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

[Diane]

10 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

Anyone who hasn't read Demian's recaps--which is who coined the term as I recall--should. They're full of so much hilarity like that. I'm at work right now so I don't have easy access, but I posted a link to the Supernatural recaps done at TWoP in one of the S5 threads recently. I can't remember which one right now. Maybe The Real Ghostbusters?

I found it:

http:// https://web.archive.org/web/20140404230327/http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/show/supernatural/recaps/

[Demented Daisy]

Or try this:

http://www.brilliantbutcancelled.com/show/supernatural/

[Idahoforspn]

4 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

I don`t believe Carver will be coming back or even become more involved with the show again. He`ll probably try to launch something new. If the CW would give him another shot, no idea. Now I would welcome his return because IMO Dabb is bar none the worst showrunner ever and for the Dean-fans I know this has been a mass exodus Season. 

That is what I have been seeing among my friends too. I didn't even watch live last week for the first time intentionally because I was so discouraged by the previous week's disaster. Maybe if they keep Dabb, the TPTB will at least give him some direction. I can hope anyway.

[catrox14]

FWIW, for me,  "many" connotes more than a few or some but less than "most" or "all" and I've always thought it a reasonable term to use to explain relative measures of anything.  Annnnyyyhoodles, I know this is veering more into ratings but I think it's appropriate because it's hard to discuss relative success or failures of showrunners without looking at ratings which includes the night of airing, what it's paired with, it's competition and the change in network executives from Dawn Ostroff to Mark Pedowitz in 2011.

I'm a relative noob compared to I think most viewers here, as I started  watching live in s9 after a Netflix binge. I do agree that Netflix probably helped boost folks tuning in to watch live for the premiere of s8 and s9 but it doesn't account for why more viewers stuck around to watch live during s9 more than s8 even if by a small margin as both s8 and s9 averaged over 1 in the ratings point (source is SuperWiki), and why s9 had the highest average total viewers and highest ratings point since Kripke era.

http://www.supernaturalwiki.com/index.php?title=Ratings

 

Quote

 

2013-2014 (Season Nine)

High: 2.76 million viewers for 9.12 Sharp Teeth

Low: 1.59 million viewers for 9.21 King of the Damned

Average Total Viewers: 2.81 million viewers

Average A18-49 demographic: 1.3 rating point

 

 

As I've mentioned before, my first glimpse of SPN was "What's Up, Tiger Mommy" during the Dean/Cas reunion by the river in Purgatory, which aired the night of Arrow's pilot premiere on 10/10/2012.  IMO, pairing it with Arrow, boosted it's s8 ratings more than anything. Yes, SPN had it's s8 premiere on Wednesday 10/03/2012, a week before Arrow premiered but I think it's more than reasonable to think the network thought moving SPN to Wednesday as the lead out for Arrow, would bring the fans to Wednesday ahead of the Arrow premiere the following week.

IMO that move had everything to do with Pedowitz, who by all accounts loved/loves the show and was seeking to boost the 18-49 male demo so moving it to Wednesday helped both Arrow and SPN. Maybe the network rewarded SPN by moving it to Tuesday night which seems to have been the most successful time slot since the Kripke era. It seemed to thrive in the 9pm Tues slot regardless of what show was it's lead in as it had The Originals before it was moved back to Wednesdays with Arrow  and then to the Thursday at 9pm, where it had Legends of Tomorrow as it's lead in.  Then it was moved to Thursday at 8pm where it's ratings have been worse than ever (but so are all of CW's ratings so I don't know what that is about). I should take a look at the numbers before it moved to 8pm.   

Were the higher s9 ratings solely a function of an arguably better time slot or because viewers  were genuinely invested in the storyline of Sam being in harms way at  the end of s8; wanting to know what Dean would do to save him;  what was Crowley going to do to save himself from Dean and Sam and would the demon blood cure still be a thing for him; what was going to happen to Cas now that his grace was stolen and the angels fell. As much as I hated Dean's role in the back half of s8,  it had one helluva a good setup for all four main characters to have compelling SL in s9.  AS upsetting as the Dean/GadreelSam arc was for both Dean and Sam fans, it was IMO hellacompelling.

IMO Dean getting the Mark of Cain went even further to be a compelling SL.  I do find it interesting that the highest rated episode of s9 was "Sharp Teeth", which is the episode that aired following "First Born" wherein Dean got the Mark of Cain. There is a notation in SuperWiki that "Sharp Teeth" aired the night of a State of the Union address and it's suggested that is why it's ratings went up. I would suggest that  it went up because viewers were excited about the Mark of Cain SL and wanted to know what happened next. It was both an emotional arc and a  mytharc for Dean. When was the last time that happened in the show...s4? Dean fans and IMO even non-Dean fans were interested because of how it would affect Sam and Cas.  

So for me I think Carver did a good job both creatively and business wise to make sure SPN didn't stagnate. And if pure numbers without context means anything, then s9 was a resounding success ratings wise for the CW.

As to LOLCanon!Carver, wasn't most of the LOL canon and questionable deaths from Singer's wife and writing partner,  and Andrew Dabb himself? BuckLemming killed off Kevin and Abaddon.  Dabb made reapers into angels so he could kill off Tessa.  Dabb wrote Bloodlines where in he created Insta-Shifters and monster families for a spinoff.  In s12, IMO Max and Alicia are very much potential spinoff material. Max was Sam and Dean with losing his sister and his mother instead of his GF and his mother, and making a deal like Dean saved Sam. Max is my new leader in the clubhouse of a long arc/potential spinoff candidate.

I guess I will always appreciate Carver for giving  Cas a SL of his own that still involved the boys; for a letting Robbie Thompson create Cain and the MoC!Dean arc and yes I even eventually loved the demon!Dean arc. Sam got redemption in s10 for not looking for Dean in s8 and saying he wouldn't save Dean in s9. I blame Jared for the "I lied" line. I think that was a poor call by Jared. I wish Demon!Dean had lasted for 10 episodes. I wish to have learned more about what being a demon meant to Dean in retrospect.

The question as always remains, which came first "The pitch for the story or the story is commissioned'.  

Edited May 9, 2017 by catrox14
corrected because it went back to Wednesdays before Thursdays

[Idahoforspn]

4 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

FWIW, for me,  "many" connotes more than a few or some but less than "most" or "all" and I've always thought it a reasonable term to use to explain relative measures of anything.  Annnnyyyhoodles, I know this is veering more into ratings but I think it's appropriate because it's hard to discuss relative success or failures of showrunners without looking at ratings which includes the night of airing, what it's paired with, it's competition and the change in network executives from Dawn Ostroff to Mark Pedowitz in 2011.

