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

[Whimsy]

I know that there has been some mod changes to this board, but the rules remain the same.  Be Civil is our number one rule.  Please stop the bickering.  We don't want to have to start doing warnings, but will if necessary.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

8 hours ago, Mulva said:

I've never gotten why we're supposed to be so disgusted and outraged over Sam drinking from that nurse when nobody cares about any other possessed people.  They kill meat suits, torture them for information and drain them for their own purposes.  What was so special about her?

I agree that I think it's because like @catrox14 said, the demon let the real nurse come to the surface and beg for her life.  So the voice Sam, and the audience, heard was a human, not a demon.  That being said, the second time I watched that ep, I really didn't feel sorry for the nurse at all...weird.

8 hours ago, catrox14 said:

 When did the boys drain a human for their blood? I legit don't remember when that happenened.

Well, @Katy M beat me to it, but Mulva had said 'meatsuits' not 'humans' and all the boys (Dean, Cas, Sam) drained several meatsuits in Swan Song.  Not one cared about those poor innocent possessed victims either, I guess.  

3 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

Agreed! I recently rewatched Are You There God It's Me Dean Winchester and Meg's speech really got me thinking. The show likes to talk about the lives they save, but how many have they completely ruined by their stab first, ask questions later policy? Not just the meat suits murdered, but the friends and family, like Meg's little sister, who lost a loved one. 

Meg's speech in that was terrific.  Very well written and very thought-provoking about how they go about the 'family business'.  

3 hours ago, shang yiet said:

That is still sad and disgusting. The victim is still in there, maybe screaming in pain like the real Meg.

And like Bobby's wife, Karen in Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid - she said she remembered what it was like being possessed. 

[catrox14]

5 hours ago, shang yiet said:

That is still sad and disgusting. The victim is still in there, maybe screaming in pain like the real Meg.

 

I understood your question to be why it was different for the audience (in general) at that point in time of the show.

IMO,  that scene was intended to be upsetting and shocking for the audience, who would never  have expected Sam to make such choices, especially when he was so adamant all season that using his psychic powers (and by extension, the demon blood drinking) was better for the meatsuits.  IMO it was upsetting because it's showing just how far Sam was falling and how fast. I think we were supposed to be shocked, angry, saddened, frightened with AND FOR Sam in that moment, because Sam was essentially disregarding the victim in the meatsuit, which was not Sam's typical way of doing things.  

2 hours ago, Katy M said:

Swan Song.

Sorry I wasn't clear. I know it happened in Swan Song. I was meaning before the moment in time of Lucifer Rising , which is what I thought was being discussed WRT to Sam's actions in Lucifer Rising. Before Lucifer Rising nothing like that was ever shown. 

Edited July 25, 2017 by catrox14

[catrox14]

4 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I guess our opinions are more dissimilar than I had generally thought if you find Sam that unlikable and without growth.

I don't have time to reply fully right now but I'll just say that I'm sorry if my post left you thinking I don't like Sam at all. That's not true.  I can like a flawed character, look at Dean.  Sam annoys me but I like him.  I think you might be inferring more about my Sam opinions than I actually maintain. 

I also think I should be more clear that it's  the writing and narrative that irritates me with Sam more than Sam himself.   I'll reply in more detail a bit later.

[AwesomO4000]

3 hours ago, catrox14 said:

  I think you might be inferring more about my Sam opinions than I actually maintain. 

I'm sorry if I misinterpreted. I think it was this:

Quote

When Sam was at his nadir in s4, those unpleasant characteristics were couched as "because demon blood".  But that's how I've always seen Sam.

...that left me with the impression, because I thought that Sam's behavior in season 4 was pretty awful. I think some of it was there, but that Sam's behavior was twisted and magnified by the demon blood. * I don't find it behavior that he would always do or that Sam would always think those things, however, and I think there was a lot of evidence for this even back in Sam's brattier days in season 1. Sam  had grief to contend with as well as emerging powers and being displaced from the life he'd known for 3 plus years back into uncertainty and a brother he was getting used used to all over again. *** Even with all of that, Sam apologized for jumping to conclusions about why Dean acted the way he did ("Something Wicked") and openly appreciated Dean's sacrifices in taking care of him when they were growing up. I also see Sam as growing a lot during seasons 5-7 rather than staying the same. I saw season 8 and 9 as more of a regression, especially since by season 10 and 11, Sam seemed to be pretty much - I think - back to seasons 6.5 - 7 territory in terms of his personality.

So for me if I thought of Sam as always being like he was in season 4 - or even worse season 8 and 9 - I wouldn't find that much of an endorsement of the character, considering I rather much disliked Sam quite a bit during large parts of those seasons... and Sam is supposed to be my favorite of the two, so...
 

* Similar to how Dean's behavior was twisted by the mark of Cain. In other words, I don't think that Dean without being affected by the mark would really rather see Sam dead than Charlie, but because he was affected, his anger was twisted and magnified.

*** And I'm equal opportunity - as I said above, I also gave Dean a pass at the beginning of season 2, because he was dealing with grief. I don't think Dean's behavior there represented how he always was, but he was hurting and just wanted to crawl into his shell to heal and Sam wasn't understanding that and he wanted to grieve together. So Dean lashed out and was a bit harsher than he normally would be.
 

Edited July 25, 2017 by AwesomO4000

[catrox14]

1 hour ago, AwesomO4000 said:

...that left me with the impression, because I thought that Sam's behavior in season 4 was pretty awful.

I re-read my comment and I can see why it read more harshly than I intended. It was poorly constructed.  

What I was trying to say, in the context of the ongoing discussion when I made the comment, (obviously poorly), is IMO there is tendency for some of Sam's more negative personality traits (i.e. being judgmental, condescending, patronizing, etc) being attributed solely to Sam using demon blood, as though the demon blood in and of itself  created those traits when those things existed in s1 as part of Sam's personality. 

 IMO, Sam's predicament after Dean went to Hell was that it heightened some of the negative aspects that lead him to make those bad choice; lead him to not trust Dean and believe that he was better and smarter and stronger than Dean; lead him to decide to drink demon blood in the first place.  I wasn't intending to imply that Sam trying to kill Dean or drink demon blood were things he was always destined to do and it just took something to make him do it.  I think Sam's situation in s4 is really complicated and more so than Dean's in s9 because it was never clear to me that the demon blood did anything other than apparently give Sam the power to kill Lilith. It's kind of muddy IMO.

WRT to Dean and the MoC, it was more straightforward in s9, that the Mark was shown to have turned Cain into murderer, and then into a demon, which is what happened to Dean. But then Dabb/Bernes completely retcon'd this in s11 "We Happy Few", Chuck told Lucifer:

Quote

LUCIFER: No, you betrayed me. You gave me the Mark to lock her away, and when it changed me – when it did what the Mark inevitably does – you threw me away.
CHUCK: No, son. The Mark – (He pauses.) You always cast a jaundiced glance at humans.The Mark didn’t change you. It just made you more of what you already were.

