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

[SueB]

3 hours ago, DittyDotDot said:

From the SuperNormal thread...

I'm sure Mark will be fine in the long run. But, while it may be a small little show on the CW with a no-name showrunner, most of Mark's TV credits are with small little genre shows and he's barely worked outside of the show for a few years now. I don't think this is going to help him get another job right now. But maybe he's not wanting another job right now either? 

Except he was also talking about stuff from ages ago when Carver was the showrunner. It's not just Dabb who hasn't known what to do with Crowley--or Cass for that matter--Carver didn't either. I actually think Carver's non-committal choices are worse than just ignoring the character altogether. Carver gave him a blood addiction that went nowhere; a frenemy-ship with Dean that was basically dropped; gave him mommy issues that not only made little sense, but was ignored more than not...Dabb may not have done much with Crowley, but Carver didn't either, IMO.

I don't disagree with Mark that Crowley having mommy issues didn't make sense--and I was pretty vocal about it at the time--but I grew to love Rowena despite it not making much sense. I don't think Rowena needed to be Crowley's mother for them to have made an interesting pair though. 

And Mark DID say (at Armageddoncon... or however it's spelled) that they MADE Rowena work. 

I f*cking LOVED the dynamic.

IMO, they made Crowley 'one foot on the dock, one foot on the boat' as both an antagonist an an ally.  You can only hold that position for so long before you swimming in the water.  

ETA: But it was a GLORIOUS run. And I loved it.  I didn't care for the hubris that he could control Lucifer.  But other than that... I was pleased with his 7 year story ... however I wanted a longer end.  I feel a little cheated by that.

Edited June 4, 2017 by SueB

[catrox14]

I think Mark's comments are being conflated as being all about him being mad that Crowley was killed off.  I don't think that is the case.  I don't think Mark is wallowing. He's PISSED OFF. That's a different thing. Multiple issues Mark has talked about:

1) "Even when I lose, I win" line cut.  IMO, what really raised his hackles was the cutting of the line that he wrote which was tied directly into a fundraising campaign about a cause dearly personal to him given his son has diabetes and he raises money for the camp for children with diabetes. He clearly didn't expect that to happen.  It's not about putting money in Mark's pocket. It pretty much fucked up that campaign because the shirt's motto has much less impact than it would if the line had been included.  Aside from the line's ties to the fundraising campaign, it's a stupid, terrible creative choice made by the producers/editors/network who have the final cut to take out a perfect line that perfectly suited Crowley.

2) His comment about Dabb wanting to kill off Crowley for a long time:  I think he must have had some insights into why he thought that and I think it's clear that Carver loved Crowley and loved writing for him.  Carver has said this in interviews and in producer's previews etc. So I don't think Carver wanted to kill off Crowley.  But as always the mystery figure who never speaks about all these decisions is Bob Singer. We all know he's probably got as much power if not more than Carver or Dabb IMO. 

3) His comment that Crowley having a mother was illogical: 

IMO he's not really wrong. Mark wasn't bashing Ruth and he said that they made it work. So him saying they made it work, implies IMO that it was never a choice that Mark liked for Crowley.  I wonder if Rowena was a Carver creation, or a Buck Lemming creation, given her first appearance was in "Soul Survivor" which they wrote.  She wasn't known to be Crowley's mother until "Girls, Girls, Girls" which was penned by Robert Berens.  Was it always planned for her to be Crowley's mother under Buck Lemming or did Berens alter her course?  Did Buck Lemming want her to be Crowley's mother and being that Lemming is married to Singer, he might have pushed Carver to accept her as Crowley's mother.  Maybe it was Carver's idea which Mark still didn't like, but Carver did.  I'd love to know how that developed. 

Rowena could have existed as a nemesis for the boys and Crowley without her being his mother.

4) His comment that killing Crowley was done because the writers were lazy and bored...well that's up to opinion. I think it is lazy IMO. And maybe they were bored with Crowley. But that's not Mark's fault. He did as much as he could with a lot of the schlock he was given. 

So all in all, I don't find Mark's remarks all that off putting. Surprising, yes, n the sense that I'm surprised he was being as direct as he was, but IMO this show has had made a crap ton of really awful writing choices over the years.

Edited June 4, 2017 by catrox14

[catrox14]

ETA: I also think Mark is not going to be significantly harmed by this situation.

I love SPN. I love the story of Dean and Sam and Cas and Crowley. But honestly, I don't kid myself that this show has the kind of writing that is critic-proof.  The reality is that Mark has been in shows that have critical acclaim and/or greater popularity. I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see him land a role on some prestige show. 

I wouldn't even be surprised to find Mark showing up on one of the DC shows. I feel like the chances are greater more than less that another show will be happy to hire Mark, who will bring along millions of fans that he already has, from all of his other shows and the SPN fans that aren't put out by his comments and may even agree with him.

[MysteryGuest]

9 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I love SPN. I love the story of Dean and Sam and Cas and Crowley. But honestly, I don't kid myself that this show has the kind of writing that is critic-proof.  The reality is that Mark has been in shows that have critical acclaim and/or greater popularity. I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see him land a role on some prestige show. 

I have no doubts at all that Mark will find another show, if that's what he wants.  I'll be happy for him, but sad for us.  We're losing a good character, and I don't have a great deal of confidence that Dabb & Co. have something oh so much better up their sleeves.  

[ILoveReading]

Brought over from the spoiler thread, but no spoilers.

Quote

And also as a big Dean fan--do NOT see the show watering down Dean this year.  What Dabb did do was mature Dean and Sam in having more tolerance for mistakes among the brothers and Cas...which is good.

Character growth doesn't explain why Dean suddenly can't hold a weapon or show up for fight. It doesn't explain why he seemed to disinterested in hunts.   It doesn't explain why he's not researching or attempting to comfort people in peril.  Dean's a weapons expect,, and gadget builder and supposedly and expert at lore, but he suddenly doesn't want to tinker with the colt and try to fix it? 

It might be more unpopular opinion, but I saw no character growth in Dean this season.  Everything he did this season, I've seen him do multiple times.  I feel like there is difference between holding a grudge and standing up for yourself.  Every member of Dean's inner circle lied and betrayed him, and he just let it go like a water off a ducks back.  He looked like a pushover. 

IMO, Dean can speak up for himself.  He has in the past.  What he needs to do is stop taking it back because his words might make people uncomfortable.  He needs to risk being able to push them away and realize they'll be the ones to come after him this time.    It's not that Dean needs to learn to voice his opinion its that others need to learn to listen to what he's saying.  I'm not saying others have to blindly follow Dean (and no one really does), but they're often so quick to dimiss what he has to say or its just disregarded until things go sideways and then Dean gets his share of blame.

If Dean had character growth and self esteem he'd be able to speak up for himself when it counts, but the two times he should have done that this season, it was right back to peacekeeper/I don't matter Dean.  If Dean can't see that his past matters just as much as Sam's exactly what growth have we seen.  He still thinks he doesn't matter when he comes to Sam.  That's just same old same old. 

Sadly, as much as I dislike thinking of Dean this way, last season he looked like a doormat. 

Edited June 5, 2017 by ILoveReading

[Aeryn13]

Quote

Sadly, as much as I dislike thinking of Dean this way, last season he looked like a doormat. 

Yup, they made him look weak. The single worst trait you can ever give to a fictional character. It was horrid to watch on someone who had previously been strong.  

I also saw no maturing. Why, for Dean, does this always seem to mean he has to stand back, do what others tell him to and marvel at the greater glory of them? Noone else has to "mature" in this manner.   

Edited June 5, 2017 by Aeryn13

[companionenvy]

3 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

The single worst trait you can ever give to a fictional character.