I'm a relative noob compared to I think most viewers here, as I started  watching live in s9 after a Netflix binge. I do agree that Netflix probably helped boost folks tuning in to watch live for the premiere of s8 and s9 but it doesn't account for why more viewers stuck around to watch live during s9 more than s8 even if by a small margin as both s8 and s9 averaged over 1 in the ratings point (source is SuperWiki), and why s9 had the highest average total viewers and highest ratings point since Kripke era.

http://www.supernaturalwiki.com/index.php?title=Ratings

 

 

As I've mentioned before, my first glimpse of SPN was "What's Up, Tiger Mommy" during the Dean/Cas reunion by the river in Purgatory, which aired the night of Arrow's pilot premiere on 10/10/2012.  IMO, pairing it with Arrow, boosted it's s8 ratings more than anything. Yes, SPN had it's s8 premiere on Wednesday 10/03/2012, a week before Arrow premiered but I think it's more than reasonable to think the network thought moving SPN to Wednesday as the lead out for Arrow, would bring the fans to Wednesday ahead of the Arrow premiere the following week.

IMO that move had everything to do with Pedowitz, who by all accounts loved/loves the show and was seeking to boost the 18-49 male demo so moving it to Wednesday helped both Arrow and SPN. Maybe the network rewarded SPN by moving it to Tuesday night which seems to have been the most successful time slot since the Kripke era. It seemed to thrive in the 9pm Tues slot regardless of what show was it's lead in as it had The Originals, The Flash and iZombie before it was moved to Thursday at 9pm, where it had Legends of Tomorrow as it's lead in.  Then it was moved to Thursday at 8pm where it's ratings have been worse than ever (but so are all of CW's ratings so I don't know what that is about). I should take a look at the numbers before it moved to 8pm.   

Were the higher s9 ratings solely a function of an arguably better time slot or because viewers  were genuinely invested in the storyline of Sam being in harms way at  the end of s8; wanting to know what Dean would do to save him;  what was Crowley going to do to save himself from Dean and Sam and would the demon blood cure still be a thing for him; what was going to happen to Cas now that his grace was stolen and the angels fell. As much as I hated Dean's role in the back half of s8,  it had one helluva a good setup for all four main characters to have compelling SL in s9.  AS upsetting as the Dean/GadreelSam arc was for both Dean and Sam fans, it was IMO hellacompelling.

IMO Dean getting the Mark of Cain went even further to be a compelling SL.  I do find it interesting that the highest rated episode of s9 was "Sharp Teeth", which is the episode that aired following "First Born" wherein Dean got the Mark of Cain. There is a notation in SuperWiki that "Sharp Teeth" aired the night of a State of the Union address and it's suggested that is why it's ratings went up. I would suggest that  it went up because viewers were excited about the Mark of Cain SL and wanted to know what happened next. It was both an emotional arc and a  mytharc for Dean. When was the last time that happened in the show...s4? Dean fans and IMO even non-Dean fans were interested because of how it would affect Sam and Cas.  

So for me I think Carver did a good job both creatively and business wise to make sure SPN didn't stagnate. And if pure numbers without context means anything, then s9 was a resounding success ratings wise for the CW.

As to LOLCanon!Carver, wasn't most of the LOL canon and questionable deaths from Singer's wife and writing partner,  and Andrew Dabb himself? BuckLemming killed off Kevin and Abaddon.  Dabb made reapers into angels so he could kill off Tessa.  Dabb wrote Bloodlines where in he created Insta-Shifters and monster families for a spinoff.  In s12, IMO Max and Alicia are very much potential spinoff material. Max was Sam and Dean with losing his sister and his mother instead of his GF and his mother, and making a deal like Dean saved Sam. Max is my new leader in the clubhouse of a long arc/potential spinoff candidate.

I guess I will always appreciate Carver for giving  Cas a SL of his own that still involved the boys; for a letting Robbie Thompson create Cain and the MoC!Dean arc and yes I even eventually loved the demon!Dean arc. Sam got redemption in s10 for not looking for Dean in s8 and saying he wouldn't save Dean in s9. I blame Jared for the "I lied" line. I think that was a poor call by Jared. I wish Demon!Dean had lasted for 10 episodes. I wish to have learned more about what being a demon meant to Dean in retrospect.

The question as always remains, which came first "The pitch for the story or the story is commissioned'.  

Didn't Jensen make a comment at a con that the ratings we're higher for the MofC storyline?

[catrox14]

2 minutes ago, Idahoforspn said:

Didn't Jensen make a comment at a con that the ratings we're higher for the MofC storyline?

I really don't know, to be honest. 

[Idahoforspn]

3 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I really don't know, to be honest. 

I know he made a comment about one of his storylines getting better ratings than what they were currently.getting. I just don't know for sure it was the MofC sl.

[DittyDotDot]

28 minutes ago, Diane said:

I found it:

http:// https://web.archive.org/web/20140404230327/http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/show/supernatural/recaps/

 

24 minutes ago, Demented Daisy said:

Or try this:

http://www.brilliantbutcancelled.com/show/supernatural/

Thanks for the assist, guys!

34 minutes ago, Idahoforspn said:

Let me know when you have a set location. I wouldn't mind reading a few of them.

FYI, the first season's recaps were done by Drunken Bee. They're great too, but Demian takes them to a whole other level at times. Tippi's recaps were awesome too!

[Aeryn13]

I can`t remember them ever commenting on the ratings. Storylines and like/dislike for them or a wish they would have lasted longer, yes. But not even showrunners/producers/writers have really remarked on ratings IMO. Other than the usual "as long as people watch it bla bla" remarks.

[Demented Daisy]

I think it would be rather foolhardy for any of them to remark on the ratings simply because it's a many-headed beast.  No one reason for ratings to go up or down.  If so, they would be awfully easy to manipulate, right?

[Idahoforspn]

10 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

I can`t remember them ever commenting on the ratings. Storylines and like/dislike for them or a wish they would have lasted longer, yes. But not even showrunners/producers/writers have really remarked on ratings IMO. Other than the usual "as long as people watch it bla bla" remarks.

 

3 minutes ago, Idahoforspn said:

I remember seeing it in a con video because I went "dang right". It was just a "and the ratings were higher" by Jensen when the popularity of a sl oh his was being discussed. It was a quips of his after the main discussion. I will try to find it but I am doubtful I can.

Edited May 9, 2017 by Idahoforspn

[DittyDotDot]

13 minutes ago, Demented Daisy said:

I think it would be rather foolhardy for any of them to remark on the ratings simply because it's a many-headed beast.  No one reason for ratings to go up or down.  If so, they would be awfully easy to manipulate, right?

That's my thinking. Shocker, I know! ;)

[Wayward Son]

I'd have to agree with @Demented Daisy . Honestly, if that was said it comes across as a bit arrogant to just assume it was that storyline considering the fact there were multiple storyline going on in the show at that time. Plus outside factors like time slots changes, Netflix and other streaming deals etc. 

