that, Perez would actually have had to research something. Therein lies the rub. Oh, and he would have to know that Sam isn't an idiot.

And this will never happen so everyone will continue to be written atrociously out of character for the remainder of this season.

[MysteryGuest]

2 minutes ago, FlickChick said:

In order to do that, the writer (Perez) would have to know about the Campbells' penchant for black/white hunting and that the Winchesters have run into non-evil supernatural creatures, and in order to know that, Perez would actually have had to research something. Therein lies the rub. Oh, and he would have to know that Sam isn't an idiot.

On that note, how do you bring in a bunch of new writers on a 12 year old show with millions of rabid fans and not insist they at least watch a few episodes of the show they're now writing for?  It's extremely annoying.

[FlickChick]

1 minute ago, MysteryGuest said:

On that note, how do you bring in a bunch of new writers on a 12 year old show with millions of rabid fans and not insist they at least watch a few episodes of the show they're now writing for?  It's extremely annoying.

I would say that it reflects poor leadership on the part of the showrunner. If I were in charge, I would not hire anyone in S12 that did not agree to watch EVERY EPISODE of the series. PERIOD!

[ahrtee]

11 minutes ago, FlickChick said:

I would say that it reflects poor leadership on the part of the showrunner. If I were in charge, I would not hire anyone in S12 that did not agree to watch EVERY EPISODE of the series. PERIOD!

Watching every episode doesn't translate to seeing the characters the same way as anyone else.  Look at how differently the fans on this site see the characters, even watching the same episodes.  

[catrox14]

I saw something on Twitter that Perez said he's watched 25 episodes of SPN. I'll see if I can find it. So of course now I want to know which 25. Because that might explain EVERYTHING

[Wayward Son]

Id love to read everyone's answers to the question I just posted in the All Episodes thread based on this discussion <3 

[Airmid]

4 hours ago, catrox14 said:

I saw something on Twitter that Perez said he's watched 25 episodes of SPN. I'll see if I can find it. So of course now I want to know which 25. Because that might explain EVERYTHING

He like knows there's two hundred plus more right?

I mean if I was going to write for something I would at least watch all the major myth arc episodes and twenty five doesn't really seem to cover that. Hell that's barely a season.

Tell me, where can I can get the cha-ching for writing a show that I barely know?

/sarcasm. *picks up bitterness*