That strikes me as a really subjective assessment. I'd say there are tons of worse qualities -- malice, treachery, stupidity, etc. There's also so many forms weakness can take. Some are worse than others. Dean breaking in hell could be considered a form of "weakness," for instance, but I certainly don't blame him for it, and don't think the show does either. On a much less drastic level, I think almost any rounded character has some weakness. Sam was weak in succumbing to the demon's blood, and also (according to his speech, at least) for being too much of a follower. That doesn't make him a globally weak character.

I don't think Dean having a few bad hunts erases years and years of badassery, including some in this season (most recently, his fight with Ketch). So, he isn't "weak" in that respect. I do think that Dean's tendency to put family above himself has been presented as a weakness at times. I don't think it is a crushing one, nor do I think this season was evidence he hasn't grown. 

[Aeryn13]

Quote

That strikes me as a really subjective assessment.

I didn`t specify but of course I meant for me personally. There is nothing worse in my eyes. Malice and treachery are pieces of cake compared to this. At least I can work with those.  

Quote

I don't think Dean having a few bad hunts erases years and years of badassery

A string of enough losses in a row makes you kinda a has-been at best. But it wasn`t just the kills, it was really everything. The character seemed to lose all skills, all vibrancy, it was horrible to watch it.

Why for instance didn`t we hear about Dean`s stance on leadership in ep 22? Not one peep? He just listens to Sam come to that conclusion and then listens to Sam`s speech like any other hunter underling. Sure, Sam expected to "take him" along, in a position as another follower. So gee, Sam just took ownership and it was expected to be Dean`s due to be the follower from now on? 

After this Season it wouldn`t surprise me since he was always asking Sam what to do and how to fix the weapons and was getting saved by Sam. He got to play the role of hero!Sam`s number one flunky. Thanks but no thanks. I certainly don`t see that as growth. Bending over and joining the BMOL wasn`t growth to me.    

Quote

I do think that Dean's tendency to put family above himself has been presented as a weakness at times. I don't think it is a crushing one,

I would describe being a supreme doormat as a crushing weakness. And this time he could even do it for two people, Sam and Mary. Hooray. 

For me Mary certainly hasn`t been redeemed because once again they did all the wrong things for what I would have needed in terms of redemption. 

[catrox14]

4 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

Yup, they made him look weak. The single worst trait you can ever give to a fictional character. It was horrid to watch on someone who had previously been strong.  

I don't mind if a character is vulnerable. I don't even mind if they are weak in moments as long as they have a chance to be strong or some kind of redemption or something else that gives them some power back.

[catrox14]

1 hour ago, companionenvy said:

I do think that Dean's tendency to put family above himself has been presented as a weakness at times. I don't think it is a crushing one, nor do I think this season was evidence he hasn't grown. 

I wish I saw it this way. Every moment where Dean was standing up for himself to Mary, who IMO absolutely deserved every bit of his ire, anger, resentment for the way she shut him out, was undermined IMO by the writers using "family" as the reason for him to not be allowed to keep his positions when a family member has harmed him.

Dean is more complex than that. It is possible and likely that Dean can still be angry with Mary, for how she treated him, and not be done with the issue and still want to keep her safe. Those things can coexist in a person.

I think some times Dean gets put into "emotional Dean" as though his emotions make his thoughts and opinions invalid because "Dean is upset", like Sam saying Dean was being "dramatic" and thus more easily dismissed as unreasonable, when they are not.

He was texting and playing WWF with Mary and still able to recognize his conflicting emotions. And he was trying to work on it with her even though she was giving him so little. But once Mary betrayed them and Cas nearly died because of her actions, Dean had enough. And he was RIGHT to be upset. Her lies almost got his BFF killed.  Yet in the end of the Raid, there is an opinion that Dean never held about Mary's role being set forth as the reason why Dean was wrong to put Mary on blast.

Why does the show do that with Dean?  Why not let him be a complex person on paper? I swear if it wasn't for Jensen bringing that nuance and layers to Dean's internal life, I don't know what kind of character he would actually be.

Edited June 5, 2017 by catrox14

[companionenvy]

41 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

I didn`t specify but of course I meant for me personally. There is nothing worse in my eyes. Malice and treachery are pieces of cake compared to this. At least I can work with those.  

I figured you meant you personally, but since this thread also deals a lot with the writers screwing characters -- to the point of accusations that Dabb et al are deliberately destroying Dean -- it is worth recognizing when a view is so deeply idiosyncratic that it probably isn't a reliable gauge of other people's perspectives or intentions. If Dabb had Dean start running around groping women and laughing at homeless people, that could be seen as character assassination, since those things are so generally seen as negative that a writer couldn't be presumed to think they were OK; he would just be writing the character as an asshole. I don't think most people believe that a concept of "weakness" generously expanded to include things like "puts family first even when he shouldn't" would outweigh "is a terrible friend" or "is dumb as a box of rocks"on the list of character flaws. Which doesn't necessarily matter in terms of your enjoyment of the show; you're entitled to decide you don't like shows where the lead character wears blue too often, if you choose. It does matter, however, in terms of ascribing motive to writers.

If the show didn't think Dean was capable of fighting, he wouldn't have beaten Ketch in hand to hand while seriously wounded (yup, he wound up needing a rescue from Mary, but only because Ketch had a gun).

If the show thought only Sam could come up with a plan, they wouldn't have had Sam's plan to get out of the bunker fail and Dean's succeed.

If the show thought Dean was a doormat, they wouldn't have set up a confrontation with Mary where he got a chance to blame her for both his and Sam's messed up childhood and for withdrawing during the past year before choosing to forgive her. That, to me, outweighs the Raid; by the end of the season, Mary was contrite for shutting her sons out and it was acknowledged as something for which she needed forgiveness. 

I also really don't get the claim that Dean always rolls over and agrees with Sam. The brothers have parted ways numerous times before over disagreements. Granted, usually Sam was the one making the break -- but if Dean were such a weakling, he would have simply conceded to Sam in order to defuse the tension. If anything, Dean has been slow to forgive Sam on certain past occasions. In the particular case of working with the BMOL, Dean offered a logical reason to pursue cautious cooperation with the BMOL after Sam admitted (relatively quickly) that he had been lying to him about the source of their cases, and acknowledged he was wrong to have done so. I don't see that as Dean being a doormat or his opinions being invalidated.

[catrox14]

1 minute ago, companionenvy said:

If the show thought Dean was a doormat, they wouldn't have set up a confrontation with Mary where he got a chance to blame her for both his and Sam's messed up childhood and for withdrawing during the past year before choosing to forgive her. That, to me, outweighs the Raid; by the end of the season, Mary was contrite for shutting her sons out and it was acknowledged as something for which she needed forgiveness. 

Unfortunately, IMO,  that scene in the end wasn't really about Dean's childhood other than to the extent that Dean felt he couldn't protect Sam from...the littany of things that Dean couldn't have protected him from no matter what. Having Wee!Dean and Dean in the scene doesn't make it about Dean, it was about Mary and Sam. It was about Mary needing Dean's forgiveness so she could come back and not die in the brainwashing space, more than it was about Dean needing to forgive Mary IMO.  Given I never thought they played Dean needing to do that throughout s12 since Mary's resurrection. 

Saying he was a father and a mother not just a brother and it wasn't fair was so woefully insufficient to cover Dean's destroyed childhood. And yet Dean forgave her IMO for ruining Sam's life. Not his own. Like how could he really have forgiven her when she really doesn't know how bad it was. 

 I feel like Dean's trauma seems only to come up as it matters to Sam's story. I get so frustrated with all that.