I don't even know how to draw comparisons anymore because now it's just flat out that Dean and Cain were always killers and the Mark made them more murderous. I don't now if Dabb/Berens considered the implications for Dean or that they really think this is who Dean has always been.  Yes that was about Lucifer unless Chuck was lying or something, it should apply to whoever had the Mark, that it would make them more of what they already were. Then later, Dean no longer qualifies for the Mark because he's tainted from I guess having had it before. I mean unfortunately nothing Dean did under the Mark was considered okay but it also can no longer be handwaved as "because MoC".  And as a Dean fan, this is almost more than I can tolerate.  Anyway, Sam took on the Mark for a hot minute and we don't know whether it affected him or not. 

I hope that clarifies a bit.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

31 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Then later, Dean no longer qualifies for the Mark because he's tainted from I guess having had it before. I mean unfortunately nothing Dean did under the Mark was considered okay but it also can no longer be handwaved as "because MoC". 

I don't understand why Dean having had the Mark previously and therefore being unable to bear it again invalidates everything he did while under the Mark's influence as being because he was under the Mark's influence.  (I hope that's clear - it sounds a little convoluted to me.)  I don't think it invalidates the "because MoC" excuse.  But then, I'm just not thinking about it too deeply either.  

[Katy M]

35 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Anyway, Sam took on the Mark for a hot minute and we don't know whether it affected him or not. 

Sam volunteered to take the Mark, but it never actually happened. So, no, it didn't affect him.

37 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I mean unfortunately nothing Dean did under the Mark was considered okay but it also can no longer be handwaved as "because MoC". 

I think it can.  I think the Mark of Cain ramps up all your bad qualities to the zillionth degree.  And we all have murderous impulses, we just suppress them. Even the nicest person in the world.  And, Dean couldn't take it again because he was tainted by it (honestly don't understand that, but I'm going to try to make something up anyway) because the Mark amped up the evil, thereby making him evil.

[Wayward Son]

Just now, Katy M said:

Sam volunteered to take the Mark, but it never actually happened. So, no, it didn't affect him.

Agreed! Plus IIRC the corrupting influence of the mark wasn't the actual mark itself, but the Darkness / Amara it contained. Since we know Amara was never contained within the half a mark Sam was never exposed to her influence in the way true bearers such as Dean and Cain were. 

[catrox14]

32 minutes ago, Katy M said:

am volunteered to take the Mark, but it never actually happened. So, no, it didn't affect him

Sam's arm glowed and lit up like Dean's did when he got the Mark. It was on his arm for a hot minute...maybe more more like a literal hot 30 seconds LOL. To me the question is whether the time that the Mark was glowing on Sam's arm affected him  or not.  That was what I was wondering about. Thus far there is no evidence either way, IMO and I doubt it did. Just a question I had.

The Mark was said to have made someone more of what they were, and Dean and Cain were serial killers. It doesn't say having a mere thought that you want to strangle someone means the Mark will make you strangle someone.  Lucifer turned into the Devil because he was already jealous and hated humanity so it just compelled him to turn humans into demons and twist their souls.  Theoretically,  the Mark should also make the good traits better too, but with Lucifer, Cain and Dean, you would think the good traits would have come through as well but that was never implied nor shown. And yes Dean killed bad guys but he still killed human beings which is a no-no in this universe.

That retcon fucks up the Mark of Cain lore on every level. Bah. And yes I would be bitching about it it if this was Sam or Cas or John Doe that had the Mark. Can't understand why that concept was introduced at all other than to get Lucifer back to really being the reason he fell and became evil.  Because the Darkness being blamed for Lucifer sure messed up Lucifer's history.

The problem is that it also affects the Lore for any person who bears the Mark and that is bad, bad, bad. YMMV

Edited July 25, 2017 by catrox14

[MysteryGuest]

I absolutely wished Dean had more to do last season and am hoping he will this season, but I just can't wrap my head around the idea that the show is deliberately trying to drive away Dean fans.  That just doesn't make any sense.  It's all about the money, so TPTB deliberately sacrificing half the fandom over some perceived dislike of Jensen/Dean is just bad business.  Why would they deliberately sabotage themselves?  And while Jensen may be content to stick with this show because it's comfortable, it's family, whatever, I don't think he's masochistic enough to stick around while they systematically destroy the character he loves.  

I'd love for the writers to be better at creating stories that give both actors interesting things to do, instead of seemingly building one brother up while tearing the other down, but that's pretty much been the MO of this show since the beginning.  Maybe they'll surprise us this year.

We have a show with two very competent, smart, skilled hunters...how difficult is it to write stories that showcase those abilities?  Create some challenging monsters and let the boys do what they do best.  Why is that so hard for these writers to do?

[catrox14]

5 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

I don't understand why Dean having had the Mark previously and therefore being unable to bear it again invalidates everything he did while under the Mark's influence as being because he was under the Mark's influence.  (I hope that's clear - it sounds a little convoluted to me.)  I don't think it invalidates the "because MoC" excuse.  But then, I'm just not thinking about it too deeply either.  

I think you've conflated two separate things.

Chuck said that Dean was now "tainted" because he had the Mark so he no longer qualifies to bear it again. Complete separate thing and nothing to do with erasing Dean's behavior. That's not what I was saying nor implying.  

Quoting myself to clarify

Quote

IThe Mark was said to have made someone more of what they were, and Dean and Cain were serial killers. It doesn't say having a mere thought that you want to strangle someone means the Mark will make you strangle someone.  Lucifer turned into the Devil because he was already jealous and hated humanity so it just compelled him to turn humans into demons and twist their souls.  Theoretically,  the Mark should also make the good traits better too, but with Lucifer, Cain and Dean, you would think the good traits would have come through as well but that was never implied nor shown. And yes Dean killed bad guys but he still killed human beings which is a no-no in this universe.

Chuck said the Mark made someone more of what they already were. So IMO, that means that didn't really make Dean or Cain become serial killers. It means that the Mark brought out Dean's inner killer. Thus whatever Dean had done under the influence of the Mark can no longer be put down to "Because MoC" as a reason to not hold it against him for the rest of his life. Sam drinking demon blood or being Soulless and Dean having the Mark were all essentially "get out of jail free cards". But now, with the revelation from Chuck that I quoted a few posts back, whatever Dean did was really just his true self coming out, I don't see how it can be a "get out of jail free card" via Mark of Cain.

[MysteryGuest]

The Mark just accentuates the negative and brings those baser instincts to the surface.  I still think Dean gets a pass just like soulless Sam, or bad Charlie.  Their resulting behavior was certainly a part of their personalities, but under normal circumstances, they were each able to control those instincts.  With the Mark, or without a soul, or split in two, like Charlie, there was no conscience to fight those baser instincts.  I really don't see them as any different.

[AwesomO4000]

22 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

But now, with the revelation from Chuck that I quoted a few posts back, whatever Dean did was really just his true self coming out, I don't see how it can be a "get out of jail free card" via Mark of Cain.

But Cain and Dean were human. Lucifer was an angel, and an archangel at that: two completely different species. I don't see why the mark should affect Lucifer and Cain and Dean the same way at all.  I also don't think it's  as likely that the mark - and especially while it keeps Amara at bay - would amplify "good" qualities. That just wasn't Amara's M.O., so only the negative things - like killing (=destruction) - would be amplified by "dark" Amara, in my opinion. For me Dean kills when necessary, but he wouldn't normally kill just because. The mark affected Dean to want to kill "just because" because that's what it did. To think that a mark which could affect an archangel that way wouldn't have even worse consequences for a human I think is putting too much on Dean. Dean is a human being after all. He's not going to be able to fight / resist the effects of something that not even an archangel couldn't fight off.

