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

AwesomO4000 · July 1, 2017

32 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

But Sam is insisting that Dean get over it *right now* and is angry that he hasn't. Dean, for once, wasn't ignoring or denying his anger at Sam. But Sam kept challenging him about being on probation and not being an equal partner, which, to me, was a little premature at that point. In my experience, you have to rebuild trust before you can be treated as an equal, and Sam still had a way to go.

But later on in the episode, Sam agrees that Dean can be angry with him, but that their working relationship has to be different if they are going to work together and that Dean at least has to listen to Sam rather than dismiss what Sam has to say concerning their work. There's also a difference between Sam being angry about Dean not forgiving him and Dean saying one thing to his face - that he didn't blame Sam for making the mistake concerning the seal - but seeming to say something else to Bobby. I more tend to be it's the latter and maybe also some Sam guilt and frustration also exacerbating the situation.

As I have said before, I also think that Sam is working at a disadvantage here. He is under the impression that Dean let Sam come back because, as Dean said , "they make each other human." Sam doesn't know that part of the reason that Dean came back is because he's afraid that Sam will say "yes" to Lucifer, because of what he saw in "The End." So Dean is holding that internally and stewing on it, but Sam doesn't know this. So Dean is questioning Sam's judgement based on what he saw - which was understandably disturbing - but Sam doesn't know this, and so doesn't understand why Dean would be questioning his hunting decisions.

Reganne · July 1, 2017

15 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

(Side note, and JMO: an entire year of lying and betrayal (as Dean put it, "you chose a demon over your own brother!") is not equal to not telling Sam immediately that he'd sold his soul.)

In any event, Dean told Sam over and over during season 5 that he *didn't* blame him for the Apocalypse. He told Sam several times that he'd broken the first seal, and even (apologies for paraphrasing) when Sam said something like "but I killed Lilith" told him "yeah, and who knew that would be a BAD thing?" Bobby told him in 5.1 that he would never cut him out. But everyone keeps quoting that one scene in Fallen Idols as if that's Dean's true underlying feeling. And that's mostly due to the fact that the writers keep bringing the dead horse back to life years later, any time they wanted to ramp up the angst.

If you read the actual quote, it doesn't actually *say* anything, though it is implied:

So there are several things that are problematic for me here. First, we're going on assumptions that Dean was blaming Sam for the Apocalypse, and Dean doesn't deny it. But to me, it shows what I said before: Dean still hasn't forgiven Sam for lying. He's still pissed. But Sam is insisting that Dean get over it *right now* and is angry that he hasn't. Dean, for once, wasn't ignoring or denying his anger at Sam. But Sam kept challenging him about being on probation and not being an equal partner, which, to me, was a little premature at that point. In my experience, you have to rebuild trust before you can be treated as an equal, and Sam still had a way to go.

But IMO the "narrative" (at least in season 5) *doesn't* put all the blame for the Apocalypse on Sam--at least, not among his friends and family. Obviously hunters were different, which is why Walt and Roy went after him (though by this year apparently either it's been forgiven or forgotten by most of the hunters), but Dean and Bobby kept supporting and reassuring him. So, the fact that the writers brought it up again in seasons 8, 9 and 11 (I think) and made it seem like Dean's been blaming him all along is just...wrong.

Yes, Dean's secret came out early but only because Sam figured it out on his own.... not because Dean told him or was planning to tell him. If Sam hadn't figured it out, it had the potential to go on much longer which is my point. It's not like the narrative showed us anything about Dean deciding to tell him. In fact, it suggested the opposite. That he had planned to keep it from Sam and told Bobby to do the same.

As far as people quoting the conversation with Bobby and suggesting that is Dean's true feelings, I see that situation as no different than the people that quote Sam in the purge and deem that to be Sam's true feelings.... even though Sam has shared contradictory quotes before and after to the purge. In fact your reasons for Dean saying that to Bobby in fallen angels could really apply to Sams speech in the purge. Being angry for being lied to and causing Kevins death. Maybe Sam was still angry with him.

As far as no support for Sam... I was speaking more in terms of the beginning of season 5. Which would equal a few months in Sams life. Then of course the hunters. The ones who found Sam in the bar and the ones who killed Sam and Dean.

Aeryn13 · July 1, 2017

Quote

So in my opinion, I would say that the parallels between season 5 and 9 in this regard are pretty close, except that Dean came off looking much better in season 5 than Sam did in season 9 (in my opinion anyway).

So in my opinion, if you question one instance, maybe the other should also question come into question?

While I liked the storyline of Dean and the MOC, that was actually more akin to the darkside story Sam had in Season 4. So Dean killing Abaddon was a neat episode but it wasn`t portrayed as a super-big hero moment. And IMO Abaddon wasn`t portrayed as a credible enough threat to the world.

Meanwhile Dean served as a distraction in the Season 9 Finale but he got owned badly by the tablet-powered Metatron. If that was a "win"-moment, we have very different definitions for that. Certainly nothing like 5.22.

So, I don`t see a comparable win for the hubris. And then the MOC got taken away pretty much without Dean`s doing so that story in itself ended without yielding the big flashy sparkles moment I would need to compare those two storylines and say Dean got the better deal. Not when Dean`s part is missing the most important thing in my eyes.

Now you might compare Season 5 for Sam and Season 11 for Dean more easily as the "aftermath" of the dark story. However, the respective Finales weren`t equal in terms of scope and gravitas in their portrayal.

Sorry when it comes to such comparisms, I`m afraid I`m quite literal.

Quote

failing of the narrative to properly redeem the character when it likely wouldn't matter since you don't like the character anyway.

He was never my favourite character and there were instances he annoyed me - mainly the displays of snobby superiority - in Seasons 1-3 but I actually didn`t have an overall problem with him until the Season 5 fiasko. That`s what turned me off. So, a proper redemption (proper in my eyes, that is) would have worked. During Season 4 when things got really bad, I actually expected them to do it. I was looking forward to it because I figured that was the point of Season 4.

For me an episode like the Siren one epitomizes that. In Season 4 when I watched it, I thought "wow, you are in for an epic humbling, can`t wait" - and to be clear, I felt the same way during lots of comic book origin movies because that is the formula and I really like those characters. And I thought the show wanted me to feel that just as those movies wanted me to feel exactly that during those early parts of the movie. They actually work on making you root against the character at first so the story can work in making you root for them later.

Then Season 5 happened and I realized I had been wrong. The show never meant for me to think or feel that during the Siren ep. It meant for me to go "right on, you truly are stronger, smarter and better than that loser, he finally realized it, too". Since that was never gonna happen, it retroactively changed my perspective on Season 4, feeling like I wasted my time expecting something that would obviously never come.

And granted, it happened with both Sam and Dean. With both characters they totally duped me in Season 4. After Season 5, I felt like a complete fool ever getting excited for Dean supposedly getting to be more than a sidekick and for Sam to have redemption.

Nowadays I can`t even believe in the first anymore. Even if a story materializes I always expect it to be taken away. And with the second, I don`t think the show overall thinks Sam really has flaws. Certainly not one of hubris. I think they do believe he IS superior and others just need to catch up with the fact. Case in point the penultimate episode of Season 12 with the "everyone, including Dean, gazes in awe at their new leader" scene. Technically, it started out as the character admitting he had made a mistake to people who had most decidely not made that mistake but the gist of the scene was "what a hero, look at all the flunkies worshipping him". Yeah, that is how throwing in with the BMOL should have been resolved, with a visual ass-kissing.

catrox14 · July 1, 2017

1 hour ago, Reganne said:

For me, Sam's character was never ruined. I prefer my characters flawed. My problem was with the narrative and pinning all the blame of the apacalypse solely on Sam when other people and factors played a hand in the final outcome. When Dean found out he broke the first seal, he did initially blame himself. However, he received compassion from other characters who didn't blame him.

I don't recall much compassion for Dean after it was revealed that he broke the first seal. The compassion came from Anna and Sam in Heaven and Hell but that was before anyone knew he broke the first seal. Anna had compassion and forgiveness for Dean about him torturing others but I don't know if she even knew he broke the first seal, so maybe her compassion would not have extended beyound that. Who knows.

There was no compassion from the angels in that they did not/could not/would not heal Dean after he was nearly killed by Alastair. Even though Cas was being kind to Dean he still didn't heal him and he told Dean yes he started it, but it wasn't a matter of fault but fate, and Cas didn't really absolve Dean of his role because Dean still was told he had to fix what he broke.

What bothers me the most about s4 and s5 is that the narrative was blaming Dean for Sam's behavior and the real reason why the Apocalypse started is because Dean wasn't there for Sam. I say that because of Bobby's role in this whole thing.

IMO the writers wanted the audience to agree with Bobby more than any other character in the show, especially in s4 and s5 when he became their surrogate father who is better than John; is seen as the smartest one in the room with sage advice and wisdom for most of the series; who deals out harsh truths and deserved smackdowns of the boys when needed. (This is not how I see Bobby but IMO that was his designated role in the show).

In s4, Bobby was on board with putting Sam on lockdown for demon blood detox, which told me that Dean was making the right call and trying to do the right thing for Sam in that situation. It was awful but it was understood it was being done out of love and concern for Sam's welfare. But then Bobby did an about face with Dean and decided that they might be killing Sam and he didn't think it was right, and they shouldn't take Sam out of the fight.

The boo hoo princess speech from Bobby, IMO, was supposed to be seen as "correct" and that Dean was being a selfish asshole and a whiny brat for not calling Sam because "his feelings got hurt" after Sam nearly literally murdered Dean. To this day, I don't know if Bobby knew that or not but the show didn't make it clear. Given that speech ended with Bobby saying Dean was a better man than John and he was acting like John that meant Dean was totally in the wrong, and Bobby was right, thus the sympathy shifts to Sam because Bobby's POV shifted.

At any rate, the end result is that Dean was shamed (and IMO not rightfully so) into calling Sam and apologizing. But it was too late and Dean couldn't get there in time to stop Sam. IMO, the message I got was that it wasn't Dean breaking the first seal that really started the Apocalpyse but because Dean wasn't there for Sam to stop Sam from letting Lucifer out of the cage. That is where the fault lies with Dean. (And boy do I hate that narrative for so many reasons).

Again in S5, Dean is still being held responsible for Sam's decisions in the narrative even when Sam said he went with Ruby because Dean wouldn't let him go and didn't let him grow up. So Dean is being held responsible for Sam's behaviors and choices when he's both there for him and not there for him.

IMO, Dean is in a constant double bind and catch-22 in the narrative when it comes to Sam.

DeeDee79 · July 1, 2017

3 hours ago, catrox14 said:

IMO the writers wanted the audience to agree with Bobby more than any other character in the show, especially in s4 and s5 when he became their surrogate father who is better than John; is seen as the smartest one in the room with sage advice and wisdom for most of the series; who deals out harsh truths and deserved smackdowns of the boys when needed. (This is not how I see Bobby but IMO that was his designated role in the show).

Just wanted to chime in to say that while I really like Bobby this is the reason why I say that he is the only character that fits the Mary Sue description on this show.

Wayward Son · July 1, 2017

On 26 June 2017 at 3:43 PM, catrox14 said:

Respectfully, this seems to be a bit of a reach to say that Dean treated Sam like a toy. EVER in Sam's life. That simply is not true. It also tends to ignore the facts of what happened for reasons that I don't quite understand.

Sam was dying. Period. The end. Should Dean have let Sam die? That is the only choice Dean took away from Sam who was in a coma. And Dean relied on his best friends' endorsement of the angel they both believed was Ezekiel.

The only person treating Sam like a toy was Gadreel. He was the one that kept using Sam's life as a threat to hold over Dean.

I had an incredibly busy week and couldn't / didn't have the energy to reply until now. I'm direct quoting you since you were responding to me directly, but some of this post is also a general response to posts I read. So if I say something in reference to something you didn't say that's why ;) .

I suppose toy was the wrong word and puppet would be a more accurate description with Dean being the one to pull the strings.

Ones of the reasons for this opinion being the fact that I respectfully disagree with the argument you, and others in this thread, that Dean was right to make the initial decision he made because Sam was unable to decide for himself. Unlike real life coma cases Dean did have an opportunity to inform Sam of the situation at hand, but he chose not to. I've seen online debate in regards to whether it was Gadreel or Dean himself communicated with Sam in his dream scape. The stance one takes on this arguments makes little difference to my feelings on the decision, since even if it was Gadreel Dean was still complicit in the decision to trick Sam with half truths as opposed to laying all the cards in the table and allowing him to make an informed decision. This shown by the fact there were no protests about Sam's lack of knowledge and his decision to keep the lie up for months.