Funny enough we've been talking about Mark S saying things about the writing for Crowley, and I wonder if Jensen openly criticizing how the last 4 of s11 were done resulted in Dabb kind of giving Dean nothing to do .I  don't know how much I believe that but who knows.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I think some times Dean gets put into "emotional Dean" as though his emotions make his thoughts and opinions invalid because "Dean is upset", like Sam saying Dean was being "dramatic" and thus more easily dismissed as unreasonable, when they are not.

Yeah, that annoys me so much. I hated when he had roll over for Mary at the end of the Raid. And she looked like it was her due.

Even in the end when he was allowed to unload on her, well, it was mostly about Sam and he was quick to forgive her before she even had to ask. And then she fretted about Sam. And why not, Dean had just proven you can treat him as crappily as you want and pretty much not suffer any consequence.  

Quote

If the show thought only Sam could come up with a plan, they wouldn't have had Sam's plan to get out of the bunker fail and Dean's succeed.

And this is pretty much the only thing that gets quoted in terms of Dean coming up with a plan in the second half of the Season. ONE time. Compared to Sam coming up with basically everything in multiple episodes before. One lousy time is not balance. Nor does it convince me that the writers overall haven`t written down Dean`s skill-set in a major way in 12.B.

The stupid leadership thing going ONLY to Sam was just the frosting on the cake. 

Quote

If the show thought Dean was a doormat, they wouldn't have set up a confrontation with Mary where he got a chance to blame her for both his and Sam's messed up childhood and for withdrawing during the past year before choosing to forgive her. That, to me, outweighs the Raid; by the end of the season, Mary was contrite for shutting her sons out and it was acknowledged as something for which she needed forgiveness. 

As I said above, it wasn`t remotely enough for me. He didn`t even get some godamn acknowledgment from Mary. Even John managed that before his death, 

Quote

and I wonder if Jensen openly criticizing how the last 4 of s11 were done resulted in Dabb kind of giving Dean nothing to do 

Dabb showed a penchance for Super!Sam and weak!pathetic!Dean in Season 11 before the Finale was written. Granted, he dialed it up to eleven in Season 12 but I don`t think it was special punishment or something. I believe it is how he sees the characters. Loflin was probably the only who liked Dean in their duo episodes. 

Edited June 5, 2017 by Aeryn13

[catrox14]

7 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

Dabb showed a penchance for Super!Sam and weak!pathetic!Dean in Season 11 before the Finale was written. Granted, he dialed it up to eleven in Season 12 but I don`t think it was special punishment or something. I believe it is how he sees the characters. Loflin was probably the only who liked Dean in their duo episodes. 

I know it's probably not really true in the end but it did cross my mind. LOL

[companionenvy]

46 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

And this is pretty much the only thing that gets quoted in terms of Dean coming up with a plan in the second half of the Season. ONE time. Compared to Sam coming up with basically everything in multiple episodes before. One lousy time is not balance. Nor does it convince me that the writers overall haven`t written down Dean`s skill-set in a major way in 12.B.

I'm not arguing for balance; I'm arguing against hyperbole. It is possible to acknowledge that Sam got a higher-than-average number of successes relative to Dean in the back half of the season without believing that Dean is being presented as an inept weakling by a writer who hates him.

It is also possible to think that a run of at most 8 episodes in which Sam got, IIRC, 4 kills (2-3 big ones) and Dean got none (remembering that Dean got the kills in the episodes before and after that run) is not enough to outweigh 200 + episodes of canon in which, arguably, Dean comes out ahead in the kill and (especially) major kill count, and in which his perspective is often privileged. If by next season finale, we can look back at a clear pattern of Sam getting significantly more and more significant kills and plans than Dean, it might be time to start talking about Dabb favoring Sam and trying to restore him to the "main" character spot (I still don't think it wound indicate hatred or contempt for Dean). I don't think we're remotely there yet.

[MysteryGuest]

49 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Unfortunately, IMO,  that scene in the end wasn't really about Dean's childhood other than to the extent that Dean felt he couldn't protect Sam from...the littany of things that Dean couldn't have protected him from no matter what. Having Wee!Dean and Dean in the scene doesn't make it about Dean, it was about Mary and Sam. It was about Mary needing Dean's forgiveness so she could come back and not die in the brainwashing space, more than it was about Dean needing to forgive Mary IMO.  Given I never thought they played Dean needing to do that throughout s12 since Mary's resurrection. 

Saying he was a father and a mother not just a brother and it wasn't fair was so woefully insufficient to cover Dean's destroyed childhood. And yet Dean forgave her IMO for ruining Sam's life. Not his own. Like how could he really have forgiven her when she really doesn't know how bad it was. 

 I feel like Dean's trauma seems only to come up as it matters to Sam's story. I get so frustrated with all that.

I know this is what some Dean fans wanted to see, but I honestly thought what they showed us was exactly what Dean would have said.  He would never go on about the things that he lost...his childhood, his safety net, his chance at a normal life, etc.  Dean's world view has always been how things affect Sam, and whether he could keep him safe.  And he's carried that burden all of his life, including all of the guilt from the times he thinks he's failed in keeping Sam safe, whether he had any control over it, or not.  For Dean, watching Sam have to go through some of those things was 10 times harder than if Dean experienced them himself.  And he actually did experience Hell up close and personal, but I think he would say that Sam had it much worse, if asked to compare.

As a Dean fan, it would be great to see all of that acknowledged, and it has been at times, but never really enough for us.  I just don't think we're ever going to get what we want, and I don't think Dean would really want that.  

[ILoveReading]

1 hour ago, MysteryGuest said:

I know this is what some Dean fans wanted to see, but I honestly thought what they showed us was exactly what Dean would have said.  He would never go on about the things that he lost...his childhood, his safety net, his chance at a normal life, etc.  Dean's world view has always been how things affect Sam, and whether he could keep him safe.  And he's carried that burden all of his life, including all of the guilt from the times he thinks he's failed in keeping Sam safe, whether he had any control over it, or not.  For Dean, watching Sam have to go through some of those things was 10 times harder than if Dean experienced them himself.  And he actually did experience Hell up close and personal, but I think he would say that Sam had it much worse, if asked to compare.

As a Dean fan, it would be great to see all of that acknowledged, and it has been at times, but never really enough for us.  I just don't think we're ever going to get what we want, and I don't think Dean would really want that.  

I would never argue that Dean tends to put Sam first and in the early seasons I could have accepted that explanation as enough.  For instance, Dean's confrontation with his demon self in s3.  During that confrontation, Dean mostly focused on John not protecting family, letting mom die, Dean always being there for Sam, not John.  HIs words didn't focus on him, however the pay off was Dean realizing that John wronged him.

"I didn't deserve what he put on me and I don't deserve to go to hell." 

That scene felt cathartic.   This scene had the opposite effect.  It's just Dean putting himself last again.   Dean blaming himself for failing.  That line was so unecessary.  The whole scene just felt like the show once again needing to remind the audience just how hard Sam had it, and then showing it alongside Sam leading all the hunters on the raid, just felt like the writers wanting to point out Sam's character growth rather than Dean's.

At 12 seasons in, the explanation of "its just Dean." no longer works.  It's not character growth, its just the status quo.  In that situation there would be nothing wrong with Dean being about Dean.  Dean realizing that, would have been a really big moment for the character.  At some point that writers need to stop using that as a fall back, especially in a situation that really should be all about Dean.  They didn't even have to go with the hell stuff, they could have had Dean say something like when he lost Mary, he didn't just lose a mom, he lost a dad.  That he became a solider in John's revenge quest, and Dad stopped seeing him as a son.  That would have fit much better with him begging Mary to see him.    Sam suffered because I failed him, so mom see me.   Those two things don't really fit together.  That scene only became memorable because of Jensen's delivery.