And I think that the show has been mostly consistent in that viewpoint from the start - as in the viewpoint where Sam and Dean are only human. They established that way back in "Asylum" when Sam didn't overcome the effects of the psycho ghost doctor and still shot at Dean just like the cop couldn't overcome the effects and shot at the wife he loved. The show made it clear there that there wasn't going to be many - if any - hero exceptions from human behavior for Sam and Dean.

I also think that Chuck signalling out Lucifer that way was implying that Lucifer was in a way always wanting to "rebel" against how God wanted him to view humans... in other words he wasn't like what angels were supposed to be - a good soldier and obedient like Micahel used to be, for example - so I think Chuck's point wasn't that the mark didn't necessarily make Lucifer rebel and go bad, but that he always had some part of that in him to start with.

10 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

The Mark just accentuates the negative and brings those baser instincts to the surface.  I still think Dean gets a pass just like soulless Sam, or bad Charlie.  Their resulting behavior was certainly a part of their personalities, but under normal circumstances, they were each able to control those instincts.  With the Mark, or without a soul, or split in two, like Charlie, there was no conscience to fight those baser instincts.  I really don't see them as any different.

Agreed. And in Dean's case it was even more of an influence, because not only was the mark accentuating the negative, baser instincts, but Dean actually went through withdrawal symptoms when he didn't kill... so not only accentuating, but making it physically painful / miserable / potentially life threatening when he didn't kill.

Edited July 26, 2017 by AwesomO4000

[catrox14]

Just now, MysteryGuest said:

The Mark just accentuates the negative and brings those baser instincts to the surface.  I still think Dean gets a pass just like soulless Sam, or bad Charlie.  Their resulting behavior was certainly a part of their personalities, but under normal circumstances, they were each able to control those instincts.  With the Mark, or without a soul, or split in two, like Charlie, there was no conscience to fight those baser instincts.  I really don't see them as any different.

The difference is that God specifically said that Lucifer became evil, not because of the Mark but because he already was what the Mark made more pronounced. To me that would extend to Cain, and Dean as bearers of the Mark. Sam didn't start out Soulless and he wasn't Soulless based on anything he did. So it wouldn't  really apply IMO.  Sam still gets a "get out of jail free" card for that IMO either way.

[catrox14]

1 minute ago, AwesomO4000 said:

But Cain and Dean were human. Lucifer was an angel, and an archangel at that: two completely different species. I don't see why the mark should affect Lucifer and Cain and Dean the same way at all.  I also don't think it's  as likely that the mark - and especially while it keeps Amara at bay - would amplify "good" qualities. That just wasn't Amara's M.O., so only the negative things - like killing (=destruction) - would be amplified by "dark" Amara, in my opinion. For me Dean kills when necessary, but he wouldn't normally kill just because. The mark affected Dean to want to kill "just because" because that's what it did. To think that a mark which could affect an archangel that way wouldn't have even worse consequences for a human I think is putting too much on Dean. Dean is a human being after all. He's not going to be able to fight / resist the effects of something that not even an archangel couldn't fight off.

Dean and Cain were human but Chuck made no indication that those rules wouldn't apply to humans. He said it as a blanket statement that whoever had the Mark, it made them more of who they really always were.  It's not been walked back as to only apply to archangels.

[AwesomO4000]

15 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

The difference is that God specifically said that Lucifer became evil, not because of the Mark but because he already was what the Mark made more pronounced. To me that would extend to Cain, and Dean as bearers of the Mark. Sam didn't start out Soulless and he wasn't Soulless based on anything he did. So it wouldn't  really apply IMO.  Sam still gets a "get out of jail free" card for that IMO either way.

Maybe, but he did choose to drink the demon blood, so then it wouldn't apply the same as the soullessness there.

I also think Chuck was talking about Lucifer more broadly than just the killing aspect - see my modified post above - because theoretically angels were supposed to be obedient and such, but apparently Chuck didn't do such a great job with that sometimes, and especially it seems with the archangels, since only one of the  four of them didn't rebel in some way or other. And remember that in the angel world, rebelling = one of the worst things you can do supposedly, whereas angels were commanded supposedly to kill for God on occasion, so, to me rebelling - like Lucifer did - would more fit the "evil" label than killing.

Even Michael - the supposedly good one - didn't think twice about "accidentally" killing people that just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, so to me, I'm not sure killing counts as "evil" in angel vernacular.

Edited July 26, 2017 by AwesomO4000

[MysteryGuest]

2 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

The difference is that God specifically said that Lucifer became evil, not because of the Mark but because he already was what the Mark made more pronounced. To me that would extend to Cain, and Dean as bearers of the Mark. Sam didn't start out Soulless and he wasn't Soulless based on anything he did. So it wouldn't  really apply IMO.  Sam still gets a "get out of jail free" card for that IMO either way.

I personally think they played fast and loose with the lore of the Mark.  We saw that it would have eventually have turned Dean into a monster, but that's not who he is without the Mark.  It's still an outside influence so I don't see how you hold Dean accountable for that anymore than the others.

[AwesomO4000]

3 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

I personally think they played fast and loose with the lore of the Mark.  We saw that it would have eventually have turned Dean into a monster, but that's not who he is without the Mark.  It's still an outside influence so I don't see how you hold Dean accountable for that anymore than the others.

Again agreed. Cain became a demon - and it seemed that Dean would need to become one too in order to contain the mark, so that would be what the mark would want... but obviously Dean didn't want to become a demon, so the mark had to be having an effect that wasn't already in Dean just to achieve its goal of being contained. In my opinion anyway.

Edited July 26, 2017 by AwesomO4000
damn typos: it's does not = its.

[MysteryGuest]

3 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Dean and Cain were human but Chuck made no indication that those rules wouldn't apply to humans. He said it as a blanket statement that whoever had the Mark, it made them more of who they really always were.  It's not been walked back as to only apply to archangels.

I still don't see the difference, so we can agree to disagree.  With the Mark, Dean's negative, violent traits were emphasized.  Without a soul, Sam had no filter or conscience to keep him from doing whatever would get him the result he wanted, just like Charlie.  They were each dealing with some sort of outside influence, whether by having part of themselves removed, or having something added that would alter their personality.  

[catrox14]

Just now, MysteryGuest said:

I personally think they played fast and loose with the lore of the Mark.  We saw that it would have eventually have turned Dean into a monster, but that's not who he is without the Mark.  It's still an outside influence so I don't see how you hold Dean accountable for that anymore than the others.

Oh I agree that Dean SHOULDN'T be held accountable. I'm not saying I think he should be but narratively they have basically said. "Sorry, the Mark makes you more of what you are".  That's something that I'm just having trouble with. Not that I don't understand what you and others are saying, I'm just trying to understand how the show is treating it 

[MysteryGuest]

3 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Oh I agree that Dean SHOULDN'T be held accountable. I'm not saying I think he should be but narratively they have basically said. "Sorry, the Mark makes you more of what you are".  That's something that I'm just having trouble with. Not that I don't understand what you and others are saying, I'm just trying to understand how the show is treating it 

I see what you're saying, but I honestly don't think the show has tried to make Dean any "guiltier" than Sam or Charlie.  I think they each had to deal with their own guilt over what they did while under the influence, so to speak.  But both Sam and Cas repeatedly told Dean his behavior wasn't him, it was the Mark.  I don't really feel that he's been held any more accountable than the others.  And Chuck can be a pain in the ass sometimes, so I take what he says with a grain of salt!