I also disagree with the theory Sam was sucidal or seemed that way to Dean. The show made it very clear IMO that he was not suicidal at that point, not when it came down to it. He showed this through actions such as agreeing to stop the trial, his acknowledgement of his role in stopping the apocalypse, and his agreement to follow the vague half truth promise of there being a way to save him. Furthermore, the show makes it clear that Dean is aware of the fact that it's not being saved that Sam would object to, but possession. Dean knows the trauma Sam has suffered at the hands of Lucifer and Meg and his lifelong struggle with feeling different due to the demon blood. The episode is explicit about this when the following exchange occurs

Quote

DEAN
No, it's Sam's call. There's no way in hell he'd say yes to being possessed by anything.

EZEKIEL
He would rather die.

DEAN nods ruefully.

So, all in all, while I disagree with Sam's decision to later make a blanket statement about Dean only being willing to make sacrifices when they aren't his I totally agree with his assertion that Dean saved Sam for Dean and not Sam. Dean knew Sam would not want to be possessed. Dean knew Sam had reached a point where he was ready to die naturally if it was his time. Dean chose to utterly ignore that and force a possession on him because he couldn't bear to live without Sam. It was all about Dean and his needs. IMO he treated Sam like a puppet for months with Dean playing the role of puppet master. He lied to Sam, robbed him of his self-autonomy, allowed Sam to feel genuine fear about his mental health, so Dean could get what he wanted and have his needs filled.

Im fairly certain it wasn't you who said this, but I also disagree from a meta level the only options the writers had were let Dean save Sam through trickery and possession or let Sam die. Carver had numerous choices; he could have allowed Gadreel to heal him without possession need, he could have had Sam become aware of the nature of his saving and agree, thus making it something Sam agreed to rather than a gross non-con. So I refuse to cut Dean slack because "it was the only choice he could make if the show wanted to continue" and I refuse, like I've seen happen to others online, to be guilted into being treated like a Sam hater because I vehemently disagree with Deasn actions in this episode and beyond. There were numerous alternative routes that could have been taken so I'll judge the characters action based on what happened on screen.

Edited July 1, 2017 by Wayward Son

Reganne · July 1, 2017

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

I don't recall much compassion for Dean after it was revealed that he broke the first seal. The compassion came from Anna and Sam in Heaven and Hell but that was before anyone knew he broke the first seal. Anna had compassion and forgiveness for Dean about him torturing others but I don't know if she even knew he broke the first seal, so maybe her compassion would not have extended

What bothers me the most about s4 and s5 is that the narrative was blaming Dean for Sam's behavior and the real reason why the Apocalypse started is because Dean wasn't there for Sam. I say that because of Bobby's role in this whole

The boo hoo princess speech from Bobby, IMO, was supposed to be seen as "correct" and that Dean was being a selfish asshole and a whiny brat for not calling Sam because "his feelings got hurt" after Sam nearly literally murdered Dean.

At any rate, the end result is that Dean was shamed (and IMO not rightfully so) into calling Sam and apologizing.

Again in S5, Dean is still being held responsible for Sam's decisions in the narrative even when Sam said he went with Ruby because Dean wouldn't let him go and didn't let him grow up. So Dean is being held responsible for Sam's behaviors and choices when he's both there for him and not there for him.

IMO, Dean is in a constant double bind and catch-22 in the narrative when it comes to Sam.

I don't see Dean being held accountable for Sam's actions at all. Sam didn't say that Dean wouldn't let him grow up. He said going with Ruby and being on the demon blood made him feel strong. It is not uncommon for younger siblings to feel weaker than their older siblings due to no fault of the older sibling. If Dean were being held accountable for Sam's actions, the hunters would have been gunning for him and not Sam.

As far as Dean being shamed into wrongly apologizing, he wasn't completly faultless in the fight between the two of them. He did call Sam a monster. That was never going to end well with an adict and then giving him an ultimatum which never worked with Sam before when John used it on him. As far as Bobby deciding who was right or wrong, he did ultimately help Dean in his plan to lock Sam in the panic room and he never backed out of that. He stood by Dean in his decision. As far as his conversation with Dean and trying to get him to work on things with Sam, I don't see it as saying that Sam is completly in the right. If Bobby truly thought that, then he wouldnt have helped lock him up in the first place. I think Bobby was just stressing the importance of their relationship as brothers and how it could affect the outcome of the world.

Edited July 1, 2017 by Reganne

auntvi · July 1, 2017

2 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I'm still wondering how, with all that was done to Sam in season 9, he still somehow came out looking like the bad guy - that takes some awful character work and or assassination there in my opinion. For me, I would have taken a short to the point character arc like Demon Dean's to just about anything Sam got character-wise in season 8 and 9. Even season 10 Sam's character arc started out interesting but ended up just a big, old, "Sam doesn't listen and screws up again" arc in the end. So I'm not sure which is worse there.

I never gave up on Sam in seasons 4 & 5, I've almost always been sympathetic to him. I agree with you about season 9. Why would a writer do that to a character, i.e. it's always Sam's fault? Somewhere along the line the moral center switched from Sam to Dean, and it's only been in the past 2 seasons that Sam has been rehabilitated, somewhat. IMO

Aeryn13 · July 1, 2017

Quote

As far as his conversation with Dean and trying to get him to work on things with Sam, I don't see it as saying that Sam is completly in the right. If Bobby truly thought that, then he wouldnt have helped lock him up in the first place. I think Bobby was just stressing the importance of their relationship as brothers and how it could affect the outcome of the world.

I can not ever see him saying the same to Sam if the situation was reversed. "Boohoo, princess, family is supposed to make you miserable". Not in a million years. I read so often how "tough love" like that works best on Dean and he responds well to it (same with Misery). Which is IMO a bullshit excuse for being crappy to him.

When it was later revealed that Bobby had killed his own abusive father and was very much not the poster child for "family is there to make you miserable and you are there to take it, no matter what", he was just revealed to be a hypocrite on top of being a complete ass. While Season 5 was my end point with Sam, Bobby was dead to me after that speech in Season 4. It was the complete antithesis of what he said to Dean after the deal which I loved. I can hardly believe it was the same character. But somehow during Season 4 Bobby turned into an asshat and after that his interactions with Dean just sucked.

Quote

Im fairly certain it wasn't you who said this, but I also disagree from a meta level the only options the writers had were let Dean save Sam through trickery and possession or let Sam die. Carver had numerous choices; he could have allowed Gadreel to heal him without possession need, he could have had Sam become aware of the nature of his saving and agree, thus making it something Sam agreed to rather than a gross non-con. So I refuse to cut Dean slack because "it was the only choice he could make if the show wanted to continue". There were numerous alternative routes that could have been taken so I'll judge the characters action based on what happened on screen.

Of course there would have been other ways to write themselves out of the situation but then that wouldn`t have been a Dean-bashing opportunity. And maybe not the "wet dream of a storyline" for Sam that Jared talked about in interviews.

Edited July 1, 2017 by Aeryn13

DeeDee79 · July 1, 2017

3 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

When it was later revealed that Bobby had killed his own abusive father and was very much not the poster child for "family is there to make you miserable and you are there to take it, no matter what", he was just revealed to be a hypocrite on top of being a complete ass.

I totally agree with you on this.

catrox14 · July 1, 2017

18 minutes ago, Reganne said:

I don't see Dean being held accountable for Sam's actions at all. Sam didn't say that Dean wouldn't let him grow up. He said going with Ruby and being on the demon blood made him feel strong. It is not uncommon for younger siblings to feel weaker than their older siblings due to no fault of the older sibling. If Dean were being held accountable for Sam's actions, the hunters would have been gunning for him and not Sam.

Here is the transcript from Fallen Idols.

Sam literally said that Dean had to let him grow up. I don't know any other way to interpret this as Sam saying Dean doesn't let him grow up. It's Sam's words. Not mine.

Quote

[snip]

DEAN stops and turns.

DEAN
What isn't?

SAM
Us. You, me, together, I—I thought it could, but it can't.

DEAN
You're the one that wanted back in, chief.

SAM
And you're the one who called me back in.

DEAN
I still think we got some trust building to do.

SAM
How long am I gonna be on double-secret probation?

DEAN shrugs.

DEAN
Till I say so.

SAM
Look. I know what I did. What I've done. And I am trying to climb out of that hole, I am, but you're not making it any easier.

DEAN
So what am I supposed to do, just let you off the hook?

SAM
No. You can think whatever you want. I deserve it, and worse. Hell, you'll never punish me as much as I'm punishing myself, but the point is, if we're gonna be a team, you and I—it has to be a two-way street.

DEAN
So we just go back to the way we were before?

SAM
No, because we were never that way before. Before didn't work.

DEAN frowns.

SAM
How do you think we got here?

DEAN
What's that supposed to mean?

SAM
Dean, one of the reasons I went off with Ruby...was to get away from you.

DEAN
What?

SAM
It made me feel strong. Like I wasn't your kid brother.

DEAN
Are you saying this is my fault?

SAM
No, it's my fault. All I'm saying is that, if we're gonna do this, we have to do it different, we can't just fall into the same rut.

DEAN shakes his head.

DEAN
What do you want me to do?

SAM
You're gonna have to let me grow up, for starters.

Reganne · July 2, 2017

24 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Here is the transcript from Fallen Idols.

Sam literally said that Dean had to let him grow up. I don't know any other way to interpret this as Sam saying Dean doesn't let him grow up. It's Sam's words. Not mine.

I missed that part, but I still don't see it as Sam saying it's all Dean's fault, as Sam literally claimed fault in that very scene. Said that No it wasnt Deans fault. I see it as him wanting to feel strong and not as just someone's younger brother. He doesn't seem to expect an apology from Dean or anything or for Dean to admit fault. He wants to work in hunting on equal footing.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Reganne

catrox14 · July 2, 2017

10 minutes ago, Reganne said:

I missed that part, but I still don't see it as Sam saying it's all Dean's fault, as Sam literally claimed fault in that very scene. Said that No it wasnt Deans fault. I see it as him wanting to feel strong and not as just someone's younger brother. He doesn't seem to expect an apology from Dean or anything or for Dean to admit fault. He wants to work in hunting on equal footing.

I wasn't saying that Sam said it was Dean's fault. That wasn't my argument.

I'm saying that at the end of s4 and the beginning of s5, that the narrative (the writing) is making Dean responsible via his choices WRT to his relationship with Sam in s4 and s5.

That is, IMO the reason Dean breaking the first seal isn't brought up really that much if again past s4, is that the "fault" with Dean was in his not being a good enough brother to Sam and not trusting Sam's judgment even though in s4 he had no good reason to do that.

IIRC, part of the defense from the writers with Dean not being Michael's Vessel at the end of s5, was that Dean needed to learn to trust his brother's choices and back Sam more and just love Sam better and be there for him, yet in s4 when Dean was trying to be there for Sam when Sam was 100% not okay, even if he didn't know exactly how to go about it, he was literally almost killed by Sam for that. I'm saying that Dean's choices are being framed as being much of the reason Sam did what he did and the way for Dean to atone for his role was to trust Sam and be there for Sam.

That's what I say is putting Dean in a double-bind. That's just how I see it. YMMV

ahrtee · July 2, 2017

1 hour ago, Reganne said:

I missed that part, but I still don't see it as Sam saying it's all Dean's fault, as Sam literally claimed fault in that very scene. Said that No it wasnt Deans fault. I see it as him wanting to feel strong and not as just someone's younger brother. He doesn't seem to expect an apology from Dean or anything or for Dean to admit fault. He wants to work in hunting on equal footing.