Edited May 9, 2017 by Wayward Son

[Bessie]

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

2013-2014 (Season Nine)

High: 2.76 million viewers for 9.12 Sharp Teeth

Low: 1.59 million viewers for 9.21 King of the Damned

Average Total Viewers: 2.81 million viewers

 

I'm not a math person, so I'm probably about to make a stupid comment. But, how can your average total viewers be greater than your season high episode for viewers?

[Aeryn13]

Jensen has never been boastful and hogging the limelight, quite the opposite, so I can`t see him saying it like that.

[Idahoforspn]

3 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

I'd have to fade with @Demented Daisy . Honestly, if that was said it comes across as a bit arrogant to just assume it was that storyline considering the fact there were multiple storyline going on in the show at that time. Plus outside factors like time slots changes, Netflix and other streaming deals etc. 

It may have been in regard to just a part of a season and I thought the yeah Dean had strong storyline. Don't attribute arrogance to Jensen off my memory of something.

1 minute ago, Aeryn13 said:

Jensen has never been boastful and hogging the limelight, quite the opposite, so I can`t see him saying it like that.

Yes, this.

[Wynne88]

I remember he and Jared joking about the popularity of either the MoC or the DemonDean storyline, but it was their typical poking fun at each other, not any kind of insightful comment or analysis as best I can recall.  

[catrox14]

6 minutes ago, Bessie said:

I'm not a math person, so I'm probably about to make a stupid comment. But, how can your average total viewers be greater than your season high episode for viewers?

I don't know. I just brought over the numbers from Super Wiki as they were posted. I didn't look at the methodology

[Idahoforspn]

5 minutes ago, Wynne88 said:

I remember he and Jared joking about the popularity of either the MoC or the DemonDean storyline, but it was their typical poking fun at each other, not any kind of insightful comment or analysis as best I can recall.  

Yes. I didn't intend to give the impression that Jensen was giving a well thought out insightful analysis. It was a one off good natured quip after some other jokes or making fun or whatever. He wasn't being arrogant or demeaning. If he had been, there would have been an uproar in the fandom. Instead, most folks apparently didn't even notice it.

1 minute ago, catrox14 said:

I don't know. I just brought over the numbers from Super Wiki as they were posted. I didn't look at the methodology

Could it be the first two are live view numbers and the last includes delayed viewing? Just guessing here.

[Bessie]

14 minutes ago, Idahoforspn said:

Could it be the first two are live view numbers and the last includes delayed viewing? Just guessing here.

Good guess. I went and looked cause those numbers seemed screwy to me. They say that all numbers are final ratings and include live + same day. (I think. It was a bit unclear.)  Something's wrong with that total average viewer number.  No way with the numbers they provide that it could be that high. 

[Demented Daisy]

9 minutes ago, Bessie said:

Good guess. I went and looked cause those numbers seemed screwy to me. They say that all numbers are final ratings and include live + same day. (I think. It was a bit unclear.)  Something's wrong with that total average viewer number.  No way with the numbers they provide that it could be that high. 

Yeah, something is off.  For season 11:

Quote

 

2015-2016 (Season Eleven)

High: 3.12 million viewers for 11.04 Baby

Low: 2.46 million viewers for  11.03 The Bad Seed

Average Total Viewers: 2.27 million viewers

 

How could the average be lower than the lowest number of viewers?  S10 looks okay, but S8 is screwy again (high 2.51, avg 2.52).  Same with S7 (high 2.011, avg 2.03).  The rest look fine.  Odd.

Oh, but this should probably be in the ratings thread.  

[AwesomO4000]

18 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

The appearance of most of the characters you mention as recurring are bare minimum and two of them (Charlie and Kevin) were only introduced at the very end of her tenure. Additionally, I've said in the past, I suspect a lot of the final few episodes of season seven were heavily influenced by Carver. As shown by the sudden return of side characters from 17x18 on after their absence from the rest of the season and the sudden return to the Angel and demons storyline. A storyline she had taken care to move on from when she introduced the Levithians. 

While I understand that you were understandably disappointed by Castiel being gone so long from season 7, I wouldn't say that other side characters were absent from the rest of the season only to return after episode 18. The side characters that I mentioned were mostly new characters. In addition to those we also had actual Bobby up until episode 10, ghost Bobby on and off thereafter and Hallucination Lucifer. In fact I would argue that more episodes per season in the Gamble era featured Bobby than any other season. He appeared in - not including just phone calls - 11 of the 22 episodes in season 6. Even in season 7 when Bobby dies in episode 10, he had appeared heavily in 6 of those 10 episodes. After Bobby's death, and in non-Bobby episodes there were other recurring characters: Jody featured in 3 episodes, more than any other season, including one episode where she partnered with Sam while Dean was missing. Garth featured in two episodes, including partnering with Dean in one episode. Crowley was in 7 - not as many as season 8's 10, but I liked Crowley's story better in 7. Hallucifer was in a few, too. And I didn't include the recurring bad guys in my new characters count. There was Dick Roman and Edgar. I'd say that there weren't more than two episodes that went by without a significant appearance by a recurring character. Sam even worked with his imaginary Lucifer as a partner for one episode.

As for if the few last episodes were heavily influenced by Carver, I can't say as he didn't write any of the episodes. Sera wrote two, including two of the episodes featuring Castiel - his return and the finale.

18 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

However, her writing for everyone else was appalling. She had no interest in the other characters and it showed IMO.

I don't know. I liked her Bobby characterization. Yes, he became a ghost, but I actually could see why with Sera's "Death's Door." I thought she set up Bobby's attachment to the boys and not wanting to leave them very well. There were some in the fandom who were tired of Bobby, so I thought Sera had used him well throughout her tenure, and then gave him a good send off. Whether it was a good move to bring him back as a ghost was debatable, but I can see where it could've happened and for me it wasn't a terrible offense. So I guess miles vary.

And her use of and writing for Rufus goes without saying, for me, but Rufus is her character, so I always enjoy her portrayal of him (RIP Rufus).

Oh and I forgot Death! (How could I?) I thought she wrote Death well also... and Crowley. And Lucifer, too. And her soulless Sam was creepy as all get out, in my opinion.

I'm only including Sera's episodes here, but to me she seemed to write for a lot of different recurring characters even in just her episodes. So I guess it depends on how you look at it. (Including Castiel, though even though I thought Sera did a good job with him in early season 7 and based on what Kripke gave her (he wrote the season 6 finale), and his return in 7.17, I can see where others wouldn't.

18 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

 At best he's allowed to assist in a kill which ultimately went to Dean rather than him. It is this lack of follow through that will make me, as a Castiel leaning fan, eternally resent the woman's treatment of him while acting as show runner.