[catrox14]

22 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

I see what you're saying, but I honestly don't think the show has tried to make Dean any "guiltier" than Sam or Charlie.  I think they each had to deal with their own guilt over what they did while under the influence, so to speak.  But both Sam and Cas repeatedly told Dean his behavior wasn't him, it was the Mark.  I don't really feel that he's been held any more accountable than the others.  And Chuck can be a pain in the ass sometimes, so I take what he says with a grain of salt!

No, I agree he wasn't held accountable but I think, intentionally or not, the end result is they are flat out implying this is who Dean (and Cain) always was.  That in his DNA he's a killer. That's what I get from it. Like he's not "guilty" of a crime but that he is  fundamentally evil.

Edited July 26, 2017 by catrox14

[AwesomO4000]

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

No, I agree he wasn't held accountable but I think, intentionally or not, the end result is they are flat out implying this is who Dean (and Cain) always was.  That in his DNA he's a killer. That's what I get from it. Like he's not "guilty" of a crime but that he is  fundamentally evil.

Whereas I honestly don't get that at all from what I've seen on the show, but because of that, I don't know how to explain why I don't think the show isn't showing that beyond the things I've already said. I don't want to say that your interpretation is wrong, but it's not one that I see, and I don't think that is what the show intended either. But part of why I don't think it is what the show intended is the result. I think if the show intended us to see that being a killer was always inside Dean, then they would show us Dean as a killer even after the mark was gone, but they didn't show that. Who knows... maybe part of why Dean seems to be a bit off his game to some (though not to me) is either part of showing us unequivocally that Dean is not that killer or fundamentally evil, Dean being a bit gunshy because of his experiences with the mark, or both. Maybe the powers that be are giving Dean a rest from heavy-duty killing as part of that agenda - i.e. showing us that Dean is not just a killer... even Dean's world-saving resolution in season 11 - though brave and something only he could do - was not via killing or even violence, but through negotiation and leadership, showing us that Dean is actually more than a shoot first type of resolution guy and can even save the world without actual violence at all. And this is not something I would expect if the message was that Dean was intrinsically a "killer" or "evil."

Even in terms of the BMoL, the writers gave Dean the BMoL is bad position - with Dean not being cruel to the vampire like Ketch was being, and having Dean questioning Ketch's motives - with Sam (in my opinion somewhat uncharacteristically) being the "yay let's kill 'em all" dude even for contrast. This would not be what I would expect the writers to do if the message was that Dean is a killer and/or evil. If anything they were contrasting Ketch - who claimed Dean was like him - and Dean to show us how wrong Ketch was.

So for me, I don't think the show is trying to show or even in any way imply that Dean is just a killer or is evil. If anything, I see the opposite: the show actively showing us that Dean isn't - in multiple ways.

Edited July 26, 2017 by AwesomO4000

[Katy M]

14 hours ago, catrox14 said:

The Mark was said to have made someone more of what they were, and Dean and Cain were serial killers.

With the possible exceptions of Lester and Baby Stein, I don't think Dean did kill anyone with the mark that he would have killed without the mark.  I don't recall him killing anyone but monsters before he became a demon.  He was mostly just killing demons while a demon, until the Lester thing.  but, then he had the added burden of being a demon, so don't even know whether to count it for mark purposes.  After demon cure, the first humans he killed were in The Things We Left Behind.  They were basically kiddie rapists trying to kill him, so I'm not sure in what universe Dean wouldn't at least try to kill them. 

Then, he was fine the minute the mark left his arm.  Lucifer was apparently still evil after the mark because he couldn't have transferred the mark to Cain while locked in the cage, so that clearly happened afterwards.  Proving that Lucifer was Lucifer with or without the mark.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

11 hours ago, catrox14 said:

I think you've conflated two separate things.

Ah, I understand now.  It wasn't as clear to me in your original post that I quoted for my previous response since you had that line about not being worthy of the Mark a second time in the middle of your other argument about the effects of the Mark.  Gotcha.

In any event, I agree with @MysteryGuest:.  

11 hours ago, MysteryGuest said:

The Mark just accentuates the negative and brings those baser instincts to the surface.  I still think Dean gets a pass just like soulless Sam, or bad Charlie.  Their resulting behavior was certainly a part of their personalities, but under normal circumstances, they were each able to control those instincts.  With the Mark, or without a soul, or split in two, like Charlie, there was no conscience to fight those baser instincts.  I really don't see them as any different.

1 hour ago, Katy M said:

Then, he was fine the minute the mark left his arm.  Lucifer was apparently still evil after the mark because he couldn't have transferred the mark to Cain while locked in the cage, so that clearly happened afterwards.  Proving that Lucifer was Lucifer with or without the mark.

This is a very good point!

[Wayward Son]

1 hour ago, Aeryn13 said:

I want it over quickly as well though I don`t particularly care for Dean folding to Sam. It`s not a crime to hold a different opinion or favour a different tactic than Sam and it`s not a slight against him. As for Benny, the "we have to give monsters a chance" approach is pretty rich coming from the guy who called vendetta on Benny out of pretty much jealousy.

I think Sam's issues are more complex than that. For instance, I think it makes sense for Sam to be wary of a dubious supernatural ally after his own experiences with Ruby. Although there was definitively some jealously involved, which IMO wasn't helped by Dean spitefully putting Sam down constantly and boasting about how Benny, the guy he knew for less than a year, was the best friend ever.

 

S13 SDCC SPOILERS 

Spoiler

 

But to get back to my original point. When Dean was the one trapped behind a "rift" he didn't apply shoot first and ask questions later. He took whatever aid he could get regardless of the source and ultimately befriended Benny. So I'm not saying it's wrong for Dean to oppose Sam in a general sense; but it is why I would consider it hypocritical, if he continues to argue for shooting Jack after Sam points out he could help save Mary.

 

In this instance, Im happy enough to admit that depending on how the scenes play out, there could easily be a certain level of hypocrisy shown from both brothers. 

 

Edited July 27, 2017 by Wayward Son

[ILoveReading]

31 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

I think Sam's issues are more complex than that. For instance, I think it makes sense for Sam to be wary of a dubious supernatural ally after his own experiences with Ruby. Although there was definitively some jealously involved, which IMO wasn't helped by Dean spitefully putting Sam down constantly and boasting about how Benny, the guy he knew for less than a year, was the best friend ever.

 

S13 SDCC SPOILERS 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

But to get back to my original point. When Dean was the one trapped behind a "rift" he didn't apply shoot first and ask questions later. He took whatever aid he could get regardless of the source and ultimately befriended Benny. So I'm not saying it's wrong for Dean to oppose Sam in a general sense; but it is why I would consider it hypocritical, if he continues to argue for shooting Jack after Sam points out he could help save Mary.

 

In this instance, Im happy enough to admit that depending on how the scenes play out, there could easily be a certain level of hypocrisy shown from both brothers. 

 

I also think Dean's issues after coming back from purgatory are also more complex. 