Sam never said it was *all* Dean's fault, but something to remember is that AFAIK, Sam didn't start drinking demon blood until *AFTER* Dean had died. Before that, he thought Ruby was trying to help him, but wasn't following her blindly; but the reason he said he trusted her so much after Dean died was that she talked to him the way Dean would have. In other words, she was a Dean substitute. As such, she told him what to do, who and how to hunt, and trained him, but in a way that made him feel like *he* was in charge. But (as he learned too late) it was all an illusion, and she was leading him the whole time. Once Dean was back, I can see Sam resenting being put back in "little brother" position, but that wasn't Dean's fault, and that was the point where he should have stood up and insisted on equality. But by going behind Dean's back and lying about it, IMO, he gave up his right to resent Dean for stepping back into his old familiar place. (And I'm speaking as a younger sister, who's been bossed by my older sister my whole life and who has finally come to some kind of understanding, with myself if not with her. )

As for Sam not expecting an apology, maybe he didn't, but he certainly didn't dismiss or argue with the one he got at the end of the episode (especially with Dean accepting his share of the responsibility and excusing Sam's):

DEAN: Hey, listen, I was thinking about what you said yesterday. About me keeping too tight of a leash on you.

SAM looks at him.

DEAN: Hell, maybe you're right. I mean, look, I'm not exactly Mister Innocent in this whole mess either, you know. I did break the first seal.

SAM: You didn't know.

DEAN: Yeah, well, neither did you.

SAM looks down.

DEAN: I'm not saying demon blood was a great way to go, but, you did kill Lilith.

SAM: And start the apocalypse.

DEAN: Which neither of us saw coming, I mean, who'd have thought killing Lilith would've been a bad thing?

DEAN pauses.

DEAN: Point is, I was so worried about watching your every move that I didn't see what it was actually doing to you.

DEAN pauses again.

DEAN: So, for that I'm sorry.

SAM: Thanks.

DEAN closes the trunk and takes the keys.

DEAN: So where do we go from here?

SAM: The way I see it, we got one shot at surviving this.

DEAN: What's that?

SAM: Maybe I am on deck for the devil, maybe same with you and Michael, maybe there's no changing that.

DEAN: Well that's encouraging.

SAM: But, we can stop wringing our hands over it. We gotta just grab onto whatever's in front of us, kick its ass, and go down fighting.

DEAN considers this, then nods.

DEAN: I can get on board with that.

SAM nods.

SAM: Okay. But we're gonna have to do it on the same level.

DEAN grins slightly.

DEAN: You got it.

So once again, Sam insists on his own way (and yes, to me, that is demanding, not asking). And again, that, to me, is Dean trying to make things right for Sam by ignoring his own issues. I understand YMMV.

RulerofallIsurvey · July 2, 2017

4 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

So in my opinion, if you question one instance, maybe the other should also question come into question? Otherwise it sounds more like wanting to see humility "redeemed" only when it's associated with the character who is not your favorite. And that's perfectly fine, but should be acknowledged for what it is rather than being called a failing of the narrative to properly redeem the character when it likely wouldn't matter since you don't like the character anyway.

I wish I could like this more than once.

3 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

Now you might compare Season 5 for Sam and Season 11 for Dean more easily as the "aftermath" of the dark story. However, the respective Finales weren`t equal in terms of scope and gravitas in their portrayal.

Sorry when it comes to such comparisms, I`m afraid I`m quite literal.

You want literal? How's this for literal then:

Sam overcame Lucifer.

Dean overcame Amara.

Amara was stronger than Lucifer. (Lucifer tried to kill her and couldn't.)

Amara was equal to GOD in strength. (Stop. Think about that. Really.)

Dean was present when Sam wrested control back from Lucifer. Without Dean, Sam wouldn't have been able to do it. (Not a disputable fact, imo.)

NO ONE was present when Dean went up against Amara.

Heck, GOD himself sent Dean ALONE to face off against his sister - who was equal in power to the creator of the world. (Lucifer was no where near that level of power.)

So yeah, you're right - the S5 finale is not equal in terms of scope and gravitas to the S11 finale. Because if you really consider who and what Dean had to face alone versus Sam, it's obvious that Dean overcame the greater threat and is therefore the bigger hero.

2 hours ago, catrox14 said:

Here is the transcript from Fallen Idols.

Sam literally said that Dean had to let him grow up. I don't know any other way to interpret this as Sam saying Dean doesn't let him grow up. It's Sam's words. Not mine.

I don't have a problem with what Sam said to Dean, because, in my experience, the older sibling can keep the younger one in a sort of 'stasis'. Like with colleagues' children who I don't see on a regular basis, I tend to still think of them as 5 years old like when I first me them, even though they are actually in junior high now. It happened with me. My oldest brother always treated me like a stupid 12 year old kid (which was how old I was when he went off to college) - even when I was a junior in college (in Electrical Engineering, no less) and he was in grad school. Then he came home with his girlfriend and I found out, quite accidentally, that she was actually a few months younger than me. I don't think he connected the dots with how he treated me versus how he treated her until I called him out on it. And the look on his face was "oh shit."

ahrtee · July 2, 2017

8 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Sam overcame Lucifer.

Dean overcame Amara.

Amara was stronger than Lucifer. (Lucifer tried to kill her and couldn't.)

Amara was equal to GOD in strength. (Stop. Think about that. Really.)

Just a question: When did Dean overcome Amara? She disarmed him as soon as he walked into the room (or whatever). He talked to her, and she *chose* to back down. That's not the same as Sam wresting control from Lucifer by sheer will (helped by Dean or not).

ETA: Oh, and Amara was already halfway convinced not to fight any more by Crazy Pigeon Lady even before Dean showed up. So facing her down alone might have been brave (and foolhardy) but was hardly equivalent.

Edited July 2, 2017 by ahrtee
Oh, and one more thing...

ahrtee · July 2, 2017

There's a lot to comment on in your post, so I might break it up into several posts. For now, I'll just comment on this one:

5 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I didn't see season 5 in the same way that you did. I didn't see Sam as being angry with Dean for not forgiving him right away, and for me he actually said multiple times that he understood that Dean had a right to be angry and put up with quite a few digs from Dean with little to no complaint. The exception maybe being some vagueness with the dialogue in "Fallen Idols," though I tend to side with DittyDotDot (?) on this one, in that I agree that the dynamic had to change, and Sam was already trying to do his part in following Dean's lead, now Dean had to stop pulling the "I'm the oldest, and you betrayed me" card when the job and people's lives could be in danger because of it. Once that was done, things got better, and Sam actually I thought became more open with Dean and admitted when he needed help. For example, for me there was no "self-righteousness" or "fake humbleness" in "Free to Be You and Me," "Sam, Interrupted" or "My Bloody Valentine." There was Sam admitting his flaws and owning them. Or "I Believe the Children..." or "The Song Remains the Same" or "Point of No Return" either.

IA that in most of the eps you mentioned, Sam and Dean were working together well, but honestly there wasn't any real "I'm in charge" bossiness in any of them. (In Free To Be, while Sam openly admitted what he'd done wrong, he said it to the girl at the bar, NOT to Dean. Similarly, in Sam Interrupted, Sam only said that he was "angry all the time," which is not really the same as "admitting his flaws and owning them." That's more like Dean admitting that he drinks too much--hardly a deep dark secret. ) And those comments about Dean having a right to be angry do tend to come across as fake humbleness to me, mostly because his actions tend to bely his words. Consider the very end of 5.1, with this scene:

SAM: Is there something you want to say to me?

A long pause.

DEAN: I tried, Sammy. I mean, I really tried. But I just can't keep pretending that everything's all right. Because it's not. And it's never going to be. You chose a demon over your own brother—

SAM rolls his eyes.

DEAN: —and look what happened.

SAM: I would give anything—anything—to take it all back.

DEAN: I know you would. And I know how sorry you are. I do. But, man...you were the one that I depended on the most. And you let me down in ways that I can't even...

DEAN pauses, struggling for words.

DEAN: I'm just—I'm having a hard time forgiving and forgetting here. You know?

SAM: What can I do?

DEAN: Honestly? Nothing.

SAM nods a little, looking down: this doesn't surprise him.

DEAN: I just don't...I don't think that we can ever be what we were. You know?

SAM nods again: this isn't a surprise either.

DEAN: I just don't think I can trust you.

That was the last scene of the episode, and IMO was pretty powerful and important--it was Dean expressing his feeling of betrayal and saying he needs time to get over it, and Sam acknowledges it. But by the very next episode, apparently just a few days later, judging by Bobby's condition, when they have to go out among demons and Dean indicates that he still doesn't really trust Sam around them, what does Sam do? HE GETS ANGRY. VERY angry.

SAM: No, wait. I'll go with you.

DEAN: Whoa, hold on. Can I talk to you for a second?

DEAN and SAM leave the room

DEAN: You're gonna go out there again?

SAM: Well, crap doesn't hit the fan with coffee breaks.

DEAN: I'll go.

SAM: It's fine. Just stay here, get 'em ready. I'll cover Ellen.

DEAN: Why's it got to be you?

SAM: Oh, that's right, I forgot. You think I'll take one look at a demon and suddenly fall off the wagon, as if, after everything, I haven't learned my lesson.

DEAN: Well, have you?

SAM slams DEAN into the wall. The door is still open; ELLEN looks over.

SAM: If you actually think I—

SAM cuts himself off. A long pause. SAM goes back in the room.

And then Sam stomps off and does what he wanted to, and Dean lets him go. And even War called him on it:

WAR: Oh, that's adorable, considering you're my poster boy.

SAM: What's that supposed to mean?

WAR: You can't stop thinking about it, ever since you saw it dripping off the blade of that knife.

SAM is breathing hard.

SAM: You're wrong.

WAR: Save your protests for your brother. I can see inside your head. And man, it is one-track city in there. Blood, blood, blood. Lust for power. Same as always. You want to be strong again. But not just strong. Stronger than everybody. Good intentions—quick slide to hell, buddy boy. You feel bad now? Wait till you're thigh deep in warm corpses. Because, my friend, I'm just getting started.

So while Sam does admit that he has a problem by the end of the episode and leaves because he says *he* needs time, I wouldn't say that's the same as Sam being patient and acknowledging Dean's right to mistrust. It wasn't until after Fallen Idols (when Dean apologized and agreed to Sam's terms) that they settled back into working together easily.

SueB · July 2, 2017

49 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

Just a question: When did Dean overcome Amara? She disarmed him as soon as he walked into the room (or whatever). He talked to her, and she *chose* to back down. That's not the same as Sam wresting control from Lucifer by sheer will (helped by Dean or not).

ETA: Oh, and Amara was already halfway convinced not to fight any more by Crazy Pigeon Lady even before Dean showed up. So facing her down alone might have been brave (and foolhardy) but was hardly equivalent.

Amara could "taste the power" radiating off Dean but she did not disarm him. God disarmed him after he and Amara reconciled.

ahrtee · July 2, 2017

1 minute ago, SueB said:

Amara could "taste the power" radiating off Dean but she did not disarm him. God disarmed him after he and Amara reconciled.

Oh, that's right. But she wasn't threatened by him in any way, and he definitely didn't "overcome" her.

catrox14 · July 2, 2017

17 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

I don't have a problem with what Sam said to Dean, because, in my experience, the older sibling can keep the younger one in a sort of 'stasis'.

That's not really entirely the fault of the older sibling. I'm the younger sibling to an incredibly controlling older sibling. I'm not helping myself by not pushing back when I think said sibling is out of line or doesn't treat me the way I think I should be treated. And it's hard to change those patterns. If I only ever waited until something traumatic was happening to push back on what I find troublesome then I shouldn't really be surprised when we both fall back into old patterns. Maybe it won't change anything but at least I have said my peace. If I feel like I'm being kept in that same place, then I have to be the one that broaches the issue. But I can't really compare my relationship with my siblings to Sam and Dean bacause I wasn't raised by an older sibling even slightly.

We had a dysfunctional two parent household until my high school days. We didn't get along and were more or less forced by circumstances to deal with each other in later years and that didn't heal anything. But IMO Sam and Dean have a much better relationship and they seem to actually mostly like each other until the narrative does not want that. LOL

IMO, if Sam felt that way about Dean all along he should have said so before the crisis hit. But IMO Sam didn't feel that way nor did his behaviors in the show support that he thought Dean never let him grow up. It was a plot contrivance IMO.

Sam didn't seem to have any trouble speaking his mind to Dean about himself, his life, his choices, and to Dean about Dean's life choices etc, when they reunited, so where did this notion that Dean didn't let Sam grow up even come from other than the narrative wanted it that way. Sam certainly wasn't under Dean's watchful eye the 3 years he and Dean didn't speak when Sam was at college. Dean told Sam in was right in Scarecrow and that he respected his decision to leave. He was encouraging Sam to pursue a relationship with Sarah which if Sam had wanted it, might have led to another potential separation if Sam didn't want to keep hunting. Dean seemed fine with it.