I'll give you this, though I thought Castiel had more involvement in taking down Dick Roman than you did.

18 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

Then there is Castiel who is the worst victim of her tenure. As far as I'm concerned her writing for him was filled with outright malice and attempts at character assassination. She went and turned a protagonist into an antagonist with little explanation during her first year in charge of the show.

I can see where you could say this, and I understand since I've seen it happen also to Sam - twice, and also both times with little explanation as well, I have to be grateful that Sera was the only showrunner of the 3 who didn't do that to Sam. I wouldn't exactly say that Kripke had malice - don't know about Carver, but it sure seemed so.

18 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

My complaints are further strengthened by the fact Misha revealed at a con that Ben Edlund had to fight hard against her so we could get an episode showing us Castiel's motivation. If it weren't for Edlund she wouldn't even had the graciousness to show us to properly show us why Cas did what he did. 

But at least Castiel did get this, so Sera allowed it to happen in the end. Compare this to Sam in season 4 where so much of Sam's motivations and journey to the darkside were never explained. The "attempt" - "I Know What You Did..." - didn't really tell us all that much in the end (what happened after Dean died? Why did Sam bury him in Pontiac? Why did Sam start drinking demon blood in the first place (the exact event that lead to it, not a general "why?") Why exactly did am lie to Dean so often even when it wasn't necessary? etc. etc.). And then in season 8, there wasn't even a partial attempt at explanation.

18 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

...and further efforts were placed in showing him interacting with others such as Castiel and Jody during season 9. Furthermore, the finales of seasons 8-10 usually included a big scene where Sam and Dean reiterate how much the other means to them.

Ugh! In the season 8 Carver finale, not only did Sam not finish the trials, Carver wrote his reasoning so weirdly that fans questioned Sam's sincerity. And then in season 9, he made Sam a hypocrite - if the "I lied" was better, I can't imagine how horrible it was before. Oh and in season 10, Carver had Sam start an apocalypse. I'm not sure I count Carver's season finales as positives for Sam. Like in any way at all. I'm not even seeing much of an attempt there myself. But I can admit that for others, miles will vary.

The Castiel interaction was good, but my favorite Sam/Jody interaction was actually in season 7 - "Time After Time After Time." Also those two episodes in a season aren't much to write home about. Except for the mostly iffy - and not very flattering - 9.1, there wasn't a Sam-centric episode that season.

11 hours ago, catrox14 said:

As much as I hated Dean's role in the back half of s8,  it had one helluva a good setup for all four main characters to have compelling SL in s9.  AS upsetting as the Dean/GadreelSam arc was for both Dean and Sam fans, it was IMO hellacompelling.

I actually agree with you. I thought it was compelling too... when it looked like they were actually going to follow through on exploring how Sam felt about it and address the toll saving Sam and Dean's lying to him took on Sam... but then "The Purge" happened, and for the second time in the show's history, I stopped watching except for a scene here and there for a while, because I sensed it was going to be a rehash of season 8 with "Sam the crappy brother" again, since now they had the mark of Cain story arc and Gadreel on his own, so Sam's arc and POV were ceremoniously dropped.

11 hours ago, catrox14 said:

IMO Dean getting the Mark of Cain went even further to be a compelling SL.  I do find it interesting that the highest rated episode of s9 was "Sharp Teeth", which is the episode that aired following "First Born" wherein Dean got the Mark of Cain. There is a notation in SuperWiki that "Sharp Teeth" aired the night of a State of the Union address and it's suggested that is why it's ratings went up. I would suggest that  it went up because viewers were excited about the Mark of Cain SL and wanted to know what happened next. It was both an emotional arc and a  mytharc for Dean. When was the last time that happened in the show...s4? Dean fans and IMO even non-Dean fans were interested because of how it would affect Sam and Cas. 

Again, I agree - until "The Purge" when it hinted strongly to me that the storyline wouldn't give any more serious attention to how Sam felt about it, because Sam's real grievances weren't even addressed - the story only seemed interested in Sam being angry at / crappy to Dean. Sam's emotional arc was reduced to bitching with no real POV anymore, and he had no other arc. So I lost interest quickly after that, only checking in every once in a while to see if Dean was doing something (but I figured not much would happen until closer to the finale anyway).

As for an emotional arc and a mytharc for Dean, I would argue season 6? Emotional arcs in the first (Soulless Sam) and second half (Castiel's betrayal), and mytharc tie ins also in both figuring out what was wrong with Sam and getting his soul and then killing Eve and season 7? - emotional arc with losing Bobby and Castiel and revenge mytharc with Dean's personal quest to kill Dick Roman. ("You're either laughing because you're scared or you're laughing because you're stupid. I'll see you soon, Dick.") 

I realize others don't see it that way though.

Edited May 10, 2017 by AwesomO4000

[catrox14]

18 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

As for an emotional arc and a mytharc for Dean, I would argue season 6? Emotional arcs in the first (Soulless Sam) and second half (Castiel's betrayal), and mytharc tie ins also in both figuring out what was wrong with Sam and getting his soul and then killing Eve and season 7? - emotional arc with losing Bobby and Castiel and revenge mytharc with Dean's personal quest to kill Dick Roman. ("You're either laughing because you're scared or you're laughing because you're stupid. I'll see you soon, Dick.") 

What I mean by "mytharc" is a supernatural mytharc, like when he was the Righteous Man in s4/Michael vessel in s5, where something supernatural actually happened to Dean, causing Dean to become "othered" to an extent or potentially be "othered".

[Wayward Son]

1 hour ago, AwesomO4000 said:

While I understand that you were understandably disappointed by Castiel being gone so long from season 7, I wouldn't say that other side characters were absent from the rest of the season only to return after episode 18. The side characters that I mentioned were mostly new characters. In addition to those we also had actual Bobby up until episode 10, ghost Bobby on and off thereafter and Hallucination Lucifer. In fact I would argue that more episodes per season in the Gamble era featured Bobby than any other season. He appeared in - not including just phone calls - 11 of the 22 episodes in season 6. Even in season 7 when Bobby dies in episode 10, he had appeared heavily in 6 of those 10 episodes. After Bobby's death, and in non-Bobby episodes there were other recurring characters: Jody featured in 3 episodes, more than any other season, including one episode where she partnered with Sam while Dean was missing. Garth featured in two episodes, including partnering with Dean in one episode. Crowley was in 7 - not as many as season 8's 10, but I liked Crowley's story better in 7. Hallucifer was in a few, too. And I didn't include the recurring bad guys in my new characters count. There was Dick Roman and Edgar. I'd say that there weren't more than two episodes that went by without a significant appearance by a recurring character. Sam even worked with his imaginary Lucifer as a partner for one episode.