Dean's biggest fear is abandoned by those he loves.  So for Dean to go missing and come back and find out no one literally did anything to find him had to trigger and confirm every fear he had that those around him were going to leave.  It didn't help that Sam almost seemed to resent Dean coming back and kept telling Dean he was going to leave again.  So at this point its not surprising that Dean wasn't in a caring and sharing mood.

In that kind of situation, a person is going to go on the defensive.  Kind of like push them away before they can leave again. 

Not to mention, Dean was suffering from PTSD from 360 combat.  Dean lived in a black and white world.  Kill or be killed.  That kind of thinking doesn't go away over night, and to Dean the facts were simple.  Benny was there for him.  Sam wasn't.  

IMO, Benny only came between them because Sam put him there.  Dean came back from purgatory.  He fulfilled his promise to Benny, and then immediately went to find Sam.  Sam was the one acting like he wished Dean had stayed gone, so I don't really fault Dean for not wanting to care and share when Sam seemed closed off.  Then during blood brother Dean told Sam he was taking care of personal business.  He went to help a friend.  Then at the end of the ep instead of giving Dean a chance to explain, Sam just decided Benny was evil and had to go.

Sam then proceeded to put an unstable man on Benny.  When he thought Benny was guilty, Sam immediately made up his mind that he was.  Despite the fact Dean had a reasonable explantion, Sam continued to deny Benny could be innocent.  He forced Dean's hand.  Because sorry, Sam at that point the truth hurts.  Sam wasnt' exactly there for Dean when he got out of hell, and if he relied on Sam to get out of purgatory, he'd still be there.  Then Sam left Dean unconcious on the floor handcuffed to a radiator.

Dean was wrong to send the text, and there were things he probably could have handled better but they both played a part that lead to Dean telling Sam that Benny had never let him down.  

Edited July 27, 2017 by ILoveReading

[ahrtee]

17 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

IMO wasn't helped by Dean spitefully putting Sam down constantly and boasting about how Benny, the guy he knew for less than a year, was the best friend ever

Sorry, I don't see this interpretation.  I don't see Dean "putting Sam down constantly," much less being particularly spiteful or "boasting."   Dean was pissed that Sam didn't look for him.  That was valid.  Sam was pissed that Dean hadn't told him about Benny.  Also valid (though IMO understandable, considering how Sam reacted.)  But the only time I remember Dean saying Benny was better than Sam  was when he was whammied by that coin, and Sam wouldn't even accept that as an excuse/apology, which annoyed me no end, considering all the truly awful things Sam has said to Dean many times while under some outside influence, and Dean always hand-waved it as not his fault.  

The important thing to remember is that Dean may have only known Benny for a year, but it was a year of "360-degree combat," which tests and proves people much more than just casual friendship.  Also, remember that Dean always had a hard time with trust issues.  The fact that he learned to trust Benny while in Purgatory (it took quite a while, according to the flashbacks) speaks volumes for all they'd been through together.  Cas worked for the angels for the vast majority of season 4 and even though he finally stood with them against the angels, it took longer to trust him fully (and even so, he occasionally went off the rails, like beating Dean to a pulp because he wanted to say yes to Michael).  But once they did, would you say Dean was being spiteful or take it as an insult to Sam if Dean had said that *Cas* was "the best friend ever"?  

[Katy M]

29 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

 But the only time I remember Dean saying Benny was better than Sam  was when he was whammied by that coin,

In Citizen Fang, he also said that Benny was the ONLY one who had NEVER let him down.  And, actually I wouldn't mind if Dean had just said that Benny was his best friend, if he hadn't done it in a comparitve way, implying that Sam did let him down on a regular basis.  However, I never cared much for the Benny character for 2 reasons.  1. He seemed to me like a plot device to just to get between sAm and Dean.  2. I don't like the "good" monster thing.  I really don't.  I was burned by Ruby, and I refuse to get behind another monster.  It's fine if they find monsters that aren't killing and let them go. But, I don't want them being buddy-buddy with them. 

So, I guess what I'm saying is, I was fine with Benny as long as he stayed separate from Dean after Purgatory.

Oh, and I guess I also didn't like it that the writers apparently went out of their way to put his death on Sam, even though he wasn't the one who asked it, wasn't there when it happened, and tried to get Benny to come back out of Purgatory with him. 

[MysteryGuest]

1 hour ago, Wayward Son said:

I think Sam's issues are more complex than that. For instance, I think it makes sense for Sam to be wary of a dubious supernatural ally after his own experiences with Ruby. Although there was definitively some jealously involved, which IMO wasn't helped by Dean spitefully putting Sam down constantly and boasting about how Benny, the guy he knew for less than a year, was the best friend ever.

I have to disagree with this.  It's not like Dean came back from Purgatory with Benny and told Sam to take a hike because Benny was going to be his new best friend and hunting buddy.  All Dean did was allow Benny to live, in exchange for helping him out of Purgatory.  He also made Benny promise to stay on the straight and narrow, and he occasionally checked up on him to make sure he was doing just that.

I can't even turn this into a Sam vs. Dean thing because Sam's reaction to Benny was so utterly ridiculous and out-of-character.  If anyone would have understood Dean's reasons for not killing Benny, it would have been Sam.   I will never forgive TPTB for the character assassination they did to Sam in season 8.  It pisses me off every time I watch those episodes.  

[ahrtee]

2 minutes ago, Katy M said:

In Citizen Fang, he also said that Benny was the ONLY one who had NEVER let him down.  And, actually I wouldn't mind if Dean had just said that Benny was his best friend, if he hadn't done it in a comparitve way, implying that Sam did let him down on a regular basis.  However, I never cared much for the Benny character for 2 reasons.  1. He seemed to me like a plot device to just to get between sAm and Dean.  2. I don't like the "good" monster thing.  I really don't.  I was burned by Ruby, and I refuse to get behind another monster.  It's fine if they find monsters that aren't killing and let them go. But, I don't want them being buddy-buddy with them. 

So, I guess what I'm saying is, I was fine with Benny as long as he stayed separate from Dean after Purgatory.

Oh, and I guess I also didn't like it that the writers apparently went out of their way to put his death on Sam, even though he wasn't the one who asked it, wasn't there when it happened, and tried to get Benny to come back out of Purgatory with him. 

OK, had to check, and what he said was: 

DEAN: ... In fact, every relationship I have ever had has gone to crap at some point. But the one thing I can say about Benny – he has never let me down.

SAM: Huh. Well, good on you, Dean. Must feel great finally finding someone you can trust after all these years.

DEAN: [looks down, then back up at SAM] All I'm saying is that Benny is innocent.

So, yes, his relationship to Sam has "gone to crap" several times over the years, and I think even Sam would admit that.  And Dean was still smarting over being "abandoned," which, to his mind, was a betrayal, just like the people he has trusted the most over the years:  Sam, John, Cassie, Lisa, even Bobby and Mary and Cas, have "let him down" at some point over the years.  It doesn't mean he doesn't still love them, or consider them family, and in this scene he's not actually comparing Sam with Benny--Sam is the one doing that, in a very bitter and snide way.  Dean didn't fight with him about it, just  restated *his* point that he thought Benny was innocent.  But I can see how it might sound bad to those looking for insult. 