Sam did not have to believe or trust Ruby, but he chose that instead of sticking with Bobby. Yes Sam was devastated and crushed at Dean's death and trip to Hell., so I am not all surprised that he went on a huge drinking binge and made some bad choices because that was honestly the first time Sam was truly on his own.

Before he went to college he had John, Dean and even a Zanna when he needed it. Then at college he had friends and Jessica. After Jessica died, he had Dean again, and the hope of finding John. He made more friends with Bobby, Ellen, Jo. But in s4 Bobby didn't matter to Sam as much as Ruby.

IMO, Ruby already had her claws into Sam so I really think there was little Dean could have done to alter Sam's choices even from the jump in s4. Dean was dealing with his own Hell trauma. So maybe Dean became more difficult, moody, edgy, easy to anger, jugmental and less patient with Sam's choices. PTSD and all that and Sam read that as "not letting him grow up" which Okay, writers, I don't think that is what "not letting someone grow up" means. YMMV

Reganne · July 2, 2017

1 hour ago, ahrtee said:

Sam never said it was *all* Dean's fault, but something to remember is that AFAIK, Sam didn't start drinking demon blood until *AFTER* Dean had died. Before that, he thought Ruby was trying to help him, but wasn't following her blindly; but the reason he said he trusted her so much after Dean died was that she talked to him the way Dean would have. In other words, she was a Dean substitute. As such, she told him what to do, who and how to hunt, and trained him, but in a way that made him feel like *he* was in charge. But (as he learned too late) it was all an illusion, and she was leading him the whole time. Once Dean was back, I can see Sam resenting being put back in "little brother" position, but that wasn't Dean's fault, and that was the point where he should have stood up and insisted on equality. But by going behind Dean's back and lying about it, IMO, he gave up his right to resent Dean for stepping back into his old familiar place. (And I'm speaking as a younger sister, who's been bossed by my older sister my whole life and who has finally come to some kind of understanding.

So once again, Sam insists on his own way (and yes, to me, that is demanding, not asking). And again, that, to me, is Dean trying to make things right for Sam by ignoring his own issues. I understand YMMV.

See I don't see it as Sam insisting on it being his own way but more of an equal share sort of way. Being on equal footing isn't having it one brothers way. It's both. I don't blame Sam for wanting to feel like he's on the same level as Dean. IMO I don't think he resents Dean for it. He was calm and collected while speaking about the issue. He just wants to be able to be on equal footing on the job.

catrox14 · July 2, 2017

28 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

Oh, that's right. But she wasn't threatened by him in any way, and he definitely didn't "overcome" her.

Yeah, I don't think Dean overcame her per se. He was improvising like he always does once he saw that she was not as mad as she had been, which was started with the conversation she had with the Pigeon Lady. I think the most Dean really "challenged" her on was "What do you want!" which made her really consider her emotions.

AwesomO4000 · July 2, 2017

11 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

While I liked the storyline of Dean and the MOC, that was actually more akin to the darkside story Sam had in Season 4. So Dean killing Abaddon was a neat episode but it wasn`t portrayed as a super-big hero moment. And IMO Abaddon wasn`t portrayed as a credible enough threat to the world.

Meanwhile Dean served as a distraction in the Season 9 Finale but he got owned badly by the tablet-powered Metatron. If that was a "win"-moment, we have very different definitions for that. Certainly nothing like 5.22.

So, I don`t see a comparable win for the hubris. And then the MOC got taken away pretty much without Dean`s doing so that story in itself ended without yielding the big flashy sparkles moment I would need to compare those two storylines and say Dean got the better deal. Not when Dean`s part is missing the most important thing in my eyes.

Now you might compare Season 5 for Sam and Season 11 for Dean more easily as the "aftermath" of the dark story. However, the respective Finales weren`t equal in terms of scope and gravitas in their portrayal.

Sorry when it comes to such comparisms, I`m afraid I`m quite literal.

In my post I said "In that regard," because I was focusing on the declaring themselves "the one" part. But taking into account your point that Sam's win was bigger, I would counter that Sam's "losses" before his win were also bigger. I did not compare Dean's season 9 so much to Sam's season 4, because, for me, the consequence of Kevin's death was not equivalent to Sam's consequences for causing Lucifer. Not even close. Unlike Sam later in season 5, Dean never acknowledged being wrong for the Gadreel situation or for taking on the mark of Cain, and in both cases Dean didn't have to, because the narrative didn't show him as really all that wrong in the end. Gadreel was "good" and the mark was necessary for killing Abbadon. So, Dean said that taking on the mark of Cain was necessary for defeating Abaddon and that he was therefore right to do so even though he didn't think it through, and Dean was right and even Sam had to tell him he was right. So where was the big world-threatening consequence for Dean's hubris that Sam got when he raised Lucifer? There wasn't one. So Dean got a win - actually two wins, since Sam also had to basically admit that Dean was right about the Gadreel situation - and the only consequence appeared to be Kevin's death, and Dean going a little aggro until Sam was saddled with the negative consequences alter on. So in Dean's case, it was almost all "win" and no "loss" or admission of wrong doing.

Season 10 was a repeat of a Sam "loss" while Dean gets a "win"... Now Sam saves Dean against his wishes, but in Sam's case, he gets punished narratively and takes all of the negative consequences for what went wrong with the mark by starting another apocalypse . Dean does something else which might be considered hubris - he kills Death - and... nothing happens. No negative consequences at all, and in fact he gets another win when the reaper supposedly pissed off that Dean killed Death actually helps them save the world. No having to admit that might've been a mistake either.

So my main question is why should Sam be given even more of a slap down for his hubris in season 4 when Dean hardly even gets a first slap down, not once but multiple times? To me it's more fair that Sam didn't get that in season 5 after his loss at the end of season 4, since Dean basically got a free pass for multiple potentially arrogant decisions for 2+ seasons later on.

* With the one exception, as I said, being the decision to make the deal.

Quote

He was never my favourite character and there were instances he annoyed me - mainly the displays of snobby superiority - in Seasons 1-3 but I actually didn`t have an overall problem with him until the Season 5 fiasko. That`s what turned me off. So, a proper redemption (proper in my eyes, that is) would have worked. During Season 4 when things got really bad, I actually expected them to do it. I was looking forward to it because I figured that was the point of Season 4.

For me an episode like the Siren one epitomizes that. In Season 4 when I watched it, I thought "wow, you are in for an epic humbling, can`t wait" - and to be clear, I felt the same way during lots of comic book origin movies because that is the formula and I really like those characters. And I thought the show wanted me to feel that just as those movies wanted me to feel exactly that during those early parts of the movie. They actually work on making you root against the character at first so the story can work in making you root for them later.

I don't understand the reasoning here myself. Sam did get an epic humbling when he found out that he raised Lucifer and Ruby humiliatingly called him a dumbass and pointed out exactly how he was a dumbass. And then Sam had to admit that he was wrong, get chewed out by his brother, and work his way back into Dean's trust for most of a season. And again, I compare this to Dean in season 9 where he took on the mark of Cain and declared himself "the one" and then he was "the one." Where was Dean's "humbling" and why wouldn't one also be appropriate for him? This was my point. That Dean didn't get one, because he got to be right instead. So why should Dean's wins also be as big as Sam's when he didn't have to go through the humiliation of starting an apocalypse or having to admit he's wrong first?

That you wanted even more "humbling" for Sam than raising Lucifer and the resulting aftermath seems to me to be more because you don't like him as much as Dean and so his arrogance is somehow much less acceptable than Dean's arrogance and so somehow deserves more punishment. In my opinion, arrogance is arrogance, and both Sam and Dean have it, and for the most part, both Sam and Dean need it, or they wouldn't be able to do their job. That's just my opinion on that.

Quote

Then Season 5 happened and I realized I had been wrong. The show never meant for me to think or feel that during the Siren ep. It meant for me to go "right on, you truly are stronger, smarter and better than that loser, he finally realized it, too". Since that was never gonna happen, it retroactively changed my perspective on Season 4, feeling like I wasted my time expecting something that would obviously never come.

I also don't get this reasoning either. If the show wanted me to see what Sam said as right, then shouldn't Sam killing Lilith have actually been the right thing to do in that it actually stopped the apocalypse? If that happened then I would agree with you. I'm fairly consistent in this. I see results and consequences as the "rewards" for actions. Sam was arrogant and said Dean was weak... and was proven wrong when his actions instead raised Lucifer. I'm really not getting how that equals Sam being right unless I'm missing something. Contrast that with Dean saying he was right about Gadreel and about taking on the mark of Cain and that Sam was wrong... and Sam was wrong and Gadreel did help, and Dean did kill Abbadon, and so I'm more likely to see that as the show was saying Dean was right / rewarding him than not.

Quote

And granted, it happened with both Sam and Dean. With both characters they totally duped me in Season 4. After Season 5, I felt like a complete fool ever getting excited for Dean supposedly getting to be more than a sidekick and for Sam to have redemption.

Dead horse, but Dean was not a sidekick in season 2. Dean was the only brother to have any roll in killing the YED. Period. And that death was a big and iconic moment. I know, because I saw it happen. Pretending it didn't happen or that it wasn't significant doesn't make it so. And if the argument is solely that Dean had help, well Sam didn't do anything really, so there you go.

Quote

Nowadays I can`t even believe in the first anymore. Even if a story materializes I always expect it to be taken away.

And how many times has this been hypothesized in the last few seasons and it doesn't happen? Sam didn't save Dean in season 9. He didn't kill Abbadon. He didn't take on the mark of Cain. He didn't resolve the Amara storyline.

I was going to comment in more detail on your last part, but decided it wasn't worth it. Sam gets one myth-arc related, semi-heroic scene in the past 4 seasons that doesn't include him getting tortured or somehow screwing it up in the end, and even then it's somewhat badly written, and somehow it's too good for him to even have that. I give up.

11 hours ago, catrox14 said:

The boo hoo princess speech from Bobby, IMO, was supposed to be seen as "correct" and that Dean was being a selfish asshole and a whiny brat for not calling Sam because "his feelings got hurt" after Sam nearly literally murdered Dean. To this day, I don't know if Bobby knew that or not but the show didn't make it clear. Given that speech ended with Bobby saying Dean was a better man than John and he was acting like John that meant Dean was totally in the wrong, and Bobby was right, thus the sympathy shifts to Sam because Bobby's POV shifted.

At any rate, the end result is that Dean was shamed (and IMO not rightfully so) into calling Sam and apologizing. But it was too late and Dean couldn't get there in time to stop Sam. IMO, the message I got was that it wasn't Dean breaking the first seal that really started the Apocalpyse but because Dean wasn't there for Sam to stop Sam from letting Lucifer out of the cage. That is where the fault lies with Dean. (And boy do I hate that narrative for so many reasons).

But I don't think that's what really happened. Dean did try to go to stop Sam, gamely putting his understandable anger aside, and he would have been able to try and stop Sam, too... except the angels - including Castiel - nabbed Dean before he could do so. How could that be Dean's fault? It was obviously, in my opinion, the angels' fault - just the way they planned it. Dean was never going to get to that church in time, and I think the show was fairly clear about that. Everything Dean did, the angels countered. Locking Sam in the panic room - Castiel let him out. Going to the church to stop Sam - the angels put Dean in the green room. Calling Sam to apologize - the angels changed the message. I always thought that the show was extremely clear that the angels were manipulating things all along and they were never going to let Dean save Sam. Full stop, wasn't happening. As Castiel told Dean earlier... it was "fate." Except he neglected to tell Dean that "fate" = us (as in the angels) manipulating your assess nine ways from Sunday.

So I don't see the narrative showing it as Dean's fault at all in the same way you do. However, the writers later sadly didn't stress enough that the angels shared a lot of the blame, even Castiel who got to deflect and deny his involvement.

Quote

Again in S5, Dean is still being held responsible for Sam's decisions in the narrative even when Sam said he went with Ruby because Dean wouldn't let him go and didn't let him grow up. So Dean is being held responsible for Sam's behaviors and choices when he's both there for him and not there for him.