IMO, its also not just limited to that scene.  That scene was just another example of ignoring Dean's past, and not mentioning his traumas. 

Ep 12.  We have multiple references to Michael, yet nothing regarding Dean and the Michael Lance going to Sam.  They could have used any other arch angel weapon, but using having Sam use Michael's weapon felt like a deliberate snub.

The show never only brings up Dean's hell experience if they can use to label him as weak, or devalue it.  Like Dean saying 6 weeks in isolation was worse than what he experienced.

The episode with the hell hounds, Dean's experience with them was the the only thing left out of the previouslies and it was completely ignored.

Sometimes, I feel like the show itself doesn't' see Dean.  He just becomes an extension of Sam.  Never was that stronger than the half of this season.

Edited June 6, 2017 by ILoveReading

[MysteryGuest]

This particular scene didn't bother me at all, but I won't disagree that over the course of the show, they have downplayed Dean's sacrifices.  HIs time spent in Hell, specifically.  Not to argue whose time was worse, but let's face it, neither Sam nor Dean had a great time in Hell.  And yet Dean's experience is all but forgotten.  That is one glaring omission throughout the latter part of the series.  

I'm not sure why it's been forgotten or ignored, but I guess I choose to believe that it's not a deliberate snub against Dean/Jensen.  The current crop of writers have admitted that they've only watched a handful of episodes before sitting down to write for a show in it's 12th season, so I'm sure that's part of it.  Frankly, I find that absurd and a little insulting, but I'm guessing it's not unusual.  But that doesn't excuse people like Dabb and Singer for ignoring major plot points of their own show.  Maybe I'm being naive, but I can't accept the fact that the showrunners would deliberately sabotage one of their two main characters, a character and actor who is equally as popular with the fans as Sam/Jared.  That just makes no sense to me.  

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

The episode with the hell hounds, Dean's experience with them was the the only thing left out of the previouslies and it was completely ignored.

Which was glaring because it's the most significant scene involving hellhounds that we've seen on the show. In the instances where hellhounds have been present since No Rest for the Wicked ( Abandon All Hope, The Devil You Know, Trial and Error, etc. ) Dean reacts to them as a threat but I would think that there would be a reaction from the traumatizing experience of them ripping him to shreds.

3 hours ago, MysteryGuest said:

 And yet Dean's experience is all but forgotten.  That is one glaring omission throughout the latter part of the series.  

Glaring to the point of ridiculousness.

[MysteryGuest]

9 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Which was glaring because it's the most significant scene involving hellhounds that we've seen on the show. In the instances where hellhounds have been present since No Rest for the Wicked ( Abandon All Hope, The Devil You Know, Trial and Error, etc. ) Dean reacts to them as a threat but I would think that there would be a reaction from the traumatizing experience of them ripping him to shreds.

When watching Somewhere Between Heaven and Hell, in the scene where they were explaining to the girl just what a hellhound was, I fully expected Dean to say something like "I was killed by one".  I know it wouldn't have been something he would tell a stranger, but it just felt so odd to me that it wouldn't be first and foremost in his mind.  He fully remembered "being a hellhounds chew toy", and I just don't see how you'd ever forget that.  But as with Dean's time in Hell, his death by hellhound seems to have also been forgotten.  Whenever the make reference to one now, it's all about the time they had to kill one for the Trials.  I still think it's just lazy writing, but I won't deny that it's annoying sometimes.

[catrox14]

52 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

 Maybe I'm being naive, but I can't accept the fact that the showrunners would deliberately sabotage one of their two main characters, a character and actor who is equally as popular with the fans as Sam/Jared.  That just makes no sense to me.  

I don't think it's deliberate sabotage but more like neglect or they have a simplistic view of Dean. Some writers can't fathom him outside a particular set of characteristics when it comes to Sam. They do seem to give him more room to grow WRT to Cas up to a point.

All those things that inform Dean's life that make Dean who he is now, are profound and huge like dying by hellhound mauling, Hell time, torturing others in Hell, being turned into a demon, being afflicted with the MoC. It's really disheartening just how often Dean's major life experiences are totally minimized. With the convenient excuse of   "Dean wouldn't want to talk about those things".  Okay but even if Dean doesn't OTHER characters can and should. Like why doesn't Sam say something like "Dean, you okay? I know it's been a long time since your run in with hellhounds" . Hell, at this point I have so little hope for Dean to get his own voice for longer than a hot minute, I would settle for Sam recollecting how traumatizing it was for him to watch Dean be mauled to death by hellhounds. At least it would be addressed, FFS!

Dean's life is incredibly rich, storied and filled with a fuckton of trauma. But also Dean is a survivor and resilient, which I swear the show thinks means ignore it in the current text, especially with Sam's traumas are brought up over, and over, and over, and over, ...and ...over .....etc. 

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, MysteryGuest said:

When watching Somewhere Between Heaven and Hell, in the scene where they were explaining to the girl just what a hellhound was, I fully expected Dean to say something like "I was killed by one".  I know it wouldn't have been something he would tell a stranger, but it just felt so odd to me that it wouldn't be first and foremost in his mind.  He fully remembered "being a hellhounds chew toy", and I just don't see how you'd ever forget that.  But as with Dean's time in Hell, his death by hellhound seems to have also been forgotten.  Whenever the make reference to one now, it's all about the time they had to kill one for the Trials.  I still think it's just lazy writing, but I won't deny that it's annoying sometimes.

I was waiting for something like that also or at least a flashback. Sam's hell experiences have been mentioned every season at least since he went into the cage but Dean's time seems to have been swept under the rug.

3 hours ago, catrox14 said:

Some writers can't fathom him outside a particular set of characteristics when it comes to Sam.

Like in Who We Are when Dean was the one to suggest they use brawn ( his way ) since brains ( Sam's way ) didn't work?

[AwesomO4000]

10 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

I also saw no maturing. Why, for Dean, does this always seem to mean he has to stand back, do what others tell him to and marvel at the greater glory of them? No one else has to "mature" in this manner.   

Well, except Sam. This was pretty much all Sam did in season 9, and it was considered "growth" for him to learn that very special lesson that Dean was right and to marvel as Dean killed Abbadon, and then to mourn when Dean sacrificed himself in the fight against Metatron. And then when Sam didn't do what Dean told him to do and just marvel at Dean in season 10, his character was punished for it. So we'll have to agree to disagree.

5 hours ago, catrox14 said:

Every moment where Dean was standing up for himself to Mary, who IMO absolutely deserved every bit of his ire, anger, resentment for the way she shut him out, was undermined IMO by the writers using "family" as the reason for him to not be allowed to keep his positions when a family member has harmed him.

Dean is more complex than that. It is possible and likely that Dean can still be angry with Mary, for how she treated him, and not be done with the issue and still want to keep her safe. Those things can coexist in a person.

I think some times Dean gets put into "emotional Dean" as though his emotions make his thoughts and opinions invalid because "Dean is upset", like Sam saying Dean was being "dramatic" and thus more easily dismissed as unreasonable, when they are not.

But don't the writers do something very similar with Sam as well? Well, except with Sam, in addition to it being presented as "family" why Sam shouldn't be angry or keep his point of view, in my opinion, the writers often preset Sam's being angry as being wrong in the first place and/or make him look like an asshat for even being angry. At least Dean's being angry is mostly presented as being justified even if he does forgive in the end. Sometimes Sam even ends up having to apologize for having been angry. There are many examples: Sam's anger with John, Dean and the deal, Dean and Gadreel, Dean and the mark of Cain. I would include Castiel with breaking Sam's wall, but it wasn't even presented that Sam should be angry about that... though I suppose Castiel bringing back Sam soulless might qualify since Sam was a little annoyed about that, but it didn't last long. And at least the last two were presented as positive things for Sam - i.e. that Sam was being forgiving - rather than making Sam look like a jerk for being angry, so those are at least better, and I appreciated Gamble for that.