I personally liked the Dean-Benny dynamic (I'm deliberately using a hyphen instead of a slash... :) )   I got the feeling that Dean felt comfortable with him in a way he doesn't always with Sam.  Oddly enough, IMO it's because he didn't really care about Benny's opinion of him the way he does about Sam's, so in some ways he turned to Benny *because* Sam was more important to him.  I know a lot of people (men in particular) who can't talk about doubts or fears to family but can to strangers/people they don't know as well.   I think Dean still has the big-brother-has-to-be-strong attitude, and can't openly show weakness or fear (even though it's pretty visible to those who know him well--like Sam.)  

About your reasons for not liking Benny, both are perfectly reasonable.  IA that Benny was first and foremost a plot device for angst, and hate it.  But (as I think I said before) I can understand *Sam* feeling burned/betrayed by his trusting Ruby and could understand his reaction to Benny because of that except that it *only* applied to Benny, not the other "good" monsters they've met.  (And I don't want to get into Sam's comparing Benny to Amy, because...sheesh.  Another whole can of worms, which I don't even want to look into.  Suffice it to say I don't think they're even in the same universe as similar, and will explain only if anyone asks.   Otherwise, *humming and pretending I didn't even hear it.*)  

I think maybe the problem is that they use "monster" as a pejorative term instead of simply a description.  And if you're sticking strictly to the description of "non-human," there are way too many exceptions these days.  So I think maybe they need to stop with the use of "monster" as an insult and just go on with their own definition, as in "those who are killing people and those who aren't."  That way we don't have to worry about calling Benny or Garth (or even Sam if they want to go there again *sigh*) "monsters" while the BMoL or Hitler are not. 

 And for your final point,  I honestly didn't see the writers putting Benny's death on Sam.  It was pretty obvious that it was his choice, that Sam had reconciled with him and his friendship with Dean, and that Benny just didn't feel he had any place in the real world again.  But I refuse to watch Taxi Driver ever again (once was enough!) so maybe there was something I missed.  

[trxr4kids]

2 hours ago, ahrtee said:

But the only time I remember Dean saying Benny was better than Sam  was when he was whammied by that coin, and Sam wouldn't even accept that as an excuse/apology, which annoyed me no end, considering all the truly awful things Sam has said to Dean many times while under some outside influence, and Dean always hand-waved it as not his fault.  

Why can't I like this post more than once? Season 8 did no favors for Sam as a character for me yet I feel it was supposed to.

[AwesomO4000]

3 hours ago, MysteryGuest said:

I can't even turn this into a Sam vs. Dean thing because Sam's reaction to Benny was so utterly ridiculous and out-of-character.  If anyone would have understood Dean's reasons for not killing Benny, it would have been Sam.   I will never forgive TPTB for the character assassination they did to Sam in season 8.  It pisses me off every time I watch those episodes.  

You're kinder and/or more stalwart than me. I can't even watch most of season 8 it pisses me off so much.

1 hour ago, trxr4kids said:

Season 8 did no favors for Sam as a character for me yet I feel it was supposed to.

I commend your being able to see some intention of good there. I have a hard time believing any of that was supposed to be good for Sam's character... if nothing else, how could just abandoning Kevin to Crowley ever be seen as a good thing? Maybe in some weird universe where it's supposed to be noble not to interfere with the "natural order of things" like some nature photographer, but not in our world. And even if somehow abandoning Kevin was not supposed to be seen as bad (which see my previous comment), then I'm not sure Sam's "let's kill innocent Benny" attitude could be considered good... or as mysteryguest pointed out, even in character for Sam. I'm of the opinion that if it was supposed to be "good," then Benny actually would have been bad, if not down-right evil, not fluffy bunny good. And just to rub in the "see how wrong Sam was" Benny was not only good, but sacrificed himself for Sam... so I'm not seeing that as supposed to be looking good for Sam either. And finally we had Sam acting like a jerks, seemingly blaming Dean for keeping him away from the relationship that Sam had already ended before Dean came back. The whole thing, in my opinion, seemed designed to tear Sam down or revert him back to season 4 (or worse)... like Carver didn't even bother to take into account the 3 years after that.

No, Carver - who wrote the first episode - lost me as soon as he had Sam not look for Dean, abandon Kevin, and then declare that Amelia was something he never had had before... while still mentioning Jess - who he had obviously loved and had planned to marry. Just so wrong on so many levels. Then when I decided to give the show a chance again - maybe something more was going on perhaps? - "Citizen Fang" happened, and I threw my hands up and said never again for most of season 8 (I watch "Everybody Hates Hitler" and a couple of the final episodes like "The Great Escapist" - because Metatron! (Yes, I'm a weirdo who loves (to hate) Metatron.))

Otherwise season 8 is at the literal bottom of the seasons for me right next to season 9 (which also managed to somehow trash Sam's character even as the shitty stuff was being done to him - that's some pretty inventive character trashing there).

Okay done now... Sorry it hits one of my buttons that the writers seem to imply they were writing Sam as "mature" or were in any way trying to show positive stuff for his character. I'm just not buying any of what they were selling when the actual product was so obviously not as advertised. How dumb do they think I am?

[trxr4kids]

1 hour ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Okay done now... Sorry it hits one of my buttons that the writers seem to imply they were writing Sam as "mature" or were in any way trying to show positive stuff for his character. I'm just not buying any of what they were selling when the actual product was so obviously not as advertised. How dumb do they think I am?

I haven't decided if they (TPtB) think we're idiots (and there's plenty of evidence that they do) or if they're just that tone deaf in regards to characterization.

Edited July 28, 2017 by trxr4kids
apostrophe's matter people

[AwesomO4000]

1 hour ago, trxr4kids said:

I haven't decided if they (TPtB) think we're idiots (and there's plenty of evidence that they do) or if they're just that tone deaf in regards to characterization.

:: Karen Walker voice :: It's funny 'cuz it's true. ; )

Sometimes anyway. Sometimes I think they're brilliant... and that's the weird thing: how the same writer can write an episode I find awesome but later write one where I think "what the hell was this writer thinking?" and makes me question if they know what this show is even about.

[Katy M]

12 hours ago, ahrtee said:

 And for your final point,  I honestly didn't see the writers putting Benny's death on Sam.  It was pretty obvious that it was his choice, that Sam had reconciled with him and his friendship with Dean, and that Benny just didn't feel he had any place in the real world again.  But I refuse to watch Taxi Driver ever again (once was enough!) so maybe there was something I missed.  

I guess maybe my problem there is another discussion group that kept blaming the death on Sam.  Maybe it wasn't the writers' intention.  But, a lot of people squarely put the blame there..  I agree that it was Benny's choice. Benny didn't feel like he fit in here and part of him wanted to go back to Purgatory.  I actually felt really bad for him.  Like I said, I don't hate Benny as a character.  Just as a foil to Sam and Dean's relationship. 

[ahrtee]

1 hour ago, Katy M said:

I guess maybe my problem there is another discussion group that kept blaming the death on Sam.  Maybe it wasn't the writers' intention.  But, a lot of people squarely put the blame there..  I agree that it was Benny's choice. Benny didn't feel like he fit in here and part of him wanted to go back to Purgatory.  I actually felt really bad for him.  Like I said, I don't hate Benny as a character.  Just as a foil to Sam and Dean's relationship. 

There are a lot of people who see an insult to their favorite character where others don't (and often, IMO, where none was intended).  And while it's interesting to see others' interpretations, it does make it frustrating to read discussion groups sometimes.

I think the writers' intention was pretty clear *not* to blame Sam.  Benny told Dean directly when he agreed to go back to Purgatory, which should have warned him about his intention:

 BENNY: I'm not a good fit, Dean. Not with vampires and, for sure, not with the humans. I don't belong. And after a while... that starts to wear on you. 

Personally, I could see right there that he was intending to stay behind.  And once in Purgatory, Sam tried several times, up to the last second, to get him to come with him, but he refused:

BENNY: Go on. It's me they want. Go on. You just make sure you tell Dean I said goodbye. I was never any good up there anyway.

So I don't see any way anyone (including the writers) could blame Sam, except maybe for the need to send Benny to Purgatory in the first place, which was Dean's choice, not Sam's. JMO.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

In Citizen Fang, he also said that Benny was the ONLY one who had NEVER let him down. 

From everything I`ve seen on the show that was actually true. Granted, the circumstances are a lot more complex and a lifelong relationship will have conflict in it at some point but I have never seen another character on the show treat Dean as well as Benny. So even though it was probably hyperbole on Dean`s part in the moment, for me Benny took the crown from Cas in terms of that.

I felt incredibly bad for the character having such a sad ending but at the point of Taxi Driver, it seemed to be the only peace he could have.  

Quote

which IMO wasn't helped by Dean spitefully putting Sam down constantly

I honestly felt Dean was way too nice about it all during the first half of Season 8. When Sam made his final demand that Dean get over it already and he had explained himself enough, if that had been me, I would have gotten in the car and run him over. Like, my blood was boiling during that scene. More so because Sam got his way. 

That`s why both the "my biggest sin was letting you down" and the entire revisiting the Purgatory issue in Season 11 didn`t feel genuine to me. If I don`t detect a hint of regret or remorse or guilt or self-loathing DURING the time the storyline goes on, don`t try to retroactively tell me it was there because you figured it makes the character look better, show. The time to convey this to me is while it is happening, not tell me afterwards it was happening, all evidence to the contrary. I don`t have Alzheimers, I can remember what went on. 

If it`s meant to be there, put it in the script in the first place, make sure the actors plays it and have the director enforce it if necessary. 

Edited July 28, 2017 by Aeryn13

[Wayward Son]

22 hours ago, Katy M said:

In Citizen Fang, he also said that Benny was the ONLY one who had NEVER let him down.  And, actually I wouldn't mind if Dean had just said that Benny was his best friend, if he hadn't done it in a comparitve way, implying that Sam did let him down on a regular basis.  However, I never cared much for the Benny character for 2 reasons.  1. He seemed to me like a plot device to just to get between sAm and Dean.  2. I don't like the "good" monster thing.  I really don't.  I was burned by Ruby, and I refuse to get behind another monster.  It's fine if they find monsters that aren't killing and let them go. But, I don't want them being buddy-buddy with them. 

So, I guess what I'm saying is, I was fine with Benny as long as he stayed separate from Dean after Purgatory.

Oh, and I guess I also didn't like it that the writers apparently went out of their way to put his death on Sam, even though he wasn't the one who asked it, wasn't there when it happened, and tried to get Benny to come back out of Purgatory with him. 

What you've said here covers quite a large portion of why I loathe the character of Benny and he is my least favourite character on the show to date. 

 

1. I totally agree that one of the biggest issues with the Dean-Benny friendship is the fact it was used to hurt Sam by pointing out how much better than Sam Benny was. I would have been fine with the friendship if it had been left as simply "Benny is Dean's friend" and not "Benny is a uber friend who doesn't let him down like some people". Plus, I've always found the comparison, as made by Dean in Citizen Fang and Southern Comfort,  completely and utterly ridiculous. He knew Benny for less than a year, which pales in comparison to the lifetime he has known Sam, and to a lesser extent ,the five years he knew Castiel. Pretty much all of that time they were in a situation where Benny needed Dean. He needed Dean to get out of purgatory. Of course he wasn't going to let Dean down and lose his lift home. Had they spent more time together in the real world Dean's trust in him would have made more sense to me, but as it was I found Dean's viewpoint on him completely and utterly naive. Although, in typical SN style Dean gets to be right about everything. 

2. Different and yet linked with reason one, Benny never felt like a real character to me. IMO he was a plot device to instill conflict between the brothers. This was only confirmed for me when they wrote him out after Torn and Frayed when the brothers relationship was beginning to repair again. The writers choosing only to bring him back one final time so they could tie off that loose end. 

3. In a totally bitch vs jerk way I utterly resent the fact that Benny turned out to be good! I hate the fact that when Sam and Castiel allied with supernatural being the others found dubious they turned out to be evil, while when Dean does it his ally turns out to be the cuddliest little ally ever. Give me a break show!

4. From a lore viewpoint I don't think Benny worked either. Vampires of the SPN verse are not meant to be good! Even Lenore stopped hunting out of self-preservation (she didn't want to draw the attention of people like Gordon and Elkins) and not because she genuinely cared  about humanity.

5. Benny as a character just bored me. He was very bog standard with a rather uninteresting and cliched background. 

 

Some general thoughts on Dean and Sam in S8

In regards to Sam vs Dean, I don't blame Sam for being standoffish with Dean. From watching Hunteri Heroici it's pretty clear that Sam believed Dean was dead. He had a mental breakdown and just tried to escape because he couldn't cope with what had happened. When Dean found out Sam hadn't looked, he didn't  care enough to stop and show concern for Sam or ask why. Instead Dean immediately went on the offence and started making accusations. Naturally Sam got defensive in the face of such behaviour and grew irritated with Dean and his hostility. Season 8 and Season 9 version of Dean was a complete and utter loathesome jerk for me and transformed things so that I went from considering him one of my favorite fictional character of all time (as I did during seasons 1-7) to a character I vary between tolerating and disliking depending on the day. He was loathesome towards Sam in season eight constantly berating him for desiring to have a normal life (Citizen Fang), bemoaning how others were so much better than him and then using Sam's past mistakes as a weapon when he listed them in Sacrifice. Instead of caring enough about Sam to find out why he behaved the way he did, Dean was more than happy to start attacking him and berating Sam's behaviour, which were the result of mental health issues. IMO it was no wonder Sam showed signs of being suicidal by the end of the season. 

[devlin123]

I love how people were expecting a guy who had just returned from what was basically a horrific war zone where he had to fight for his life 24/7 for an entire year to come back with no psychological issues. Why wasn't Sam expected to be more understanding. But once again Dean is expected to put his own issues aside and put Sam first. Where is the support for a guy who has spent the last year running and fighting for his life?

[Katy M]

8 minutes ago, devlin123 said:

I love how people were expecting a guy who had just returned from what was basically a horrific war zone where he had to fight for his life 24/7 for an entire year to come back with no psychological issues. Why wasn't Sam expected to be more understanding. But once again Dean is expected to put his own issues aside and put Sam first. Where is the support for a guy who has spent the last year running and fighting for his life?

I don't expect Dean to put his own issues aside or to put Sam first.  But, he could have let it go that Sam didn't look for him. That was the sane thing to do.  Or, if he couldn't let it go (which is his right) he should have just cut ties and gone off with Benny or something.  Or, you know, actually discuss his issues.  Both of them drove me crazy first half of season 8.

[MysteryGuest]

I think Dean would have gotten over the fact that Sam didn't look for him, but when he realized he had also ditched Kevin to fend for himself with Crowley, that pushed him over the edge.  