I don't interpret it this way though. Yes, Sam said he went with Ruby to feel strong, and yes he said Dean needed to let him grow up... but those two things were not related. One referred to Sam's original reasons for listening to Ruby and the second one referred to them "working" - as in "we were never that way before." The two things were entirely different things. Dean was putting them together, but Sam was not. Which is why Sam said that Dean could be angry with him - the Ruby part - but otherwise Dean needed to let Sam "grow up" - the working relationship part. The growing up part had nothing to do with Ruby. That was the "strong" part which is different in my opinion.

Quote

IMO, Dean is in a constant double bind and catch-22 in the narrative when it comes to Sam.

I don't really see this so much myself, but even if it is true, it's not too different from: Sam doesn't save Dean and it's wrong, but Sam does save Dean and it's still wrong... and starts an apocalypse. Actually, I think that catch 22 might be a little worse.

9 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

Of course there would have been other ways to write themselves out of the situation but then that wouldn`t have been a Dean-bashing opportunity. And maybe not the "wet dream of a storyline" for Sam that Jared talked about in interviews.

If by "wet dream of a storyline" you mean that Sam gets turned into a pissy jerk who has to admit he's wrong - twice - is left out of all of the action, doesn't save Dean, and gets turned into a hypocrite, then yeah. Personally I can't imagine that Jared, if he knew what season 9's story arc was going to evolve into, would still have considered it to be a "wet dream of a storyline." I mean, yeah, it started out fairly good with emotionally impactfull stuff and potentially exploring how Sam felt about Gadreel taking over his body without his consent, but it ended up with "well, he didn't mean to hurt me," "he's our 'real friend'," and Sam being a useless hypocrite who got (apparently rightfully) bossed around by Dean. And the "Dean-bashing" ended up being more of a "Dean is right and is vindicated" situation more than anything else if you ask me. He wasn't even wrong about Gadreel in the end.

Edited July 2, 2017 by AwesomO4000

AwesomO4000 · July 2, 2017

5 hours ago, ahrtee said:

There's a lot to comment on in your post, so I might break it up into several posts. For now, I'll just comment on this one:

IA that in most of the eps you mentioned, Sam and Dean were working together well, but honestly there wasn't any real "I'm in charge" bossiness in any of them. (In Free To Be, while Sam openly admitted what he'd done wrong, he said it to the girl at the bar, NOT to Dean. Similarly, in Sam Interrupted, Sam only said that he was "angry all the time," which is not really the same as "admitting his flaws and owning them." That's more like Dean admitting that he drinks too much--hardly a deep dark secret. ) And those comments about Dean having a right to be angry do tend to come across as fake humbleness to me, mostly because his actions tend to bely his words. Consider the very end of 5.1, with this scene:

So while Sam does admit that he has a problem by the end of the episode and leaves because he says *he* needs time, I wouldn't say that's the same as Sam being patient and acknowledging Dean's right to mistrust. It wasn't until after Fallen Idols (when Dean apologized and agreed to Sam's terms) that they settled back into working together easily.

I agree with you that Sam was angry with Dean in the second episode and that it was a momentary lapse in his saying that he understood Dean being angry, but I think part of that was Sam's addiction getting to him. I think he was partially angry at himself... not that that made it right that he blew up at Dean. However I disagree that Sam continued that trend. He actually put up with multiple digs from Dean and accepted them as his due. And he was even putting up with a lot in "Fallen Idols" until Dean unilaterally decided that the case was over when Sam still thought there was a threat. Dean shrugged Sam's concerns off and refused to listen to Sam's rather valid reasoning... mostly because he was angry at Sam. That was when Sam objected and complained, because he thought people were at risk if they left early because Dean said so and declared "You ain't steering this boat. Let's go, chop chop." That was when Sam said that things weren't working in the current iteration. And even though there working condition did improve, Sam continued to put up with Dean's digs without much complaint and didn't deny Dean's right to be angry. The end of "The End" was a good example. Sam seemed truly grateful that Dean was giving him another chance.

As for "Sam, Interrupted," as in "Good God, Y'All" Sam did admit the problem was him:

Quote

Sam: Most of the time, I can hide it, but...I am angry. I'm mad at everything. I used to be mad at you and Dad, then Lilith, now it's Lucifer, and I make excuses. I blame Ruby or the demon blood, but it's not their fault. It's not them. It's me. It's inside me. I'm mad...all the time...and I don't know why.

And disagree that there wasn't any bossiness in at least one of the episodes I mentioned: "Point of No Return," because Dean was quite a bit about the bossiness in that one. However, in that case, Castiel and Bobby weren't having it either for their own reasons, so Sam had some help. But still in the end, Sam let Dean make his own choice and deferred to Dean to make his own decision on whether or not he would trust in Sam again, even going against Bobby and Castiel's wishes to do so.

Sam also didn't get angry with Dean in "Dark Side of the Moon." In my opinion, Sam felt genuine regret that the memories being shown made Dean unhappy and distrusting of Dean, and Sam tried to reassure Dean, but didn't get angry with Dean for not believing in him. Even when Dean threw away the amulet, Sam seemed to just accepted it as something he deserved.

So I guess that I didn't see the same "fake humbleness" that you did. I saw honest regret and Sam trying. So we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

Aeryn13 · July 2, 2017

Quote

So yeah, you're right - the S5 finale is not equal in terms of scope and gravitas to the S11 finale. Because if you really consider who and what Dean had to face alone versus Sam, it's obvious that Dean overcame the greater threat and is therefore the bigger hero.

If Dean had actually physically/spiritiually overcome possession by Amara while falling Jesus-pose into a CGI-hole in a visual repressentation of saving the world, sure. Then it would be without a doubt the bigger visual win. As it was onscreen, not so much.

Quote

But taking into account your point that Sam's win was bigger, I would counter that Sam's "losses" before his win were also bigger. I did not compare Dean's season 9 so much to Sam's season 4, because, for me, the consequence of Kevin's death was not equivalent to Sam's consequences for causing Lucifer.

I know it`s different for you but I don`t care so much about the scale of the losses on the way. Characters screwing up and it spiraling into madness and mayhem is a given of a story for me, especially a dark story. So when that not happens to Dean so much, I don`t see it as a narrative boon, I see it as the writers not being interested enough in him to write real, fleshed-out stories that way.

That nothing happened when Dean killed Death for example? Shit writing. I would have WANTED something big to come from it.

Conversely, I don`t think it means they hate Sam but that they write proper stories for him.

In the same way, I wouldn`t have minded if much bigger things, losses, came from Dean taking the MOC. Would only have made him more important in the story. If he had then gotten the super big flashy hero-moment (and flashier than the Season 11 Finale, I mean), it would have redeemed any big losses before any way. That`s how those stories work for me.

So what you see as positives for Dean/negatives for Dean in your comparism are the opposite for me.

Quote

Where was Dean's "humbling" and why wouldn't one also be appropriate for him? This was my point. That Dean didn't get one, because he got to be right instead.

Dean taking on the MOC and killing Abaddon with it is the same as Sam drinking demon blood and killing Lilith with it. Both were right about their ability to do what they did with the means they had chosen.

Now I agree the consequences are not the same because Abaddon was never heard from again. But that kill was mid-Season whereas the other was in the Finale. One was the Seasonal villain and the point of the plot that year whereas the other was a recurring villain who didn`t play that role at all. In short, the story Sam had was just more important, that`s why it had consequences.

So why didn`t Dean get that moment you were looking for? He wasn`t important enough to the writers, that`s why. Him being beaten by Metatron and being turned into a demon could have been that moment. But again, he wasn`t important enough to do something with it.

IMO it`s not because he is protected or catered to or something, it is because he is not considered as much of a lead character. Which does make me angry anc bitter.

The things that appear to make you angry for happening to Sam, the story consequences for his actions, they make me angry for NOT happening to Dean.

Quote

I don't understand the reasoning here myself. Sam did get an epic humbling when he found out that he raised Lucifer and Ruby humiliatingly called him a dumbass and pointed out exactly how he was a dumbass.

In Season 4, yes. But my point was: Season 5 retconned that. In the new lol-canon of Season 5 Sam wasn`t acting out of hubris in Season 4 but because Dean was bossy and unsupportive. And only when he learned his lesson and accepted his place as Sam`s lowly cheerleader than Sam could truly be the one to defeat Lucifer.

So, in the end Sam wasn`t arrogant because he truly was the one and only Chosen One and Dean truly was weak because all he could do in the end was drive a car and kneel on the ground, gazing in awe at Sam. Others may consider that strong, I do not.

Quote

That you wanted even more "humbling" for Sam than raising Lucifer and the resulting aftermath seems to me to be more because you don't like him as much as Dean and so his arrogance is somehow much less acceptable than Dean's arrogance and so somehow deserves more punishment.

Admittedly, it is and has been my main problem with the character for all 12 Seasons of the show. So in that regard, it is less acceptable to me but during Season 4 I actually believed they were working on it. Evidently, not so much. But to be fair, it is a problem with the line readings in conjunction with the writing for me so that`s most likely never gonna change.

Dean does have arrogance but that`s not the main problem of the character for me. It`s actually something far worse in my eyes. It`s the patheticness that comes out in regards to family. Drives me up walls. But again, also not likely to change. In these late years only ignoring the hell out of it helps me keep my sanity.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Aeryn13

ILoveReading · July 2, 2017

The problem with the writing is that when there is riff in the brothers relationship, regardless of who did what I find the show puts the burden on Dean. That it's Dean that has to change his behavior. That's Sam's errors were were the result of other people not accepting what he was doing.

So Sam can say it's his fault all he wants, but IMO, he still but the blame for his actions on Dean. Even if he didn't say the words, you"re bossy but the implication in that scene is clear. That everything would have been okay if only Dean had treated Sam like a an adult. In a well written show Dean would have been allowed to point out that he did just that. He gave Ruby multiple chances. He thanked her twice. He agreed to work with her (Heaven and Hell), and he did let Sam make his own decisions. In Death takes a Holiday Dean tells Sam to keep his secrets just stop lying.

By not allowing Dean to point that out and just have him accept Sam's terms and say Dean and Dean alone needs to change,it leaves the impression that Dean is the one in the wrong. Kripke even said that Dean had to learn to love Sam more and accept his cool powers. They even pulled the "Lucifer drinks demon blood" out of thin air to make Dean wrong about objecting to that.

So its why I feel like the show completely whitewashed Sam in s5 for his actions in s4.

The problem is that what Sam had with Ruby was an illusion of power. She was the puppet master who pulled Sam's strings 6 ways til Sunday. She was far more controlling then Dean ever was. So to say that Ruby made him feel not like Dean's kid brother shows he didn't learn a thing. Sam wasn't powerful when he was with Ruby. He's was weaker than he's ever been at any time up to that point.

I'm not saying Dean handled the situation perfectly, there were thing he could have handled better but IMO, overall Sam made his own decisions when it came to Ruby. Dean's objections weren't based on treating Sam like a child, his objections were based on not trusting Ruby. They were reasonable It's something I find the show relies on to much. They just say Dean needs to learn to let go and not treat Sam like a kid, even during situations were objecting to Sam's behavior is reasonable. Like Sam's hallucinations, you don't trust someone under those circumstances, or when Sam was suffering from trialburculosis and was too weak to stand. Sorry Sam you do need a chaperone in those circumstances.

Never was this trope more evident that this season. Every single member of Dean's inner circle lied and betrayed him. Yet, it was Dean who did all the apologizing and compromising and adjusting his behavior.

DeeDee79 · July 2, 2017

17 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

The problem with the writing is that when there is riff in the brothers relationship, regardless of who did what I find the show puts the burden on Dean. That it's Dean that has to change his behavior. That's Sam's errors were were the result of other people not accepting what he was doing.

So Sam can say it's his fault all he wants, but IMO, he still but the blame for his actions on Dean. Even if he didn't say the words, you"re bossy but the implication in that scene is clear. That everything would have been okay if only Dean had treated Sam like a an adult. In a well written show Dean would have been allowed to point out that he did just that. He gave Ruby multiple chances. He thanked her twice. He agreed to work with her (Heaven and Hell), and he did let Sam make his own decisions. In Death takes a Holiday Dean tells Sam to keep his secrets just stop lying.

By not allowing Dean to point that out and just have him accept Sam's terms and say Dean and Dean alone needs to change,it leaves the impression that Dean is the one in the wrong. Kripke even said that Dean had to learn to love Sam more and accept his cool powers. They even pulled the "Lucifer drinks demon blood" out of thin air to make Dean wrong about objecting to that.