My point being that this isn't something just done to Dean in my opinion.

6 hours ago, catrox14 said:

Funny enough we've been talking about Mark S saying things about the writing for Crowley, and I wonder if Jensen openly criticizing how the last 4 of s11 were done resulted in Dabb kind of giving Dean nothing to do .I  don't know how much I believe that but who knows.

I'm not sure what you mean here about Dean not doing anything in the last episodes of season 11. Dean was one of the main reasons that Chuck got off his ass and did something in the end, and Dean was the one who convinced Amara to give Chuck and reconciling with him a chance. Dean also convinced Crowley to join the fight. I guess I'm just not seeing "nothing" here myself.

6 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

And this is pretty much the only thing that gets quoted in terms of Dean coming up with a plan in the second half of the Season. ONE time.

While maybe not a plan per se, Dean was the one to figure out that it was a ghost in "Family Feud." Sam thought it was a witch. Dean even figured out that it had something to do with Gavin. And I'm pretty sure Dean was the one to come up with something in "Twigs and Twine and Tasha Banes" too, since he was the one to kill the witch. And Dean was the one who was the leader of he and Mick in "The Raid" and decided what they would do there.

And yes, Sam has come up with some plans the second half of the season, but I'm not sure how much it counts when many of them aren't used and/or they don't work. That's mostly just busy work. For example, what did it matter if Sam came up with the idea to drain the grace off of the nephilim? Mostly they just wasted time considering that plan when it wasn't even going to be used anyway.

5 hours ago, companionenvy said:

It is also possible to think that a run of at most 8 episodes in which Sam got, IIRC, 4 kills (2-3 big ones) and Dean got none (remembering that Dean got the kills in the episodes before and after that run) is not enough to outweigh 200 + episodes of canon in which, arguably, Dean comes out ahead in the kill and (especially) major kill count, and in which his perspective is often privileged.

I agree, and it wasn't even an 8 episode stretch. It was maybe 5 at most. Dean killed demons - one majorly saving Sam - in "Stuck in the Middle" (episode 12.12) - he killed a vampire in "The Raid" (12.14), and he killed the witch in "Twigs and Twine and Tasha Banes" (12.20). And I might have forgotten something as well.

That's actually more kills than Dean had all season in season 3 - where if I'm remembering correctly, Dean had 1 (or maybe 2) kill(s) all season - but I don't see many people complaining about season 3 in that regard or saying season 3 purposely made Dean look "weak" even though both Sam and Dean were also outwitted and/or out-maneuvered by both Ruby and Bella quite a bit throughout the season. I guess to be fair, people - including me - do complain about that part sometimes, but I don't remember seeing an argument that Kripke must have disliked Dean or wanted to make him a useless character in season 3, because he had hardly any kills and looked inadequate sometimes in comparison to others.

4 hours ago, MysteryGuest said:

His time spent in Hell, specifically.  Not to argue whose time was worse, but let's face it, neither Sam nor Dean had a great time in Hell.  And yet Dean's experience is all but forgotten.  That is one glaring omission throughout the latter part of the series.  

My theory is that they don't address Dean's time in hell, because it would be a reminder that Dean broke the first seal there, and that doesn't fit with the Sam started the apocalypse mantra that the show has going. But that's just my admittedly cynical and likely not true opinion on that one.

7 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

Dabb showed a penchance for Super!Sam and weak!pathetic!Dean in Season 11 before the Finale was written.

I still don't get this criticism. Sam got 1 episode where he was arguably "Super Sam" * One. Dean got one in season 6, which was even more so "Super Dean," in my opinion, but I don't see people complaining that Gamble made Dean into super-Dean - usually it's the opposite actually. Dean also got his own episode in season 11 that focused on him, where he was the badass, and where he saved everyone single-handedly through his ingenuity and fighting ability, including Sam. And Sam got one episode that focused on his childhood where Dean learned something sympathetic about Sam's childhood. And as I said earlier in this thread, that was arguably the first episode like that in 11 seasons for Sam whereas Dean's had about half a dozen like that over the series run.

But somehow those two episodes or so somehow make season 11 a "Super Sam" season? I honestly just don't get it. It's not like Dean didn't have "Baby" as I described above. And there were plenty of other episodes where Dean and Sam worked together or Dean did the killing: Plush, Into the Mystic, Safe House, The Chitters, and probably others that I'm forgetting. Sure Sam got the Lucifer arc, but that was basically done by episode 10 and transferred over to Castiel, whereas Dean had the Amara arc all season long.

I personally loved season 11. I liked the balance of Dean having the main arc, while Sam had a couple of episodes focused on him. There are about 4 episodes from that season currently in my top 25 or so and they are all very different in tone and character focus - so well-rounded. And I didn't need the Dean/Amara connection explained out explicitly. For me it worked better without anvils and without me knowing exactly what it was, since I don't think Dean and Amara understood it either, so I liked experiencing that along with Dean and Amara. In contrast, I agree with those who criticized season 12 for pointing out too explicitly and early exactly who the BMoL were and what their plans were. I preferred the little bit of mystery, and I figured out what I thought the bond was based on the clues we were given.

I guess I just don't see the supposed "Super Sam" slant from maybe 2 or 3 episodes and a short arc that was pretty much done by episode 10. Obviously mileage varies.

* (though my theory on that one was that maybe in an original script somewhere Sam was brought back to life by a reaper because Dean asked or something, but then they decided to use Billie instead and/or they didn't want a repeat of the deal, but then couldn't really account for why Sam was "dead" for so long, but I digress...).

[catrox14]

My point being that this isn't something just done to Dean in my opinion.

38 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I'm not sure what you mean here about Dean not doing anything in the last episodes of season 11. Dean was one of the main reasons that Chuck got off his ass and did something in the end, and Dean was the one who convinced Amara to give Chuck and reconciling with him a chance. Dean also convinced Crowley to join the fight. I guess I'm just not seeing "nothing" here myself.

I was referring to Dean in s12.

 

26 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

 

My point being that this isn't something just done to Dean in my opinion.

I was just talking about Dean. I wasn't thinking about Sam's perspective so I'm sorry if something I said implied that my comment was bashing Sam in some way. It wasn't. It was a Dean-centric  commentary in how I think the writers see Dean and it wasn't because of Sam per se.

 

Maybe I should have moved my post to the Dean thread to avoid confusion.  I don't know where to put the comment because it wasn't really versus.  If any Sam conversation  comes of out it then it's not right for bitterness. If I post it in the Dean thread it will potentially sound bitter.  I don't know where to post anymore :(

[RulerofallIsurvey]

6 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

My theory is that they don't address Dean's time in hell, because it would be a reminder that Dean broke the first seal there, and that doesn't fit with the Sam started the apocalypse mantra that the show has going. But that's just my admittedly cynical and likely not true opinion on that one.

You're not alone.  I tend to agree with this.  Just like whenever Sam's time in hell is mentioned, it's because 'Sam's a giant egotistical power-tripping screw-up and started the Apocalypse.'  How would mentioning Dean's time in hell go?  "You know, Dean also went to hell".  "You mean the righteous weakling who broke under torture when his daddy didn't and broke the first seal which really started the Apocalypse?"  (Heads explode all over fandom and PTV in particular.)  

[mertensia]

15 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

 

As I said above, it wasn`t remotely enough for me. He didn`t even get some godamn acknowledgment from Mary. Even John managed that before his death, 

 

Yes, but it was enough for a lot of us. I don't think the writers are ever going to be pro-Dean enough for some fans but there are those-like me- who think they're mostly doing a good job. Dean's speech was always going to be about the single most important thing to him: his family.