We've discussed this season numerous times, and I think their only objective was to have Sam and Dean at odds for most of the season, regardless of how much they had to fuck with both of their characters to make that happen.  If they honestly felt that having Sam not look for Dean and bail on Kevin was somehow a sign of growth and maturity, then they must have been passing that crack pipe around the writer's table pretty regularly.  Then someone must have binge-watched season 8 on Netflix a few years later and realized just how badly they screwed up, which made them add that lame line for Sam in season 11 about how he should have looked for Dean.  Sam shouldn't have had to apologize for the stupid shit the writers made him do.  They should have made a public service announcement themselves and taken the blame for the worst character assassination of the entire series. It was that bad.

[trxr4kids]

5 hours ago, devlin123 said:

I love how people were expecting a guy who had just returned from what was basically a horrific war zone where he had to fight for his life 24/7 for an entire year to come back with no psychological issues. Why wasn't Sam expected to be more understanding. But once again Dean is expected to put his own issues aside and put Sam first.

Because Sam went to THE CAGE!!!Gasp!!!With Michael and Lucifer!!!!! Never mind Michael turned out to be a huge baby, LUCIFER WAS THERE!!!!

Dean was only in hell with the demon torture master trying to break the first seal, in charge of or directly torturing him, nothing to see there!

4 hours ago, Katy M said:

I don't expect Dean to put his own issues aside or to put Sam first.  But, he could have let it go that Sam didn't look for him. That was the sane thing to do.

Someone who comes back from that kind of (combat) trauma (IRL) can and does frequently not think/react sanely due to the trauma.

[catrox14]

Seems like an awful lot to ask that the literally just out of 360 degree, nearly 24 hour a day, 365 days combat, PTSD ridden guy, must be the one that has to understand and be compassionate about someone he fully believed would look for him but didn't. I have to be honest I can't fathom  why that is expected much less condemned for not being done. Seems pretty cruel to Dean. JMHO

[Wayward Son]

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

Seems like an awful lot to ask that the literally just out of 360 degree, nearly 24 hour a day, 365 days combat, PTSD ridden guy, must be the one that has to understand and be compassionate about someone he fully believed would look for him but didn't. I have to be honest I can't fathom  why that is expected much less condemned for not being done. Seems pretty cruel to Dean. JMHO

No more cruel than viewers demanding perfection from Sam and then attacking Sam for daring to have a mental break down and fleeing, due to an inability to cope. Or Dean battering away at Sam's limited self-esteem and mental health to the point he exhibits signs of being suicical, but YMMV. 

[catrox14]

45 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

No more cruel than viewers demanding perfection from Sam and then attacking Sam for daring to have a mental break down and fleeing, due to an inability to cope. Or Dean battering away at Sam's limited self-esteem and mental health to the point he exhibits signs of being suicical, but YMMV. 

I think I must have lost the thread here. I thought you were saying that narratively that's what Dean should have done. Or are you saying it's more what viewers think Dean should have done? I think I don't understand the conversation, so I'll just bow out.

[Wayward Son]

3 hours ago, catrox14 said:

I think I must have lost the thread here. I thought you were saying that narratively that's what Dean should have done. Or are you saying it's more what viewers think Dean should have done? I think I don't understand the conversation, so I'll just bow out.

The way I understood your post is that you were saying that it was "cruel" of me to not approve of Dean's behaviour in s8. I was countering that IMO it is no more cruel than Dean fans, and indeed within the show Dean himself, who persist on casting Sam as the bad guy for having a mental breakdown and the actions resulting from said breakdown. 

 

@trxr4kids

Quote

Because Sam went to THE CAGE!!!Gasp!!!With Michael and Lucifer!!!!! Never mind Michael turned out to be a huge baby, LUCIFER WAS THERE!!!!

Dean was only in hell with the demon torture master trying to break the first seal, in charge of or directly torturing him, nothing to see there!

I'm not sure why you've brought up the brothers respective time in hell.? As I understood it, we have been discussing the trauma of Dean's time in purgatory and the trauma of Sam having a mental breakdown at the end of season seven. 

Edited July 29, 2017 by Wayward Son

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I love how people were expecting a guy who had just returned from what was basically a horrific war zone where he had to fight for his life 24/7 for an entire year to come back with no psychological issues. Why wasn't Sam expected to be more understanding. But once again Dean is expected to put his own issues aside and put Sam first. Where is the support for a guy who has spent the last year running and fighting for his life?

100 % agreed. 

Dean comes back from Purgatory to a guy who doesn´t act even one iota like he was broken or regretful or anything. Nope, Sam acts put upon that Dean dares to be alive. Wow. Did anyone force Sam to leave the bitchy vet? I don`t think so. Sam explained crap. He acted smug and self-righteous about not lifting a finger to save Dean. Or Kevin.

So the idea that Dean was the one who should have to cater to Sam`s whims and ask him nicely if Sam felt alright is honestly offensive to me.

And Sam having limited self-esteem? IMO he has the very opposite problem. Which is why Dean NOT catering to him at first and daring to be hurt and confused bothered Sam. Because Dean dared to question Sam and of course we can`t have that.

Then, after acting like a total shit in the first half of Season 8, Sam gets narratively rewarded with the Trials and proceeds in no time to make it all about a Chosen One quest for him, to purify him. That speech about showing Dean the light was as quickly forgotten as it was said.

What does Dean do? He plays the dutiful little sidekick and constantly debases himself in the second half. And that is fucking STILL not enough for Sam.

That speech in the church wasn`t about Sam acknowledging a mistake of his own, not really. It was about how Dean`s wrong actions hurt Sam`s ego. Like OMG, what does it fucking take to satisfy that ego? Does Dean have to crawl before him and tell Sam everything Sam ever does is right?

I get wanting validation but I`m years beyond any sympathy for other characters, mainly Dean, not being able to feed the seemingly bottomless well of need Sam has in that regard. It is fed far too much already with stuff like that wonky "rah rah, bow before me for I am your leader" stuff and it is Sam`s problem and his alone that noone can satisfy it.  

Though I`m sure by the sounds of Comic Con Season 13 will all about feeding Sam`s ego since that is apparently his due. Urgh.

Edited July 29, 2017 by Aeryn13

[MysteryGuest]

1 hour ago, Wayward Son said:

The way I understood your post is that you were saying that it was "cruel" of me to not approve of Dean's behaviour in s8. I was countering that IMO it is no more cruel than Dean fans, and indeed within the show Dean himself, who persist on casting Sam as the bad guy for having a mental breakdown and the actions resulting from said breakdown. 

I'd have to re-watch season 8, and I'm not terribly inclined to do that, but was it ever really stated that Sam had a mental breakdown?  When Dean comes back, all Sam says is that everyone was gone, he didn't know where to look for Dean, so he just walked away from the life.  He figured someone else could worry about Kevin, or any other issues that were out there.  If you had just returned from a year of fighting for your life 24/7 to that attitude from your fellow hunter brother, are you honestly saying you wouldn't be pissed?  Now I'm on record for saying that Sam's behavior in season 8 shouldn't be held against him because the writers totally fucked him over, but with things as they were written, I really don't see Sam as the sympathetic character there.  

Season 8 just needs to be wiped from the SPN history books.