So its why I feel like the show completely whitewashed Sam in s5 for his actions in s4.

The problem is that what Sam had with Ruby was an illusion of power. She was the puppet master who pulled Sam's strings 6 ways til Sunday. She was far more controlling then Dean ever was. So to say that Ruby made him feel not like Dean's kid brother shows he didn't learn a thing. Sam wasn't powerful when he was with Ruby. He's was weaker than he's ever been at any time up to that point.

I'm not saying Dean handled the situation perfectly, there were thing he could have handled better but IMO, overall Sam made his own decisions when it came to Ruby. Dean's objections weren't based on treating Sam like a child, his objections were based on not trusting Ruby. They were reasonable It's something I find the show relies on to much. They just say Dean needs to learn to let go and not treat Sam like a kid, even during situations were objecting to Sam's behavior is reasonable. Like Sam's hallucinations, you don't trust someone under those circumstances, or when Sam was suffering from trialburculosis and was too weak to stand. Sorry Sam you do need a chaperone in those circumstances.

Never was this trope more evident that this season. Every single member of Dean's inner circle lied and betrayed him. Yet, it was Dean who did all the apologizing and compromising and adjusting his behavior.

I wish that it was possible to like this post multiple times.

Reganne · July 2, 2017

26 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

The problem with the writing is that when there is riff in the brothers relationship, regardless of who did what I find the show puts the burden on Dean. That it's Dean that has to change his behavior. That's Sam's errors were were the result of other people not accepting what he was doing.

So Sam can say it's his fault all he wants, but IMO, he still but the blame for his actions on Dean. Even if he didn't say the words, you"re bossy but the implication in that scene is clear. That everything would have been okay if only Dean had treated Sam like a an adult. In a well written show Dean would have been allowed to point out that he did just that. He gave Ruby multiple chances. He thanked her twice. He agreed to work with her (Heaven and Hell), and he did let Sam make his own decisions. In Death takes a Holiday Dean tells Sam to keep his secrets just stop lying.

By not allowing Dean to point that out and just have him accept Sam's terms and say Dean and Dean alone needs to change,it leaves the impression that Dean is the one in the wrong. Kripke even said that Dean had to learn to love Sam more and accept his cool powers. They even pulled the "Lucifer drinks demon blood" out of thin air to make Dean wrong about objecting to that.

So its why I feel like the show completely whitewashed Sam in s5 for his actions in s4.

The problem is that what Sam had with Ruby was an illusion of power. She was the puppet master who pulled Sam's strings 6 ways til Sunday. She was far more controlling then Dean ever was. So to say that Ruby made him feel not like Dean's kid brother shows he didn't learn a thing. Sam wasn't powerful when he was with Ruby. He's was weaker than he's ever been at any time up to that point.

I'm not saying Dean handled the situation perfectly, there were thing he could have handled better but IMO, overall Sam made his own decisions when it came to Ruby. Dean's objections weren't based on treating Sam like a child, his objections were based on not trusting Ruby. They were reasonable It's something I find the show relies on to much. They just say Dean needs to learn to let go and not treat Sam like a kid, even during situations were objecting to Sam's behavior is reasonable. Like Sam's hallucinations, you don't trust someone under those circumstances, or when Sam was suffering from trialburculosis and was too weak to stand. Sorry Sam you do need a chaperone in those circumstances.

Never was this trope more evident that this season. Every single member of Dean's inner circle lied and betrayed him. Yet, it was Dean who did all the apologizing and compromising and adjusting his behavior.

I don't see it as having to have Dean alone making a change. I see it as Sam wanting to be on equal footing with Dean in their work, which IMO is understandable. As it was already pointed out by Awesom0400, Sam believed in fallen idols that there was more to the case and they could potentially be putting other's lives in danger if they left simply because Dean wouldn't listen to Sam or treat him as an equal partner. I had never thought of it that way before, but it's true. It's not just simply Dean having to change his behaviour. Anyone would want to be treated on equal footing on a job especially if the result of not doing that could potentially put others lives in danger. There was more at stake here. If Dean wasn't ready to share equal footing with Sam on the job and take what he has to say into consideration, he shouldn't have let him hunt with him. The job doesn't work well with only one member of the duo calling the shots.

To me, the fact that Sam's powers led to nothing good in the series only reinforces that Dean was right to not accept Sam's powers regardless of what Kripke has said. The narrative in the show doesn't follow that idea in the slightest. It actually reinforces the opposite idea. Sam's powers were bad because they directly led to the apocalypse. Even Chuck/God himself told Sam drinking demon blood was wrong. I don't see how Lucifer drinking demon blood makes Dean wrong for objecting to that.... so I'm not understanding what you're trying to say there.

ILoveReading · July 2, 2017

25 minutes ago, Reganne said:

I don't see it as having to have Dean alone making a change. I see it as Sam wanting to be on equal footing with Dean in their work, which IMO is understandable. As it was already pointed out by Awesom0400, Sam believed in fallen idols that there was more to the case and they could potentially be putting other's lives in danger if they left simply because Dean wouldn't listen to Sam or treat him as an equal partner. I had never thought of it that way before, but it's true. It's not just simply Dean having to change his behaviour. Anyone would want to be treated on equal footing on a job especially if the result of not doing that could potentially put others lives in danger. There was more at stake here. If Dean wasn't ready to share equal footing with Sam on the job and take what he has to say into consideration, he shouldn't have let him hunt with him. The job doesn't work well with only one member of the duo calling the shots.

To me, the fact that Sam's powers led to nothing good in the series only reinforces that Dean was right to not accept Sam's powers regardless of what Kripke has said. The narrative in the show doesn't follow that idea in the slightest. It actually reinforces the opposite idea. Sam's powers were bad because they directly led to the apocalypse. Even Chuck/God himself told Sam drinking demon blood was wrong. I don't see how Lucifer drinking demon blood makes Dean wrong for objecting to that.... so I'm not understanding what you're trying to say there.

But with regards to Ruby, Dean did treat Sam like an equal. Other than the first ep where he said, no the older brother is back (paraphrasing). But despite that Sam still left Dean alone on his very first night back from hell, so it's not like Sam was listening to Dean anyway.

All the way back in to s2 when Ruby first showed up, Sam told Dean he wanted to use her. So literally from the moment they met Sam showed a willingness to work with her. Despite misgivings, Dean followed Sam's lead with regards to her multiple times. Plus, he called Dean weak during Sex and Violence, he followed that up with telling Ruby Dean wasn't strong enough to take on Alaistair in OTHOAP, and again called Dean weak in WTLB. Sam was full of arrogance and hubris. He believed he was stronger, smarter faster and better than his brother.

So how did Dean make Sam feel like a kid brother when Sam spent entire season thinking he was superior to Dean? It makes no sense as the reason he gave to Dean as to why he was with Ruby. It's contradictory and the reason it comes across as blame shifting. Sam needed to acknowledge that he was not in control at all with regards to Ruby. As I said it was all an illusion.

While, Dean may not let Sam die, I've always felt more often than not Sam treated Dean as an equal partner on a hunt. He didn't shy away from letting Sam do dangerous things. And in the Benders when asked to choose, Dean picked Sam. Because he knew that Sam had the better chance. I've never felt that Dean doesn't think Sam isn't a capable hunter.

It's also not on Dean to let Sam do anything. He's a grown man who made his own decision regarding Ruby. He's not 12. So yet another reason why I feel like Sam was blame shifting.

What I felt from Sam the most toward Dean in s4 was resentment. It's almost like Sam resented Dean coming back and questioning what Sam was doing.

As for Fallen Idol's Sam hadn't demonstrated that he could be trusted yet. He did nothing to really earn it by that point and seemed almost put out that Dean didn't immeditely give it. Then the show turned it on Dean and said that Dean had to treat Sam like an adult. But during s4 he did.

As for Sam's powers, what I mean is that they invented a reason to justify Ruby feeding Sam demon blood. Lucifer needing it was never mentioned before or after it. The show made a point to say that Ruby only did it to get Sam ready to house Lucifer. So he could be strong enough. They they made Dean stand by while Sam drained 4 bodies and drank the blood. IMO, it sent a message that Dean was wrong to object to Sam's demon blood drinking because it gave Sam these cool powers.

Edited July 2, 2017 by ILoveReading

catrox14 · July 2, 2017

1 hour ago, ILoveReading said:

or when Sam was suffering from trialburculosis and was too weak to stand.

Oh my gods. That is hilarious. No joke, I literally burst out laughing at this. My gods. This is the best description of his trial illness I've ever read. Henceforth, this will be what I use. I will give you credit though. God, that's funny!

ILoveReading · July 2, 2017

1 minute ago, catrox14 said:

Oh my gods. That is hilarious. No joke, I literally burst out laughing at this. My gods. This is the best description of his trial illness I've ever read. Henceforth, this will be what I use. I will give you credit though. God, that's funny!

It wasn't me that came up with it. It was Snow Leopard on the old IMDB forums.

Aeryn13 · July 2, 2017

In Fallen Idols they made Dean act like John which is not his usual modus operandi, he does listen to Sam`s contributions usually and they work together equally to faciliate a narrative in which Dean had always acted like in this episode. Season 4 included. So of course Sam was right to finally strain against this consistent string of Dean being bossy and unreasonably. And how Sam had never ever gotten his way before until Ruby came along.

Coupled that with Dean being giving NO argument to call bullshit on that narrative, not pointing out how he did try with Ruby multiple times, the blame-shifting was clear to me.

When it suited the show, Dean was "weak and inferior" in Season 4 and then when it suited them to claim he was instead ultra-bossy and controlling during Season 5, they said just that. It didn`t matter anymore what actually happened in Season 4, only what Season 5 claimed happened.

Just like the plot point of Michael/Lucifer was older/younger brother in Season 5 and guess what, now the dreadful duo canonically claim Lucifer the older brother. The show does what it wants with its own canon.

Kripke wanted the message to be how Dean had to learn to love and support his brother more. So obviously Dean was at fault for not doing that previously. Sam was just a victim of him who was held back from saving the world. And once Dean learned his lesson, Sam could fulfill his true destiny.

I said before that I don`t think it is a coincidence that Kripke himself is a younger brother. So while I find the above message horrible, I didn`t find it surprising.

Quote

Never was this trope more evident that this season. Every single member of Dean's inner circle lied and betrayed him. Yet, it was Dean who did all the apologizing and compromising and adjusting his behavior.

Well, of course. Because the other people have the right to treat him however the hell they want and only he is in the wrong if he doesn`t react to their liking. That`s basically the show.

I know I was supposed to be rooting against the BMOL for what they did to Mary but all I could think was: finally someone who doesn`t cater to her whims.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Aeryn13

RulerofallIsurvey · July 2, 2017

10 hours ago, catrox14 said:

That's not really entirely the fault of the older sibling.

In this case (in my example) I disagree. It was entirely the fault of the older sibling. I grew up, mostly in my brother's absence. Just as my colleagues' children have grown up without my seeing it every day. And yet in my mind, they are still those 5 year olds they were when I first met them. In Dean's eye, in many ways, Sam was still that rash 17-18 year old who stormed out of the house and went to Stanford, or the 12 year old who ran off for two weeks. You essentially said so yourself: Sam grew up at Stanford without Dean. Sam changed during all those months of Mystery Spot when Dean was 'dead'. Sam changed during the time Dean was in Hell. (Not arguing that the way Sam changed during that time was not entirely a bad thing.)

But in Dean's mind, Sam hadn't changed at all and therefore their relationship didn't need to change. As you also noted, Sam didn't have any trouble speaking his mind to Dean about himself, his life, his choices, etc when they were reunited. The part you neglected was that, even though Sam spoke his mind, it still didn't change how Dean treated him. So, unlike you in your example with your older siblings, Sam did push back. It just didn't really make any difference until things came to a head. Just like in my example with my older brother: it wasn't my behavior that needed to change in the relationship. It was the way my older brother related to me. Because he had to realize that I wasn't 12 years old anymore, nor was I behaving like a 12 year old, and it took him dating a younger woman and seeing us side-by-side to finally get it.

RulerofallIsurvey · July 2, 2017

12 hours ago, ahrtee said:

So facing her down alone might have been brave (and foolhardy) but was hardly equivalent.

What @SueB said:

11 hours ago, SueB said:

Amara could "taste the power" radiating off Dean but she did not disarm him. God disarmed him after he and Amara reconciled.