I can agree on there being a decent use of Jody and Garth. However, I'd have to disagree that her use of Bobby and Hallucination!Lucifer could be seen as signs of her commitment to continued use of side characters. In my opinion Bobby only got as big of a role in season seven due to the fact that it was being written as a send off. Had she of stayed he would no longer have been around for season 8 bar perhaps the one off appearance he got under Carver! To me it's the same as how she gave Castiel a prominent role in season 6 only to ditch him for large parts of season 7. I also wouldn't count Hallucination!Lucifer for the simple fact that IMO he technically wasn't another character. He was actually an extension of Sam's battered psyche. Although I am aware that there are other fans who view him as legit Lucifer communicating from the cage. So if yours one of those fans I'm happy to disagree about that :). 

Ultimately, based on what we were given i.e the villainisation of Castiel, the killing off of Bobby and so on I feel Sera Gamble was gearing the show back towards a brother heavy s1-3 feel. In my opinion, like with those seasons, most episodes would have featured just the brothers. There would have been recurring characters, but they'd have been limited to the likes of Jody who only appear 2-3 times a season. I don't think we'd have had additional series regulars under Gamble based on her words off screen and what she gave us on screen. Of course that's speculation on my part so I can understand if you perceive it differently. 

1 hour ago, AwesomO4000 said:

But at least Castiel did get this, so Sera allowed it to happen in the end. Compare this to Sam in season 4 where so much of Sam's motivations and journey to the darkside were never explained. The "attempt" - "I Know What You Did..." - didn't really tell us all that much in the end (what happened after Dean died? Why did Sam bury him in Pontiac? Why did Sam start drinking demon blood in the first place (the exact event that lead to it, not a general "why?") Why exactly did am lie to Dean so often even when it wasn't necessary? etc. etc.). And then in season 8, there wasn't even a partial attempt at explanation.

I actually feel that Sam was given some motivation for his actions in S4. Personally, I didn't need to see a specific event to explain why he started drinking the demon blood. For me it was obvious that it was the death of Dean and the anger and desperation it invoked that led to Sam being willing to do whatever it took to see Lilith dead. I actually prefer to think of it being caused by something as major as Dean's death than reduced to say his pride being hurt because he couldn't kill a demon on a hunt with Ruby or whatever. Although I understand that milages may vary. 

However, even if I did share your viewpoint I would still say Castiel didn't get a much better deal. One episode simply wasn't enough to make up for a season of Castiel being secretive and behaving in a suspicious manner. Although to his credit Ben Edlund did his best with the little time he was allowed to explore Castiel's motivations. For me this is shown by the fact that bar Cas leaning fans, who watch things related to him carefully,  many fans seem to still misunderstand his actions in season six. I'm not going to name individual posters, because that would be wrong of me and I honestly can't remember off the top of my head, but even on here I've seen posters write as though they believe the opening of purgatory and the breaking of Sam's wall were about power for powers sake. If so many of the audience were left with such a gross misconception then Gamble failed somewhere, or as I suspect just didn't care enough to explore it in the detail needed.

[AwesomO4000]

10 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

I actually feel that Sam was given some motivation for his actions in S4. Personally, I didn't need to see a specific event to explain why he started drinking the demon blood. For me it was obvious that it was the death of Dean and the anger and desperation it invoked that led to Sam being willing to do whatever it took to see Lilith dead. I actually prefer to think of it being caused by something as major as Dean's death than reduced to say his pride being hurt because he couldn't kill a demon on a hunt with Ruby or whatever.

Well, I wouldn't like something like that either. I agree it was Dean's death*, but still that's a huge step for someone to take in my opinion to narratively just gloss over it. For example, when Dean took the deal, it was obviously Sam's death that caused him to do it, but we got a bunch of dialogue giving a detailed explanation of what exactly it was about Sam's death that caused Dean to make the deal. If we just skipped over that, for me it wouldn't have been as informative for his character - in my opinion anyway.

* Though the writers even tried to muddy that one by having someone (I forget what character, but it was a bad guy) and maybe also Dean point out that Dean was back and right there, so what was Sam's problem?

Quote

One episode simply wasn't enough to make up for a season of Castiel being secretive and behaving in a suspicious manner.

10 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

but even on here I've seen posters write as though they believe the opening of purgatory and the breaking of Sam's wall were about power for powers sake. If so many of the audience were left with such a gross misconception then Gamble failed somewhere, or as I suspect just didn't care enough to explore it in the detail needed.

After further consideration, I moved my discussion to the "Bitch" vs "Jerk" thread just in case.

Edited May 10, 2017 by AwesomO4000

[AwesomO4000]

Bringing this over from the Writers thread, because after thinking about it, I got worried, and decided to put it here to be safe. Sorry about that...

Concerning Gamble's delay in explaining Castiel's motives in season 7:

Quote

One episode simply wasn't enough to make up for a season of Castiel being secretive and behaving in a suspicious manner.

But isn't that close to what happened with Sam, too? It wasn't as many episodes as Castiel, but it was still most of the season of Sam acting shady before we found out what it was. And at least Castiel did some good things too - like helping with the time travel in "Frontierland" and going on the hunt against Eve. Sam got belittling Dean and out of control killing instead. One of his only two positive episodes the entire season, he wasn't even really himself - "It's A Terrible Life."

Quote

but even on here I've seen posters write as though they believe the opening of purgatory and the breaking of Sam's wall were about power for powers sake. If so many of the audience were left with such a gross misconception then Gamble failed somewhere, or as I suspect just didn't care enough to explore it in the detail needed.

Interesting. I honestly don't remember ever seeing that - however it would be not so different from those who believe that Sam's motivation for drinking demon blood was so he could be "stronger than everyone" like War implied in early season 5... and that is a theory I've seen many times. So for me, I actually would have preferred a more succinct explanation and exploration of Sam's character there like we got with Dean when he made the deal and, in my opinion, like we got for Castiel. I personally thought it was spelled out very well by Edlund's episode and that power for power's sake wasn't even implied. There was even a timeline walking us through Castiel's whole decision making process of how Raphael would recause the apocalypse if he won, that Castiel had to stop him but needed help, but he didn't have the heart to disturb Dean's peace after losing Sam, and then bringing it all full circle back to Cas asking for advice from God. The writers didn't give Sam the same courtesy, though, in my opinion, and as is often the case, Sam's motives were left up for interpretation.