[gonzosgirrl]

I'd be fine with them mentioning that Dean broke in Hell, because I'm not sure what it says about someone who doesn't break after 30 years of abuse by Hell's most skilled torturer. But apart from that, justifying it by saying it's all or nothing - that the automatic and/or only response to "Dean went to Hell" is yeah, well Dean's a pussy who couldn't hack it seems to me like the dreaded hyperbole that is so disdained. He did what he did, but he's also had to live with all his memories of it. He didn't get his pain magicked away. So to write him walking willingly back into Hell, or seeing the results of a Hellhound killing someone, without even a lousy "Then" moment, never mind a line or two? Is bullshit.

 

ETA: Seems to me there's a pretty broad area of possibilities between literally forgetting it ever happened and throwing him under the bus if it were even mentioned. They manage to do it for Sam.

Edited June 6, 2017 by gonzosgirrl

[gonzosgirrl]

9 minutes ago, mertensia said:

Yes, but it was enough for a lot of us. I don't think the writers are ever going to be pro-Dean enough for some fans but there are those-like me- who think they're mostly doing a good job. Dean's speech was always going to be about the single most important thing to him: his family.

I think the point here was not Dean's very Dean-like speech, it was the lack of Mary actually acknowledging the Dean part of it. Her half-assed 'apology' was following immediately by justification (but.. but.. it was harrrrd) and then all she was worried about, even after all Dean said, was that Sam wouldn't be able to forgive her.

[ILoveReading]

7 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

I think the point here was not Dean's very Dean-like speech, it was the lack of Mary actually acknowledging the Dean part of it. Her half-assed 'apology' was following immediately by justification (but.. but.. it was harrrrd) and then all she was worried about, even after all Dean said, was that Sam wouldn't be able to forgive her.

At the start of the season,  Mary wondered how she was going to face Sam,, and in the end her concern was still on Sam.  That's why the speech didn't work for me.  Despite Dean begging Mary to see him, she still doesn't.  

Edited June 6, 2017 by ILoveReading

[mertensia]

3 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

I think the point here was not Dean's very Dean-like speech, it was the lack of Mary actually acknowledging the Dean part of it. Her half-assed 'apology' was following immediately by justification (but.. but.. it was harrrrd) and then all she was worried about, even after all Dean said, was that Sam wouldn't be able to forgive her.

Because Dean did and does. Look, they need to remember that Dean, too, spent time in Hell, I agree, but they are never going to write the gushy Dean love episodes people want.

[DittyDotDot]

1 minute ago, gonzosgirrl said:

I think the point here was not Dean's very Dean-like speech, it was the lack of Mary actually acknowledging the Dean part of it. Her half-assed 'apology' was following immediately by justification (but.. but.. it was harrrrd) and then all she was worried about, even after all Dean said, was that Sam wouldn't be able to forgive her.

Mary already knew Dean forgave her because he said so, so yeah, at that moment she was still worried Sam wasn't going to be able to do the same thing. 

And, Mary's "but...but...but..." was also very Mary-like, IMO. If you ask me, they wrote to who the characters are.

[Wayward Son]

6 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

 Mary wondered how she was going to face Sam,, and in the end her concern was still on Sam.  That's why the speech didn't work for me.  Despite Dean begging Mary to see him, she still doesn't.  

Or, you know, she had already received the forgiveness of one son and knew the opportunity to build something was there, so her main worry was to then focus on the son whose forgiveness she felt was not guaranteed ;)

ETA: Or what @DittyDotDot said.

Edited June 6, 2017 by Wayward Son

[ILoveReading]

2 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

Or, you know, she had already earned the forgiveness of one son and knew the opportunity to build something was there, so her main worry was to then focus on the son whose forgiveness she felt was not guaranteed ;)

ETA: Or what @DittyDotDot said.

Dean forgave Mary, because he's Dean.  Mary really did nothing to earn it. 

[Wayward Son]

Just now, ILoveReading said:

Dean forgave Mary, because he's Dean.  Mary really did nothing to earn it. 

OK then I'll change the word 'earned' to 'received'. My basic point still stands.

[ILoveReading]

Just now, Wayward Son said:

OK then I'll change the word 'earned' to 'received'. My basic point still stands.

We'll have to agree to disagree since the speech was all about Sam.  Maybe I'll change my mind when I see how Mary treats Dean next season. 

[DittyDotDot]

2 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

Dean forgave Mary, because he's Dean.  Mary really did nothing to earn it. 

Right, and...?

I mean, so what if Mary didn't do anything to earn Dean's forgiveness? They wrote Dean giving forgiveness because that's who Dean is and they wrote Mary having her head up her ass because that's who Mary is. Seems like they got it right, to me.

[Mulva]

1 hour ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

You're not alone.  I tend to agree with this.  Just like whenever Sam's time in hell is mentioned, it's because 'Sam's a giant egotistical power-tripping screw-up and started the Apocalypse.'  How would mentioning Dean's time in hell go?  "You know, Dean also went to hell".  "You mean the righteous weakling who broke under torture when his daddy didn't and broke the first seal which really started the Apocalypse?"  (Heads explode all over fandom and PTV in particular.)  

Now that is something I'd like to see.  It really galls that the show constantly puts all the blame on Sam for the apocalypse when Dean is the one who broke the first seal.

[gonzosgirrl]

24 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

OK then I'll change the word 'earned' to 'received'. My basic point still stands.

Which is why she hasn't earned my redemption even if she received it from Dean & Sam.

Edited June 6, 2017 by gonzosgirrl

[Wayward Son]

10 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

We'll have to agree to disagree since the speech was all about Sam.  Maybe I'll change my mind when I see how Mary treats Dean next season. 

I don't see what Deans speech being about Sam has to do with the point I'm making. 

 

Your original statement was that Mary's focus on whether Sam could forgive her or not was a sign that she wasn't seeing Dean.

My reply was that Mary was likely fretting over Sam rather than Dean because Dean had just forgiven her. She knew she had his forgiveness. She didn't know whether she would have Sam's or not. Why would she fret more over the child whose forgiveness she had already received than the child whose forgiveness she wasn't sure of.

[gonzosgirrl]

25 minutes ago, mertensia said:

Because Dean did and does. Look, they need to remember that Dean, too, spent time in Hell, I agree, but they are never going to write the gushy Dean love episodes people want.

How about one gushy episode? No, wait, how about one gushy scene, with an honest, no excuses, no buts, scene where somebody recognizes Dean's history without a punchline immediately following it.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

39 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Seems to me there's a pretty broad area of possibilities between literally forgetting it ever happened and throwing him under the bus if it were even mentioned. They manage to do it for Sam.

Sorry - I can't honestly remember a time when a mention of Sam going to hell wasn't also about throwing him under the bus for starting the Apocalypse or just to show him being wrong again (like about his 'visions' of S11).  

10 minutes ago, Mulva said:

Now that is something I'd like to see.  It really galls that the show constantly puts all the blame on Sam for the apocalypse when Dean is the one who broke the first seal.

I'd need to pick up a blast shield first to protect myself from the fallout of all those head exploding first.  ;)  Some claim they want Dean's time in hell acknowledged.  But I don't think they'd be too happy with what they'd actually get.  It's a 'be careful what you wish for' situation, imo.  

[gonzosgirrl]

4 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Sorry - I can't honestly remember a time when a mention of Sam going to hell wasn't also about throwing him under the bus for starting the Apocalypse or just to show him being wrong again (like about his 'visions' of S11).  

I'd need to pick up a blast shield first to protect myself from the fallout of all those head exploding first.  ;)  Some claim they want Dean's time in hell acknowledged.  But I don't think they'd be too happy with what they'd actually get.  It's a 'be careful what you wish for' situation, imo.  

Why does it have to be like this? I don't know about other people, but I would have been happy with "Hey Dean, thanks for walking back into Hell again to help me. I know that had to be hard for you."  Somehow I think Sam could've managed that without adding, "Did you stop along the way to carve up a few more souls, you weak-ass wimp."

4 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Sorry - I can't honestly remember a time when a mention of Sam going to hell wasn't also about throwing him under the bus for starting the Apocalypse or just to show him being wrong again (like about his 'visions' of S11).  

 

How about pretty much all of S7?

Edited June 6, 2017 by gonzosgirrl

[RulerofallIsurvey]

1 minute ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Why does it have to be like this? 

Oh, I don't know.  Why does it have to be Sam: I think I'm seeing visions that God wants me to go back to the cage.  Dean: yeah, because that worked out so well for you last time after you were stupid and started the Apocalypse.?    There's never any mention that Sam helped avert the impending Apocalypse by falling into the pit with Lucifer.  It's all about the fact that he started said Apocalypse.  

Seems to me you want something for Dean (mention of his hell time without any mention of bad repercussions) which is not also being granted to Sam.  So, from the opposite pov: why shouldn't it be like that?  Why should Dean get it and not Sam?

[RulerofallIsurvey]

1 hour ago, gonzosgirrl said:

How about pretty much all of S7?

Really?  In all of Season 7 there wasn't one single mention about Sam's hell time that didn't throw him under the bus for either starting the Apocalypse or being wrong?  For your consideration, I give you 7.03 The Girl Next Door:

Quote

DEAN: "New rule. You steal my baby, you get punched. The hell were you thinking, Sam, running off like that? I mean, for all I know, Satan could have been callin' your plays."

 Not exactly a ringing endorsement of Sam making the right choice, imo.

I think you are confusing a few episodes at the beginning and one or two around the middle with an entire season's worth of 23 episodes. 

And for what it's worth, Dean's hell time was mentioned in several eps in S7 also:

• 7.01 Hello Cruel World. DEAN: Look at me. Come on. You don’t know what’s real? Look man, I’ve been to Hell. Okay, I know a thing or two about torture. Enough to know that it feels different. Than the pain of this – this regular, stupid, crappy this.
• 7.04 Defending Your Life: FLASHBACKS to <snip> DEAN crying as he tells SAM about torturing souls in Hell in 4.10 Heaven and Hell.
• 7.21 Reading is Fundamental: HESTER (speaking to Dean): "Why should we give you anything... After everything you have taken from us? The very touch of you corrupts. When Castiel first laid a hand on you in Hell, he was lost! For that, you're going to pay."

[AwesomO4000]

1 hour ago, gonzosgirrl said:

How about one gushy episode? No, wait, how about one gushy scene, with an honest, no excuses, no buts, scene where somebody recognizes Dean's history without a punchline immediately following it.

Episodes where there was at least a gushy scene or the entire episode:

• Something Wicked
• What Is and What Should Never Be
• All Hell Breaks Loose, Part 2
• A  Very Supernatural Christmas
• Dark Side of the Moon
• Point of No Return (in my opinion)
• Mannequin 3...
• Season 7, Time for a Wedding
• Book of the Damned, in a way
• Bad Boys

Those are the ones I can think of, but there are probably more.

1 hour ago, gonzosgirrl said:

How about pretty much all of S7?

I mostly agree with you there that there weren't a lot of negative mentions, and this is one of the reasons I enjoyed season 7 so much. Neither Sam nor Dean were set up as wrong or as betraying the other brother or lying to them for the sake of angst. They worked together and both were presented mostly positively throughout the season.

For me, it's too bad that this type of portrayal didn't continue, but instead we had to devolve into manufactured angst and betrayal again and again under Carver's era (in my opinion).

[gonzosgirrl]

18 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Episodes where there was at least a gushy scene or the entire episode:

• Something Wicked
• What Is and What Should Never Be
• All Hell Breaks Loose, Part 2
• A  Very Supernatural Christmas
• Dark Side of the Moon
• Point of No Return (in my opinion)
• Mannequin 3...
• Season 7, Time for a Wedding
• Book of the Damned, in a way
• Bad Boys

Those are the ones I can think of, but there are probably more.

I mostly agree with you there that there weren't a lot of negative mentions, and this is one of the reasons I enjoyed season 7 so much. Neither Sam nor Dean were set up as wrong or as betraying the other brother or lying to them for the sake of angst. They worked together and both were presented mostly positively throughout the season.

For me, it's too bad that this type of portrayal didn't continue, but instead we had to devolve into manufactured angst and betrayal again and again under Carver's era (in my opinion).

I was talking more about recognizing Dean's time in Hell, especially when Hell is the actual subject.

[gonzosgirrl]

1 hour ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Really?  In all of Season 7 there wasn't one single mention about Sam's hell time that didn't throw him under the bus for either starting the Apocalypse or being wrong?  For your consideration, I give you 7.03 The Girl Next Door:

 Not exactly a ringing endorsement of Sam making the right choice, imo.

I think you are confusing a few episodes at the beginning and one or two around the middle with an entire season's worth of 23 episodes. 

And for what it's worth, Dean's hell time was mentioned in several eps in S7 also:

• 7.01 Hello Cruel World. DEAN: Look at me. Come on. You don’t know what’s real? Look man, I’ve been to Hell. Okay, I know a thing or two about torture. Enough to know that it feels different. Than the pain of this – this regular, stupid, crappy this.
• 7.04 Defending Your Life: FLASHBACKS to <snip> DEAN crying as he tells SAM about torturing souls in Hell in 4.10 Heaven and Hell.
• 7.21 Reading is Fundamental: HESTER (speaking to Dean): "Why should we give you anything... After everything you have taken from us? The very touch of you corrupts. When Castiel first laid a hand on you in Hell, he was lost! For that, you're going to pay."

Mentioned by Dean, and by another angel wanting to punish him some more for it. That's not really the spirit of this conversation, or at least not the one I was having.

As to S7, the first 2/3 of the season was about Sam suffering for his time in Hell with Lucifer and everyone around him was pretty darn sympathetic as I recall, with Dean leading it. Considering the number of times Sam has tried to kill Dean while being on demon blood/possessed/soulless/hallucinating, I think that comment from 7.03 is the least he could've said. And he still showed more understanding than he ever got in S4.

[Pondlass1]

I just love how, not just protective but empathetic Jensen is about his character.  The writer/director/showrunner would have him prancing off down to the depths of hell like it's a walk in the park.  

 OK, Jensen, ACTION..so walk down the steps.  Wait, why are you hesitating? We're on a time clock here.   What? Dean went to hell before?  oh and he's re-living the emotion, he's remembering?   Ok, good work,  ... that's a wrap. Lunch!!!

[catrox14]

6 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Oh, I don't know.  Why does it have to be Sam: I think I'm seeing visions that God wants me to go back to the cage.  Dean: yeah, because that worked out so well for you last time after you were stupid and started the Apocalypse.?    There's never any mention that Sam helped avert the impending Apocalypse by falling into the pit with Lucifer.  It's all about the fact that he started said Apocalypse.  

If you're referrring to Dean's comments to Sam in "Plush", that's not really how it went down.  Dean was telling Sam to not trust GOD because GOD, didn't show up to help them during the Apocalypse. Dean didn't say anything  to Sam about Sam starting the Apocalypse. Here is what Dean said.

Quote

Sam: So, uh... on the off chance that you're actually listening, uh... Uh, I gotta be real honest. The visions aren't making a whole lot of sense to me. Truth is... I don't know what's what. Please. What are you trying to say?

Dean: Really? I mean, really?

Sam: You ever hear of privacy?

Dean: Hey, you want privacy, close your door.

(Sam gets up and walks out of his room and Dean starts following him)

Dean: Thought we talked about this.

Sam: Yeah, we did, Dean. But why is it so hard to believe that God could be sending me visions about the darkness?

Dean: You kidding me? He didn't feel the need to show up for the Apocalypse. Why would he give a crap now?

Sam: I don't know. Maybe because she's his sister? What do you wanna do? Sit back? Ignore him? Do nothing?

Dean: No, that's -- that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying, don't count on God. Okay? Count on us.

 Dean has always been pretty consistent about his distrust of  God. he literally did not bring up the Apocalypse to rub Sam's face in it, but to state his opinion that GOD is the problem here, not Sam, other than Sam trusting God when Dean's opinion was that God shouldn't be trusted to help them.  Also, Dean was attached to Amara and it was questionable whether Dean was being influenced by the Darkness to deter Sam from trusting what he thought was God's visions. I might be wrong but I can't think of any time in s11 wherein DEAN brought up Sam's role in the Apocalypse and held it against him. If there is, please let me know

 

6 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Seems to me you want something for Dean (mention of his hell time without any mention of bad repercussions) which is not also being granted to Sam.  So, from the opposite pov: why shouldn't it be like that?  Why should Dean get it and not Sam?

Assuming that Sam was being chastised again by Dean about the Apocalypse, (which I don't think was happening) the subsequent episodes made it clear that Sam was back on the redemption path as part of his ongoing Hero's Journey. Even, when the narrative for Sam mentions his role in the apocalypse including the negative repercussions, it also allows for Sam to be redeemed by making a sacrifice to right his wrongs as much as he could.  It makes clear that despite him making amends he still feels guilty. And most importantly that he is forgiven.  That is well trod territory pretty much every season since s5 including and up to s12.

In s11, Sam's Hero Journey,  was really revitalized and furthered with Sam once more facing down his lifelong nemesis, Lucifer. and saying no. 

He faced the issue of not looking for Dean in s8 which was resolved without Sam literally saying "I'm sorry" or "I apologize".

Quote

DEAN

Yeah, he was messing with you. That's what he does.

SAM

Give me a sec.

[Sighs]

I should've looked for you. When you were in Purgatory, I... I should've turned over every stone.

[Dean hangs his head as he listens]

But I didn't. I stopped. And I've never forgiven myself for it.

DEAN

Well... I have.

Hey. That's in the past, man. What's done is done.

All that matters now, all that's ever mattered, is that we're together.

So... Shut up and drink your beer.

This is a bit of a retcon for Sam's benefit with him saying , "I stopped". I think it can be read that he may have looked a little bit but then he stopped. Or it could be read that he didn't look at all. Sam didn't really even say "I'm sorry" but he did say "I've never forgiven myself for it" and Dean said " "Well, I have." and "It's the past and what's done is done" .  Sam acknowledged his error, didn't have to apologize, and was forgiven.  

If they bring up Dean's Hell time again, in a real meaningful way in s13, then yes they should talk about all of it. Let Dean acknowledge his guilt about Hell. And  let him be forgiven by others. Like have someone tell him "I forgive you" in the same way that Sam has been forgiven. I don't know if Anna and Sam saying it wasn't his fault is enough TBH. Anna's "I forgive you" was about Dean selling her out for Sam, but I don't think it was intended to be a blanket forgiveness.  I can find no reason in the current narrative with Sam as the person he is now, where Sam would  ever say or remind Dean that he was a pussy for breaking in Hell.

I know I have the head!canon that Dean was actually in Hell for 100 years because of dying in Mystery Spot but I won't include that here. I really probably don't want to know  just what all was done to Dean, that made him finally say, "I can't take anymore" ; what level of mental, emotional, and whatever kind of potentially physical torture exacted upon him that would cause him to make a choice that went counter to all that he has ever stood for in his life, to the extent that he would torture others for 10 years. They need to address what being a torturer does to the torturer, too.

IMO, they don't bring up Dean's Hell time because it WOULD require them to really examine it and examine what put Dean into such a position in his life that he would sell his soul for his brother's life. Yes I understand the PLOT REASONS related to the angels but there are character reasons related to Dean's upbringing as a parentifed child. They kind of skirted the topic by having Dean saying had to be a father and a mother to Sam, but that's not really the same as being a parentified child. Who knows,  maybe I'll get damn fucking lucky and we'll actually get a revisit of Dean's big issues in s13, but I'm not going to hold my breath either.

Edited June 6, 2017 by catrox14
because one of my sentences didn't make sense to me. LOL

[Aeryn13]

Quote

OK, Jensen, ACTION..so walk down the steps.  Wait, why are you hesitating? We're on a time clock here.   What? Dean went to hell before?  oh and he's re-living the emotion, he's remembering?   Ok, good work,  ... that's a wrap. Lunch!!!

Heh. I think that`s about right. 

In terms of Sam and sympathetic mentions of hell, Death bemoaning how shredded his soul is and the Season 6 Finale do not qualify? Nothing about this was about starting any apocalypise, it was 100 % sympathy. 

And while an episode where Dean is pelted with rotten fruit for being such a weak loser who broke in hell would obviously find its fans, I don`t think the absence of it marks a preferential treatment in any way. Not being completely degraded doesn`t make a character a writer`s pet. Simply acknowledging that the character suffered in hell isn`t too much of a boon IMO. Since it happened, it can be easily worked in when hell comes up in context. Like say, when the character needs to go back there. Same as being ripped apart by hellhounds can be referenced when they are hunting one. They would do it with Sam, no questions asked.

Quote

I mean, so what if Mary didn't do anything to earn Dean's forgiveness? They wrote Dean giving forgiveness because that's who Dean is and they wrote Mary having her head up her ass because that's who Mary is. 

That`s why the so-called redemption of hers didn`t work for me. Presumably when she was trapped with Lucifer, they didn`t want the reaction to be "whatever bitch, I have no shred of sympathy for you" but instead "OMG, poor Mary, what`s gonna happen to her?" 

Dean being a much better person than her, I got early on in this Season. I didn`t need this scene for it. So, despite being well-acted it really served no purpose for me. 

Quote

I'm not arguing for balance; I'm arguing against hyperbole. It is possible to acknowledge that Sam got a higher-than-average number of successes relative to Dean in the back half of the season without believing that Dean is being presented as an inept weakling by a writer who hates him.

The original point of the discussion was about this one scene being offered up as proof that the show/writers didn`t want to portray Dean as the guy who couldn`t come up with a plan. 

So, in all the other scenes where he actually didn`t come up with shit in 12.B, what did they want to get across then? Because I posit it was exactly that: Dean being stupid/lazy/inept. 

Quote

It is also possible to think that a run of at most 8 episodes in which Sam got, IIRC, 4 kills (2-3 big ones) and Dean got none (remembering that Dean got the kills in the episodes before and after that run) is not enough to outweigh 200 + episodes of canon in which, arguably, Dean comes out ahead in the kill and (especially) major kill count, and in which his perspective is often privileged. If by next season finale, we can look back at a clear pattern of Sam getting significantly more and more significant kills and plans than Dean, it might be time to start talking about Dabb favoring Sam and trying to restore him to the "main" character spot (I still don't think it wound indicate hatred or contempt for Dean). I don't think we're remotely there yet.

I don`t need 23 more episodes of valium!Dean to see a clear pattern. I`m there now. And if Dabb wishes to turn it into a clear version of Samnatural, I think it would indicate less than favourable feelings for Dean/Jensen. Not giving a fuck about either being included in that description.