You're right: Dean facing down Amara was hardly equivalent to Sam facing down Lucifer. Dean faced the exponentially more powerful opponent. Not equivalent at all, imo.

Personally, I think a lot of disgruntled reactions to the S11 finale vs. the S5 finale is just because S5 came first. If the timing of the story lines were somehow reversed and Dean had faced off against Amara first, I think there'd be a lot fewer negative reactions from Dean!fans and more from Sam!fans. Because then, Sam's 'bdh' moment would be forever compared and contrasted to Dean's, which had come first. Then Sam!fans would forever be reminded that, sure while Sam might have physically overcome Lucifer's possession, Dean's opponent was much more powerful and so whatever Sam did was just a poor imitation. For some reason, some fans think that no matter what comes after, the first one is always the best: the yardstick, it sets the bar and nothing else can ever measure up. As it is, that was S5 with Sam and Lucifer. So, no matter what Dean does or overcomes in the future, it's just never going to be good enough. Heck, he could take on Michael in S13, kill Lucifer, and save not only the SPN!world the AU as well, and there would still complaints about how it wasn't equivalent to the S5 finale.

Reganne · July 2, 2017

33 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

All the way back in to s2 when Ruby first showed up, Sam told Dean he wanted to use her. So literally from the moment they met Sam showed a willingness to work with her. Despite misgivings, Dean followed Sam's lead with regards to her multiple times. Plus, he called Dean weak during Sex and Violence, he followed that up with telling Ruby Dean wasn't strong enough to take on Alaistair in OTHOAP, and again called Dean weak in WTLB. Sam was full of arrogance and hubris. He believed he was stronger, smarter faster and better than his brother.

So how did Dean make Sam feel like a kid brother when Sam spent entire season thinking he was superior to Dean? It makes no sense as the reason he gave to Dean as to why he was with Ruby. It's contradictory and the reason it comes across as blame shifting. Sam needed to acknowledge that he was not in control at all with regards to Ruby. As I said it was all an illusion.

What I felt from Sam the most toward Dean in s4 was resentment. It's almost like Sam resented Dean coming back and questioning what Sam was doing.

As for Fallen Idol's Sam hadn't demonstrated that he could be trusted yet. He did nothing to really earn it by that point and seemed almost put out that Dean didn't immeditely give it. Then the show turned it on Dean and said that Dean had to treat Sam like an adult. But during s4 he did.

As for Sam's powers, what I mean is that they invented a reason to justify Ruby feeding Sam demon blood. Lucifer needing it was never mentioned before or after it. The show made a point to say that Ruby only did it to get Sam ready to house Lucifer. So he could be strong enough. They they made Dean stand by while Sam drained 4 bodies and drank the blood. IMO, it sent a message that Dean was wrong to object to Sam's demon blood drinking because it gave Sam these cool powers.

I think in season 4, the demon blood/powers made Sam not feel inferior to Dean. I get the feeling before he started using his powers, he did feel inferior to him. I think the demon blood made him feel stronger and more powerful and not just a kid brother. While hopped up on demon blood, yes it made him feel stronger than his brother. However, any other time in the series, I don't get that feeling from him. Perhaps you feel he was wrong to feel this way, but Dean definitely felt stronger and more powerful than Sam while sporting the MOC and having the first blade. It's why he made sure Sam was out the way when he went to kill Abbadon.

I don't see resentment from Sam towards Dean. Not until towards the end of the season where he gets locked up in the panic room and gets called a monster. What I see is someone who had prior to Dean coming back hit the lowest point of his life. He initially turned to the bottle and tried to make deals to get Dean back. All of which failed. He failed to be able to save his brother... who had always been able to save him. He couldn't do for his brother what his brother did for him. At that point, he was vulnerable. He seemed to isolate himself. Then in walks Ruby who offers him a solution. A way to get kill Lilith and with what little else he has in his life at that time, he takes her up on it. When Dean comes back, I think he is genuinely happy to have him back but he's afraid of how Dean would react to his powers and especially drinking demon blood. He has a mixture of feelings. Fear of disappointing/upsetting Dean and the idea of the ends justifying the means. His actions of drinking the demon blood are wrong, but they could lead to the death of Lilith who has killed many people and sent Dean to hell.... which you would think would be a good heroic thing to do.

IMO, Sam's powers weren't shown to be cool, but wrong and demonic. Only leading to disaster. I think the narrative was quite clear on that through seasons 4 and 5. I didn't understand the whole drinking blood to be Lucifers vessel either (my head cannon is that Sam drank it in order to make him stronger to give him a better chance at overtaking Lucifer and jumping in the cage) I still don't understand how that makes drinking demon blood a good thing. It was never shown that being Lucifers vessel was a good thing. He was the villain. Why would being the vessel of a villain be a good thing? I think this situation was more of a 'the end justifying the means' sort of situation. Drinking the demon blood is wrong, but in this situation it is to stop Lucifer to save the world so we will allow this wrong thing to happen so that the apocalypse will be stopped. I think if the message was that drinking demon blood was the right thing to do, the show would have kept Sam drinking demon blood after defeating Lucifer and then have Dean accept that Sam drinks demon blood.

ahrtee · July 2, 2017

11 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

What @SueB said:

You're right: Dean facing down Amara was hardly equivalent to Sam facing down Lucifer. Dean faced the exponentially more powerful opponent. Not equivalent at all, imo.

I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree here, because if you think having an opponent (no matter how powerful) back down willingly is equal to overcoming someone almost as strong (though not omnipotent) sheerly by strength of will is equal, we'll never agree. To me, it's the difference between a fighter getting a knockout after a hard battle against impossible odds, vs. winning by default because his opponent refused to fight. The fact that he was declared the winner, despite (and especially *because of*) the fact that his opponent could have killed him with one finger but chose not to, does not make the victories equal.

Edited July 2, 2017 by ahrtee

Aeryn13 · July 2, 2017

Quote

I think in season 4, the demon blood/powers made Sam not feel inferior to Dean.

Back in Season 1 Asylum he called Dean pathetic under the influence. He basically reiterated that feeling, just using nicer words, under no influence in Scarecrow. When the Crossroads Demon in Season 3 taunted him, she didn`t insult him like demons usually do but called him out on feeling like sloppy, needy Dean was a burden. IMO Sam felt superior way before the demon blood powers in Season 4. I got that feeling during the entire show. The blood drinking just heightened the issue but it didn`t create it.

Quote

IMO, Sam's powers weren't shown to be cool, but wrong and demonic.

I very much disagree. Unfortunately Dean got little in terms of many displays of powers during the MOC and infuriatingly even less as a demon but the very few things we got I found to be cool. And those were also wrong and demonic. Visual cool displays of powers doesn`t have to be good. In supernatural shows they often do not. They are often violent and dark. I still love them and love powered-up characters in general.

Quote

To me, it's the difference between a fighter getting a knockout after a hard battle against impossible odds, vs. winning by default because his opponent refused to fight. The fact that he was declared the winner, despite (and especially *because of*) the fact that his opponent could have killed him with one finger but chose not to, does not make the victories equal.

Yup, it`s not remotely the same "look at our hero" level of awe a narrative can muster.

Now at this point, I don`t see them giving Dean anything anymore - after Season 12 especially where they basically neutered him for half a Season - but even if they did, they would never bother to make it as epic.

I would hope for at least somewhat of an epic hero`s death in the Series Finale so the character can maybe go out with a minimum of dignity but I`m not counting on my luck there.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Aeryn13

ahrtee · July 2, 2017

22 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Personally, I think a lot of disgruntled reactions to the S11 finale vs. the S5 finale is just because S5 came first. If the timing of the story lines were somehow reversed and Dean had faced off against Amara first, I think there'd be a lot fewer negative reactions from Dean!fans and more from Sam!fans. Because then, Sam's 'bdh' moment would be forever compared and contrasted to Dean's, which had come first. Then Sam!fans would forever be reminded that, sure while Sam might have physically overcome Lucifer's possession, Dean's opponent was much more powerful and so whatever Sam did was just a poor imitation. For some reason, some fans think that no matter what comes after, the first one is always the best: the yardstick, it sets the bar and nothing else can ever measure up. As it is, that was S5 with Sam and Lucifer. So, no matter what Dean does or overcomes in the future, it's just never going to be good enough. Heck, he could take on Michael in S13, kill Lucifer, and save not only the SPN!world the AU as well, and there would still complaints about how it wasn't equivalent to the S5 finale.

You may be right about having one win set as the yardstick and others will never measure up to it, but I don't think it's always the first one. After all (as I've heard other fans complain here) Dean got the first"big win" by killing the YED, but I've never seen that compared to Swan Song.

And if you want to reverse the storylines: imagine what the Sam fans would say if *Dean* had been the one who won against Lucifer and Sam just talked Amara down. There would have been much complaining about how Sam always has to take a back seat to his big brother and how "heroic Dean" always gets the wins in battles while Sam can only talk his way out of a fight.

I'm not trying to be snarky, just pointing out that *both* sides have their opinions and, from what I've read here, *nothing* anyone says or how many lines they quote will change the other side's minds, because it's all based on personal interpretation. This thread is, by nature, hugely partisan but lately it's seeming almost as bitter as the real world.

ahrtee · July 2, 2017

4 hours ago, shang yiet said:

I really wanted Sam to be a demon leader boy king. Wasted opportunity.

If we had Sam as the demon boy king, it would have set up a massive Dean-vs-Sam/good-vs-evil battle, and either Sam would have to change sides or Dean/good would win. And I'm guessing neither of those choices would go over well with the Sam fans. (Or are you thinking Sam as Demon King would reform Hell into something good and the world would then be without evil?)

MysteryGuest · July 2, 2017

I have to give you all credit for keeping this argument going. It makes me question just how much of a fan of the show I really am, because for the most part, I couldn't care less about any of this. I've been a Dean fan since the beginning, and never honestly felt that he was being shortchanged, except maybe his time in Hell.

I loved Swan Song and was very proud of Dean for sticking with Sam till the bitter end. I never felt cheated because Dean didn't get to be Michael's meat suit...I was thrilled that he didn't say yes when it looked like he was going to. He and Sam are really not much alike, and I definitely relate more to Dean than Sam. Obviously, Sam fans feel the same about him.

I hate when they dumb either character down to make the plot work, or write them completely out-of-character. Mainly, I wish the writing in general were better, especially lately. But I honestly think Dean/Jensen has had plenty of opportunity to shine on a show that has 2 stars. There are storylines that I wish they'd followed up on a bit more, and some that I wish they hadn't bothered with at all, but after 12 years, I guess that's normal.

I don't want Dean to be Sam, or have his storylines because then he wouldn't be the character I love. For me, it's not about the flash, it's more about the substance of the character. But then I don't really watch for the action, I watch for the relationship of these two men, and the journey they've been on all of their lives. And let's face it, the eye candy isn't half bad, either.

Reganne · July 2, 2017

1 hour ago, Aeryn13 said:

Back in Season 1 Asylum he called Dean pathetic under the influence. He basically reiterated that feeling, just using nicer words, under no influence in Scarecrow. When the Crossroads Demon in Season 3 taunted him, she didn`t insult him like demons usually do but called him out on feeling like sloppy, needy Dean was a burden. IMO Sam felt superior way before the demon blood powers in Season 4. I got that feeling during the entire show. The blood drinking just heightened the issue but it didn`t create it.

When he called him pathetic, that didn't really have to do with hunting and the job. He was referring to how Dean always obeys John. I don't see the connection to that. I think we're always going to disagree on this though. On the other hand, Dean is the one who refers to Sam as the second best hunter. Though in a somewhat joking manner and seemingly still giving Sam at least some credit, Dean has never (to my knowledge) said Sam was the better hunter. Sam however has said Dean is better than him.

Bessie · July 2, 2017

47 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

I'm not trying to be snarky, just pointing out that *both* sides have their opinions and, from what I've read here, *nothing* anyone says or how many lines they quote will change the other side's minds, because it's all based on personal interpretation.

Well, all I can do is speak for myself and say that my positions have shifted based on comments and interpretations I've read. But I will agree that if the idea is that, as a rule, Dean is always getting shafted by the writers, other characters, show runners etc., then, yeah, discussion is unlikely to change anyone's opinion on those topics.

12 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

But then I don't really watch for the action, I watch for the relationship of these two men, and the journey they've been on all of their lives.