Was it just arrogance? Was it want for power? Was it simply revenge? Was it to stop Lilith? Was it because he "didn't want to be doing this when he was old" (My personal favorite - I'm still bitter about that one). I don't know, because all of those things were implied at one point or another by the show/writers, but nothing was ever shown for sure. Your miles may vary, but I thought Kripke left Sam's motives much more vague than Gamble/Edlund left Castiel's - the damage that Lilith might do wasn't even upplayed to give Sam at least a positive reason to kill Lilith like Raphael's obvious threat was. In fact everyone and his brother told Sam not to do it - that it was supposed to be Dean. In Cas' case, he was pretty much it to stop Raphael.

So we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

[auntvi]

Seen on Twitter:

[ILoveReading]

Apparently that hashtag trended briefly on Twitter.

I wonder if there was bad blood between the show and Robbie Thompson when he left.  As for as I understand it that if a writer creates a character they get a fee whenever that character is used.  Thompson's characters all seem to end up being killed off  I always found it strange that Charlie didn't get at least one appearance after her death.  Now, Eileen.

[Myrelle]

The killing of Eileen didn't bother me as much as the levels of stupidity that every character on the show exhibited in last night's episode. I knew that she was going to be killed off as soon as the Brits ordered her death two episodes ago, so that was just predictable. I think the straw that broke the camel's back for me was the reasoning behind Lucifer now being able to control Crowley. I was looking at the TV wondering "That's it?! THAT'S how Lucifer "escapes" his bondage?! Ergh. Why am I still watching this drek?".

So two more episodes and maybe that will be it. I just can't do it anymore; not even for the Ackting because they won't even allow that to happen except on an extremely limited basis that's been much too limited and limiting this season to continue to draw this viewer in any longer-and I'm not talking about screen time here; not in the least.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Myrelle

[Idahoforspn]

14 minutes ago, Myrelle said:

The killing of Eileen didn't bother me as much as the levels of stupidity that every character on the show exhibited in last night's episode. 

That's how I felt. Not really upset they killed Eileen but thought how they did it showed they don't understand the fans at all. That scene was just the beginning of badly written scene after badly written scene IMO. Only thing I liked was the ten seconds of badass Dean in the bunker. 

14 minutes ago, Myrelle said:

 

So two more episodes and maybe that will be it. I just can't do it anymore; not even for the Ackting because they won't even allow that to happen except on an extremely limited basis that's been much too limited and limiting this season to continue to draw this viewer in any longer-and I'm not talking about screen time here; not in the least.

I plan on giving them two episodes next year just to see if Pedowitz steps in to fix the problems because of the torrents of complaints. He could fire people or at least lay down the law. I'm going to give him a chance as the huge tidal wave of complaints has come after it's too late for this year.

[Idahoforspn]

I like Crowley but feel he is being written poorly. I like Cas but feel he is being written poorly. I like Sam but feel he is being written poorly. I love Dean but feel he is being written abysmally. Do I detect a pattern.

[FlickChick]

7 hours ago, Idahoforspn said:

I like Crowley but feel he is being written poorly. I like Cas but feel he is being written poorly. I like Sam but feel he is being written poorly. I love Dean but feel he is being written abysmally. Do I detect a pattern.

THIS! Dabb will probably write the finale, and if he makes either Sam or Dean kill their mother to save the life of the other brother, or watch her being killed because she somehow overcomes this brainwashing/spell, I think I'm done. This season has been one travesty after another. No one apparently give a shit about continuity, canon, pacing, using the talents they are blessed with, or telling a good story. Frankly, I hope that when they come back next season, it will be with the announcement of being the last. Even Jensen can't save this mess for me. And the longer they go on with this type of writing, the more likely it is to go down the toilet even further. Such a disappointment for what use to be my favorite show. The # above only addresses one of the problems - where's #fireDabb?

[Idahoforspn]

18 minutes ago, FlickChick said:

THIS! Dabb will probably write the finale, and if he makes either Sam or Dean kill their mother to save the life of the other brother, or watch her being killed because she somehow overcomes this brainwashing/spell, I think I'm done. This season has been one travesty after another. No one apparently give a shit about continuity, canon, pacing, using the talents they are blessed with, or telling a good story. Frankly, I hope that when they come back next season, it will be with the announcement of being the last. Even Jensen can't save this mess for me. And the longer they go on with this type of writing, the more likely it is to go down the toilet even further. Such a disappointment for what use to be my favorite show. The # above only addresses one of the problems - where's #fireDabb?

I think Jensen has saved a number of episodes in the past with his acting for me anyway. But this year, it's hard to save a scene if your not in it, not conscious, or not allowed to speak if you are. And they better be careful how they kill Mary!

Edited May 12, 2017 by Idahoforspn

[Geordiegirl1967]

No idea if this is the right thread for this, but after being cancelled a couple of days ago, Kripke's new show Timeless has been UN cancelled. I've never heard of that but apparently it is true. It is getting 10 eps to air next summer. Trashes my secret and highly unlikely hope that he would come back to SPN to set his baby back on the right path again. But I am happy for him.

Meanwhile Gamble's show The Magicians has been renewed but Carver's No Frequency has been cancelled.

[Geordiegirl1967]

19 hours ago, FlickChick said:

Frankly, I hope that when they come back next season, it will be with the announcement of being the last.

Wouldn't you prefer they strengthened the writing team and put right the issues rather than cancelling the show. It still IMO has all the ingredients needed to be a great show - primarily the acting abilities of and chemistry between Jared and Jensen.

It is just that this show runner and crop of writers are not using them. And I don't buy the 'but they want more time off' argument. It is perfectly possible to write a wonderful ep that showcases the brothers bond without both Js being together in every scene. Remember Scarecrow? That's how you do it - phone calls, last minute rescues, talking fondly of their brother to other characters (in that case Meg, the people in the town etc). They were apart for most of that ep but it still worked fantastically and used their chemistry and the brothers bond.

I want it to get better again not to end.

[rue721]

33 minutes ago, Geordiegirl1967 said:

It is perfectly possible to write a wonderful ep that showcases the brothers bond without both Js being together in every scene.

I think a big problem is that they keep killing off all the compelling characters aside from Sam and Dean. So there's nobody interesting for either character to hang out with aside from each other.

I was really frustrated that they killed Eileen so fast, before we really got to see her hunt, because I am genuinely intrigued to know how a deaf hunter would hunt differently from a hearing one. I also was frustrated that they decided that Mary's hunting and fighting style is apparently the exact same as her sons', despite being a completely different physical type. She doesn't have any idiosyncratic tricks up her sleeve, nor does she do anything to capitalize on her own strengths? IMO that's a lack of imagination on the part of the writers.

Don't get me wrong, the writers' lack of investment in characters aside from Sam and Dean has been a problem since basically Day 1 of the show -- but if they want to keep things going and take some of the weight off of J&J, then they need to open up the show's world and they need to put some effort into other characters as well. I don't even mean creating ~big~ backstories for those side characters or giving them their own storylines, I mean fleshing them out so that they're 3D -- have their own perspectives, their own strengths/weaknesses, their own habits and routines, etc. The writers need to be thinking about what those other characters can bring to the world of the show that Sam and Dean can't.

I think Rowena is the poster child for what can happen when they give a character some time and space to coalesce. IMO she was really grating and flat when she was first introduced, but she's a favorite of mine nowadays, and IMO brings a lot to the show. I actually miss her now when she's gone for long periods (like she has been this season).

In general, I find the world of the show very rich...so every time we get another hasty death for "shock value," I get more aggravated. IMO it's the show shooting itself in the foot. I don't know why it does that. I don't know why the writers do that. It seems so self-defeating.

[Geordiegirl1967]

2 hours ago, rue721 said:

I think a big problem is that they keep killing off all the compelling characters aside from Sam and Dean. So there's nobody interesting for either character to hang out with aside from each other.

I disagree. That's not the issue. In fact too often other chs have been divisive (Cas, Benny, Amelia)  They can interact with each other by phone. They can interact with guest chs. 

[Aeryn13]

Having a little cadre of interesting recurring characters is not a bad thing. The show just hasn`t done a good job integrating them. The side plots they have tried to come up with for Cas in the last few years just weren`t very good. And the same can be said for Crowley. Whereas IMO both characters worked well when they were part of the same mythology the main characters were involved in. 

It`s obvious J2 are negotiating more and more time off each time they re-sign for more Seasons. And for some odd reasons, they cover a lot of their scenes together and the writers try to padd out the rest with just about everything.

To me it would be best to either cut the episode order - which the studio/network won`t do for money reasons - or choose a different approach in writing - which also won`t happen because in terms of fresh blood the show only attracts very inexperienced writer newbies and they don`t have a strong creative mind at the helm to oversee and guide things either. Nothing about either situation is likely to change.  

[Wayward Son]

33 minutes ago, Geordiegirl1967 said:

I disagree. That's not the issue. In fact too often other chs have been divisive (Cas, Benny, Amelia)  They can interact with each other by phone. They can interact with guest chs. 

I can see your point about Benny and Amelia, but I don't recall Cas causing division between the brothers. As far as I can remember, it has generally been a case of they are both allied with Cas at the same time, or they are both against Cas at the same time. I can't really recall any major incidences of Cas and brother one vs brother two. 

[Idahoforspn]

4 hours ago, Geordiegirl1967 said:

 

It is just that this show runner and crop of writers are not using them. And I don't buy the 'but they want more time off' argument. It is perfectly possible to write a wonderful ep that showcases the brothers bond without both Js being together in every scene. Remember Scarecrow? That's how you do it - phone calls, last minute rescues, talking fondly of their brother to other characters (in that case Meg, the people in the town etc). They were apart for most of that ep but it still worked fantastically and used their chemistry and the brothers bond.

I want it to get better again not to end.

I have said this for a long time. It isn't the amount of time the Js are on screen as much as it is making them the secondaries to other characters storylines.

[FlickChick]

4 hours ago, Geordiegirl1967 said:

Wouldn't you prefer they strengthened the writing team and put right the issues rather than cancelling the show. It still IMO has all the ingredients needed to be a great show - primarily the acting abilities of and chemistry between Jared and Jensen.

It is just that this show runner and crop of writers are not using them. And I don't buy the 'but they want more time off' argument. It is perfectly possible to write a wonderful ep that showcases the brothers bond without both Js being together in every scene. Remember Scarecrow? That's how you do it - phone calls, last minute rescues, talking fondly of their brother to other characters (in that case Meg, the people in the town etc). They were apart for most of that ep but it still worked fantastically and used their chemistry and the brothers bond.

I want it to get better again not to end.

Of course I would rather if the writers/showrunner were willing and able to use the boys as you mentioned above! But it's become obvious to me that they either cannot or will not make the necessary changes in order to have the Js be "present" in the story even if they're off-screen at the time. MO is that none of them is talented enough to do this. Instead we have these boring Lucifer, BMOL, Mary resurrected, Spawnifer (that's a great name btw), and lousy characterizations when they are writing about our main characters. It's just sad to see. So, unfortunately, if they continue on the same path, I would prefer if they would end the series before it goes down even further, and give our guys the opportunity to pursue other opportunities. Obviously, it is only my personal opinion, but it's getting harder for me to watch my once beloved show that I started watching with the Pilot.

Edited May 13, 2017 by FlickChick
it's they; not the

[Geordiegirl1967]

4 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

I don't recall Cas causing division between the brothers

Cas himself hasn't and you are right that he hasn't caused conflict between D&S directly. They both care about him and vice versa. 

BUT IMO the desire to placate and keep giving crumbs to the fans of the Dean/Cas relationship (many of whom see the Dean/Sam bond as direct competition, so denegrate it, portray it as unhealthy, say Dean deserves better than Sam etc etc) has pushed the writers to create scenes and situations where Dean and Cas are together without Sam. So his presence in the show diminishes the focus on Dean and Sam IMO.

There are / have been many recurring characters who are NOT divisive; Jody, Charlie, Bobby, Donna, Claire, Ellen. Mary shouldn't have been divisive and yet she has. Why is it pretty much only Dean who communicates with her? Why has Sam only talked to her through Dean except when she wanted to get Sam onside when Dean refused to talk to her? How many times has Sam asked 'have you heard from mom?' 

There are plenty of examples of how to keep the show focused on Dean and Sam, and to showcase their bond without them having to be in every scene and always together;

- The Usual Suspects. The boys were interviewed separately but their answers eloquently showed how close they were. The secret message Dean passed to Sam and that he got immediately did the same thing.

- Dean's frantic reaction to Sam being missing in AHBL (and in The Benders and Red Meat and when Gordon had him and lots of other times Sam was in danger) and his relief then terror when they found him make ep2 of s12 look a pitiful excuse for a SPN ep (Dean leaving the search to Cas, no emotional moment when they found Sam etc). Ditto Sam's desperation when Dean was in hell or when Dean was taken back in time or when he had the MoC.

- conversations with others can be just as effective as conversations with each other; when Sam told Charlie he couldn't do it without his brother for example. Beautiful scene. Or when Bobby confronted Dean in the car lot about his deal to save Sam. Or when Dean begged Billy to bring Sam back in Red Meat.

- others can talk about them when neither of them are even there. Eg Zachariah talking to Adam about their bond. I was hoping all season for a scene between Mary and Cas or Jody where she discussed her boys relationship with each other with someone who has known them as men. She could have asked 'who took care of them when John was hunting?' 'have they been ok?' and Cas/Jody could have said 'they had each other. Dean took care of Sam'. She could have observed for herself how close they were to someone else. Another missed opportunity.

- they could make much more use of flashbacks. Colin Ford and e.g. Brock Kelly as young Sam and Dean are still Dean and Sam but Jared and Jensen could be sitting around their pools while those scenes were filmed.

- make better use of the time they ARE both filming together. A few really good broments go a long way. How about replacing one in every 3 scenes where they interview a witness or view a body together while spouting some exposition, with one heartfelt conversation between D&S? 

I could go on. Suffice to say that the show has totally underused and undermined the key relationship in the show between its 2 stars. And the quality and popularity of the show is suffering as a result. As Eric Kripke said 'the more SPN is about Sam and Dean the better it is'.

Having said all that, there is plenty of room in a 23 ep season to satisfy people who watch the show for reasons other than Sam & Dean and their bond. We can have ALL of the types of scenes and focus on D&S I have mentioned while ALSO giving good stories to Cas and Crowley, having compelling MOTW eps etc. We just need better writers.

Edited May 14, 2017 by Geordiegirl1967

[ILoveReading]

15 hours ago, Idahoforspn said:

If I remember correctly, the writers didn't want to do the President storyline but Singer and Dabb insisted. Shows the quality of their judgement.

I remember that interview.  No one in the writers room thought it was a good idea.  They should have listened.

Edited May 16, 2017 by ILoveReading

[Demented Daisy]

9 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

I remember that interview.  No one in the writers room thought it was a good idea.  They should have listened.

Link?  I missed it.

[Myrelle]

http://collider.com/supernatural-season-12-midseason-premiere-andrew-dabb-interview/#season-12

[DittyDotDot]

From the Spoilers thread...no spoilers, though:

11 hours ago, MysteryGuest said:

While I enjoy episodes with secondary characters like Jody or Donna, etc., I watch for Sam and Dean.  I don't think their whole story has been told yet, personally.  I just think the writers we have are unable to tell any stories well.  I would be very disappointed with even less Sam and Dean, and would probably stop watching at that point.  I'm here for the brothers' saga.  Without that, it's a completely different show, IMO.

I wasn't advocating to remove Sam and Dean altogether, just they develop their other characters so they can stand on their own without Sam and Dean.

IMO, right now, the show is trying to do too much without having the resources to accomplish half of it. They're trying to have Sam and Dean involved in everything, but they don't have access to the actors enough for them to be able to be involved in everything. They're spreading what they have of Sam and Dean too thin and no storyline is being fully developed in the end.

IMO, Sam and Dean don't need the be the main focus of every single episode or involved in every single storyline for the show to still be about them. I'd rather have Sam and Dean in 15 tight and really good episodes than 23 unfocused and meandering episodes, myself.

If they had been smart, IMO, they would've kept Sam and Dean in that black site for a couple episodes and the payoff would've been earned. Instead of telling us Cass spent all this time looking for Sam and Dean, show that to us; show us him trying to work a case and it all going to shit. That's an episode right there. Give us an episode of Mary trying to step up in their absence and show us her deciding she needs to give them a world without monsters. Show us what Crowley is trying to accomplish with Lucifer rather than just using their back and forth power struggle to fill space in random episodes. All the while have Sam and Dean in the background being driven mad at that black site. Then do the great escape and all the talk of it being worse than hell and the world changing without them wouldn't have been just hyperbole.

Basically, they could've used it to make the story about Sam and Dean while having the other characters to carry the weight for a couple episodes.

So, when I say shifting focus, I'm not saying remove Sam and Dean, but they need to stop trying to make sure Sam and Dean are present at all times. For all the screentime they've given to Mary, they really haven't developed her as a character or her storyline much. And, for all the focus they did on Cass, it still wasn't much ado about Cass, IMO. 

I guess what I'm really saying is, being a show in it's 12th season, I think they can afford to take risks and be bolder. I think they're playing it all too safe and they'd be smart to try steal a base or two. Maybe they'll get tagged out on third, maybe they'll make it home, but it's not like they're winning games by playing it safe either.

[Demented Daisy]

36 minutes ago, Myrelle said:

http://collider.com/supernatural-season-12-midseason-premiere-andrew-dabb-interview/#season-12

Thanks.  I assume this is the passage that people are talking about?

 

Quote

 

I read that the writers’ room wasn’t necessarily immediately on board with the idea of Lucifer jumping into the President. Why was that an important path, and did you have to do any convincing to get everyone on board?

 

DABB: Whenever something like that gets floated, it’s good that someone is like, “Wait, what?!” I’ve been in plenty of meetings on Supernatural where someone is like, “Oh, by the way, we’re going to send Sam and Dean back to the Old West,” and you’re like, “Wait, what?!” Or they’re like, “Oh, by the way, we’re going to send Sam and Dean to a world where they’re Jared and Jensen, acting on a show called Supernatural,” and you’re like, “Wait, what?!” Sometimes the best ideas, and a lot of the worst ideas, come from that. That encourages you to talk it out and find the path you want to go down, that could be fun. Once we internally decided that it was going to work for us and that it would be an interesting thing to do, the network and the studio were both extremely on board. The great thing about being on a 12-year show is that you have a ton of trust, and we have a ton of trust from our partners at Warner Bros. and The CW, so they were on board. It’s the discussion that happens, all the time and with every idea. Very rarely does an idea come through where you’re like, “Oh, that’s a slam dunk, definitely!” For us, when we did the math on the President thing, we knew what it was doing for us. We understand that it’s a big, “What the fuck?!” moment, but we actually like that about it and we were convinced that it wasn’t going to fundamentally change the show. We’re not becoming The West Wing. It was a really fun episode that was the climax of a storyline, and there will definitely be some ripple effects from it, going forward, but it wasn’t fundamentally changing the show. As long as the fundamental supernatural of Supernatural doesn’t change, we always feel like we’re in a good position, even if we take wild swings, once in awhile.

 

That sounds like an exchange of ideas, not:

16 hours ago, Idahoforspn said:

If I remember correctly, the writers didn't want to do the President storyline but Singer and Dabb insisted. Shows the quality of their judgement.

Or:

57 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

I remember that interview.  No one in the writers room thought it was a good idea.  They should have listened.

[Demented Daisy]

Tortured metaphor alert!  Yay!  

In a move that shocked absolutely no one, I agree.  ;-)

[RulerofallIsurvey]

5 minutes ago, Demented Daisy said:

Thanks.  I assume this is the passage that people are talking about?

 

That sounds like an exchange of ideas,

Thank you.  That's just what I was going to say.  I get that miles vary and all, but there was Nothing in that snippet of an interview which was anywhere near the two quotes you referenced.

Edited May 16, 2017 by RulerofallIsurvey
references

[DittyDotDot]

12 minutes ago, Demented Daisy said:

Tortured metaphor alert!  Yay!  

Did you really expect anything less? ;)