I wonder if that's part of how viewers react to certain things. I'm the same way. I don't care about the plots anymore because, generally, I think they've been bad for 4 or 5 years now and even when they do strike upon an idea I'm enthusiastic about, the implementation is weak.

I'm all about characterization. I think it's one of the reasons I hate the Lucifer/sproutifer storyline. Last season, I skipped most of the mytharc episodes and that worked well for me. Unless dramatic changes are made, I expect I'll be doing this until the series is over.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Bessie

Reganne · July 2, 2017

8 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

I have to give you all credit for keeping this argument going. It makes me question just how much of a fan of the show I really am, because for the most part, I couldn't care less about any of this. I've been a Dean fan since the beginning, and never honestly felt that he was being shortchanged, except maybe his time in Hell.

I loved Swan Song and was very proud of Dean for sticking with Sam till the bitter end. I never felt cheated because Dean didn't get to be Michael's meat suit...I was thrilled that he didn't say yes when it looked like he was going to. He and Sam are really not much alike, and I definitely relate more to Dean than Sam. Obviously, Sam fans feel the same about him.

I hate when they dumb either character down to make the plot work, or write them completely out-of-character. Mainly, I wish the writing in general were better, especially lately. But I honestly think Dean/Jensen has had plenty of opportunity to shine on a show that has 2 stars. There are storylines that I wish they'd followed up on a bit more, and some that I wish they hadn't bothered with at all, but after 12 years, I guess that's normal.

I don't want Dean to be Sam, or have his storylines because then he wouldn't be the character I love. For me, it's not about the flash, it's more about the substance of the character. But then I don't really watch for the action, I watch for the relationship of these two men, and the journey they've been on all of their lives. And let's face it, the eye candy isn't half bad, either.

TBH, a lot of the things I discuss don't really bother me or at least didn't when I binge watched the show.... well except for the whole Sam is solely responsible for the apocalypse early season 5. That did bother me on my first watch. lol I just feel that some of the fanbase rag on Sam for things that Dean does also so I feel the need to bring up "well what about when Dean did this". I think I just like to debate for some reason. It's interesting for me to think back on different episodes and how the two characters treat and react to each other. It's fun to discuss with people who have a different opinion than mine and therefor interpret things differently. When all is said and done I too truly love the brothers relationship despite all of it's flaws. It's probably my favourite part of the series.

ahrtee · July 2, 2017

3 minutes ago, Bessie said:

Well, all I can do is speak for myself and say that my positions have shifted based on comments and interpretations I've read. But I will agree that if the idea is that, as a rule, Dean is always getting shafted by the writers, other characters, show runners etc., then, yeah, discussion is unlikely to change anyone's opinion on those topics.

This is the reason I generally stay away from this thread (I only got sucked in this time because I was responding to a comment on another thread that was going to head into bitch/jerk territory so I put it here).

One of the things I like about the site is hearing other comments that might give me a different perspective on things or point out things I missed. Generally, it only works for me in episode threads, because there's something new to discuss. And yes, once any comment starts on the "once again [one character or another] is proven wrong/sidelined/unnecessary/has his character trashed" I usually stop reading. This happens with BOTH characters, not just Dean. It's the repetition/generalizations I hate to read, not necessarily the thought behind it.

Aeryn13 · July 2, 2017

Quote

When he called him pathetic, that didn't really have to do with hunting and the job. He was referring to how Dean always obeys John.

To clarify, you meant Sam only felt inferior to Dean in regards to the job of hunting? Because while I don`t see that either, I took your earlier post as Sam feeling inferior to Dean as a person so my response was in regards to that. Personally, I think Sam has always looked down on Dean somewhat. And he still does.

I know a lot get taken as brotherly banter and Dean certainly makes his own putdown remarks. Which in essence I get, my friends and me are the same way with each other. We shoot a lot of zingers at each other, all in good fun of course. My problem with Sam is when it comes to that, I believe 90 % of his lines are supposed to be zingers in good fun as well but they are not coming across like that to me. They are coming across more genuine than banter. With Dean, I think banter mostly stays with banter. That is really at its core an acting/directing problem for me and pretty much always has been.

Quote

But then I don't really watch for the action, I watch for the relationship of these two men, and the journey they've been on all of their lives.

Well, I wouldn`t say I watch for the action because, lets face it, it`s not really an action show. If there is any CW show, I watch remotely for the action, it would be Arrow which by far and large has significantly more martial arts and stunt work. However, I certainly don`t watch for the relationship anymore. In fact, I abhor that relationship. What it has turned the characters into is not something I find particularly rootable. Whenever I can ignore the relationship, those are now the best episodes for me.

And I truly did like the development of the brothers relationship in Seasons 1 and 2. After Season 5, it was doodely dead for me.

RulerofallIsurvey · July 2, 2017

1 hour ago, ahrtee said:

You may be right about having one win set as the yardstick and others will never measure up to it, but I don't think it's always the first one. After all (as I've heard other fans complain here) Dean got the first"big win" by killing the YED, but I've never seen that compared to Swan Song.

I've seen the Dean got the first "big win" comments, but I thought that was usually dismissed by Dean!fans because that wasn't saving the whole world like Sam falling in the pit with Lucifer, and therefore no comparison.

1 hour ago, ahrtee said:

And if you want to reverse the storylines: imagine what the Sam fans would say if *Dean* had been the one who won against Lucifer and Sam just talked Amara down. There would have been much complaining about how Sam always has to take a back seat to his big brother and how "heroic Dean" always gets the wins in battles while Sam can only talk his way out of a fight.

You may right. Then again, I don't know. Since Sam is usually the one characterized as being the good 'talker' that might have fit his personality better and would have made sense from a character perspective.

But someone, on both sides, no doubt still would have found something about which to complain.

1 hour ago, ahrtee said:

I'm not trying to be snarky, just pointing out that *both* sides have their opinions and, from what I've read here, *nothing* anyone says or how many lines they quote will change the other side's minds, because it's all based on personal interpretation. This thread is, by nature, hugely partisan but lately it's seeming almost as bitter as the real world.

Exactly. Except I personally think this thread is more bitter than the real world.

28 minutes ago, Reganne said:

TBH, a lot of the things I discuss don't really bother me or at least didn't when I binge watched the show.

Same.

RulerofallIsurvey · July 2, 2017

1 hour ago, ahrtee said:

The fact that he was declared the winner, despite (and especially *because of*) the fact that his opponent could have killed him with one finger but chose not to, does not make the victories equal.

It seems to me that you are dismissing Dean's contribution to changing Amara's mind to back down willingly as unimportant. Or at least not as important as Sam's 'strength of will' against Lucifer. And I just don't agree. Because I think it took enormous strength of will for Dean to face Amara alone, knowing he was going to die (whether or not he did) and find the right things to say, under very stressful circumstances and in the heat of the moment, that would make her change her mind.

In this analogy, according to you, a SWAT team member who storms a hostage situation and physically wrestles down a terrorist, who is armed with an uzi, killing them both in the process but saving the rest of the hostages, is more of a hero than the negotiator who goes in armed, but then sets aside his weapon to talk the terrorist, who has his finger on the trigger of a nuclear warhead, into giving up his hostages - and everyone walks out alive. Actually, I think it takes more guts to do what the negotiator did, than the SWAT team member.

MysteryGuest · July 2, 2017

47 minutes ago, Bessie said:

I wonder if that's part of how viewers react to certain things. I'm the same way. I don't care about the plots anymore because, generally, I think they've been bad for 4 or 5 years now and even when they do strike upon an idea I'm enthusiastic about, the implementation is weak.

I'm all about characterization. I think it's one of the reasons I hate the Lucifer/sproutifer storyline. Last season, I skipped most of the mytharc episodes and that worked well for me. Unless dramatic changes are made, I expect I'll be doing this until the series is over.

I think we all watch for different reasons. I'm just amazed sometimes at the stuff that's brought up because most times it's something I either didn't remember, or it didn't bother me. When watching an episode, certainly there are things that happen, things that are said, that I react to at the time, but I think 95% of that is typical sibling shit, so my inclination is to side with the sibling I like best. I have 3 siblings of my own, and calling us dysfunctional would be an understatement. I love them all, but just don't put us in the same room for longer than a few hours, or all hell breaks loose. Compared to my family, Sam and Dean are the poster children for healthy sibling relationships.

47 minutes ago, Reganne said:

TBH, a lot of the things I discuss don't really bother me or at least didn't when I binge watched the show.... well except for the whole Sam is solely responsible for the apocalypse early season 5. That did bother me on my first watch. lol I just feel that some of the fanbase rag on Sam for things that Dean does also so I feel the need to bring up "well what about when Dean did this". I think I just like to debate for some reason. It's interesting for me to think back on different episodes and how the two characters treat and react to each other. It's fun to discuss with people who have a different opinion than mine and therefor interpret things differently. When all is said and done I too truly love the brothers relationship despite all of it's flaws. It's probably my favourite part of the series.

Debating is fun, and I do plenty of that myself. I guess I just don't really see this show in terms of Sam vs. Dean. It's more Sam and Dean vs. the writers for me.

catrox14 · July 2, 2017

3 hours ago, Reganne said:

I don't see it as having to have Dean alone making a change. I see it as Sam wanting to be on equal footing with Dean in their work, which IMO is understandable. As it was already pointed out by Awesom0400, Sam believed in fallen idols that there was more to the case and they could potentially be putting other's lives in danger if they left simply because Dean wouldn't listen to Sam or treat him as an equal partner. I had never thought of it that way before, but it's true. It's not just simply Dean having to change his behaviour. Anyone would want to be treated on equal footing on a job especially if the result of not doing that could potentially put others lives in danger. There was more at stake here. If Dean wasn't ready to share equal footing with Sam on the job and take what he has to say into consideration, he shouldn't have let him hunt with him. The job doesn't work well with only one member of the duo calling the shots.

The problem with Fallen Idols is that the narrative conflated Sam's issues with Dean to their hunting despite that never being an issue in the past even in s2 when Dean thought he'd have to kill Sam, unless I'm not forgetting some hunts where that was the case.

It didn't seem to be an issue even in s3. Dean didn't want to be around Sam in the beginning of s4 when he learned Sam was hanging out with Ruby not because he didn't trust Sam has a hunting partner. It seemed to be the typical dynamic of give and take and splitting up roles and activities in their casework and of mutual trust.

Even in the Siren episode and Metamorphosis, they had issues with each other but it didn't seem to extend to the hunting itself. Dean felt betrayed by Sam WRT Ruby but it was never tied into how they were together as hunters, not for the most part.

IMO, if Dean had been inclined to bossy tendencies WRT to hunting, Sam made it clear that Dean was not going to boss him around as a hunting duo, when as early as the pilot Sam literally shoved Dean away from the computer because he wasn't satisfied with how Dean was doing the research. It was Sam's idea that they needed to don suits to be pretend to be federal agents in Phantom Traveler even as he made fun of Dean for having fake IDs made at Kinko's. I think they were shown to be on pretty equal footing as hunters. Dean didn't boss Sam around on hunts as a matter of course.

Even IF Dean tended to see Dean as a kid, he did not behave with him in that manner after Scarecrow and he rarely behaved that way with Sam on hunts so it really wasn't an MO that made sense for Fallen Idols.

So why even conflate their interpersonal issues with their hunting. But then nothing makes any sense in Fallen Idols.

LIke, I said before if this episode fell before THE END, I could buy into Dean and Sam's issues; that Dean was still having trouble with forgiving and forgetting and that Sam would feel like Dean didn't trust him, but placing it after their reconciliation wherein Dean asserted his trust in Sam and Sam promised to not let him down after Dean learned the lesson that he was wrong to say that they were better apart than together to his about face after seeing what the future potentially held for him, Sam and Cas and the world at large.

So I ask the question, why does this episode exist?

IMO it really only makes sense as a set up for why Sam had to jump into the pit alone.

auntvi · July 2, 2017

3 hours ago, Reganne said:

I have to say, I always liked the potential for Sam's powers. I wanted to see them develop.

I like the idea of Sam having some residual powers that would sometimes be useful. They already use spells and such quite a bit. But I don't want it as another bone of contention between the 2 brothers. Dean would have to get over his knee-jerk antipathy to Sam's psychic powers.

Sign In

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

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Aeryn13

BabySpinach

BabySpinach

Posted Images

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment