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

[catrox14]

49 minutes ago, Reganne said:

 I just think both brothers have been through severely traumatic experiences that would give them both severe PTSD in the real world and probably shouldn't really be expected to put the full onus on solely one of their shoulders. 

Sam was shown to have adapted to life without Dean by the time Dean showed up again a year later. He literally told Dean in 8.1 that he found a life he never had before( sorry JESSICA). That he was at that point happy but he left her and he didn't tell Dean why he left. Sam was not emotionally unstable when he got to the cabin other than bummed about breaking up with Amelia. But Dean had OBVIOUS PTSD which Sam himself even lampshaded later in the episode. Sam himself said he got his own life together. So yes I do think in that situation, the onus was on Sam to understand where Dean was coming. That it couldn't have been equivalent because the situation was not equivalent.

As far as a character having to shoulder the onus by setting aside their own issues, I'll point to s4 when Dean, having JUST been strangled by Sam, the onus was on Dean to go and save Sam no matter his own immediate trauma.

Edited October 14, 2017 by catrox14

[Reganne]

54 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Sam was shown to have adapted to life without Dean by the time Dean showed up again a year later. He literally told Dean in 8.1 that he found a life he never had before( sorry JESSICA). That he was at that point happy but he left her and he didn't tell Dean why he left. Sam was not emotionally unstable when he got to the cabin other than bummed about breaking up with Amelia. 

And Dean said he was fine and didn't remember hell initially in season 4.  That doesn't mean he wasn't emotionally unstable.  Yeah we never got to dig deeper into Sam's emotional trauma in season 8 so we will never know the extent of it.  That seems to happen a lot in the series.  They only ever showed us Sam's emotional guilt.  And yes I know some people have problems with Sam's speech in Sacrifice but the casual way Sam says "so" at the prospect of his life ending tells me he was emotionally unstable...... even if they only allowed us to see Sam's feelings of guilt.

[catrox14]

28 minutes ago, Reganne said:

And Dean said he was fine and didn't remember hell initially in season 4.  That doesn't mean he wasn't emotionally unstable.  

Dean admitted he was lying about not remembering Hell. And IMO Dean was unstable. He drank excessively in s4 and had anger outbursts, like punching Sam in 4.4

IMO in s8, Sam and Dean had to be opposite viewpoints because Carver was addressing the idea of the soldier returning home to find nothing was the same. That family  had moved on without him. That people changed their lives. I don't know how they could have shown that without Sam being adjusted by the time Dean returned. Maybe Sam was supposed to suffering PTSD in 8.1 but if he was Jared did a poor job of showing that, but I really don't think that's the case because that wasn't what Carver was saying about Sam. And if Sam was suffering PTSD  whooo boy talk about a hypocrite and possibly crazy but I reallllly don't think that is what was going on.

IMO Carver was saying that Sam grieved and adapted and had left hunting and that was OKAY. It was Dean who had the problem.  He gave Dean a vampire war buddy which in a bad analogy was like the war buddy that comes back and drinks too much and can't get adjusted to life outside the war and Dean is his connection to life but because vampire he's sketchy which makes Dean sketchy. Had he not thrown Kevin into the mix it might have flown better. But Kevin was maybe the person that reflected when Sam was messed up and not thinking about anything but his own pain at that time.  But that's just me. YMMV

[Airmid]

6 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

And did Dean make any attempts to understand why Sam did what he did or did he jump straight into "you abandoned me for a girl?" But that's a pretty standard go to for self-obsessed Dean who has to make everything about himself. Just look at how the very normal act of going to college meant that Sam hated him and they'd never been a real family, or how Sam has no right to make decisions about his own fate in case poor old Dean doesn't like what he decides.

Barring the college thing (which I never liked how they harped on in the show) Sam did let Dean down before.

Back when Dean was raised from hell and understandably freaked out was Sam even contactable by those close to him? Nope, Dean had to track him by cell. Then when Dean went to face what had brought him up after Pamela's blinding, Sam was off fucking around with Ruby. In fact, during season four, all Sam seemed capable of doing was sneaking around and lying to his brother. Sam gets out, chooses a demon over his brother and happily slurps demon blood believing in the party line before beating his brother half to death. That's - well that's not a good indicator of someone making good life decisions and even with forgiveness things like this would still weigh heavily on the minds of loved ones. 

This doesn't excuse Dean doing anything similar to his brother at all. But, Dean has gotten more chances to show both his grief and his acceptance while Sam kind of gets left holding the short straw. Sam got written in S8 as someone who just could not give a fuck, and that wasn't right. Given how the story was written however, Dean should have been livid over Sam ditching him to go shack up with the Vet. Nothing was done to show Sam suffering, trying to deal with what happened, why he choose not to look etc. and in the end it severely hurt not only his character but Dean's as well due to their relationship. Not to mention that Kevin was left to fend for himself with no background knowledge of how to do that. One of the smartest moments they ever wrote for that character was Kevin making a demon bomb and tricking demons to bring him the ingredients. 

In short, given how Sam was written in S8, yes Dean gets to say something over that. Just like Sam gets to be pissed his brother got him possessed by an angel without consent. 

[Wayward Son]

One thing that annoys me about Sam not looking for Dean is the fact it could easily be tied into the history of the show. He could have referenced how he behaved during and after Dean’s time in the pit. He could have expressed fear of becoming that guy again, of slipping back into darkness. He was also afraid of the consequences knowing the cost of previous resurrection.  That at least would have made Sam’s motivations clear and understandable IMO. They still could have then had Dean hurt by Sam’s actions. 

 

Sadly, that would be too balanced for Carver whose mission was to highlight just how right the brothers toxic co-dependency is. That is why Sam moving away from it is presented in the worst light possible, as opposed to a more nuanced one, why his objections to Dean’s actions in s9 are wiped away by the “I lied” and of course to complete the three season arc of Carver Sam is back on the co-dependency train and saves Dean at all costs. 

Edited October 14, 2017 by Wayward Son
I meant the pit not the cage. Obviously Sam was the one in the cage.

[Myrelle]

5 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

I blame Sam not leaving on the shows self limitations.

I feel the exact same way, but just exchange the name Dean for Sam.

[Wayward Son]

9 minutes ago, Myrelle said:

I feel the exact same way, but just exchange the name Dean for Sam.

Putting aside my general preferences and the bitch vs jerk of it, I actually think both brothers have suffered at one point or another from the shows refusal to allow them proper time apart to process and deal with things. 

[ILoveReading]

1 minute ago, Wayward Son said:

Putting aside my general preferences and the bitch vs jerk of it, I actually think both brothers have suffered at one point or another from the shows refusal to allow them proper time apart to process and deal with things. 

I know we don't agree on much but I agree with this.  If the show isn't going to go against its established formula they need to stop writing stories where the brothers shouldn't be togther.  Because they should never have been together at the start of s8 or the back half of 9.  Neither was ready to accept their brothers actions. 

[Wayward Son]

9 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

I know we don't agree on much but I agree with this.  If the show isn't going to go against its established formula they need to stop writing stories where the brothers shouldn't be togther.  Because they should never have been together at the start of s8 or the back half of 9.  Neither was ready to accept their brothers actions. 

I agree with this! I also think both brothers could have done with more time apart at the beginning of season 5. Nothing too drastic but 5-6 episodes rather than the two we got. IMO, again I’m trying to put aside my preferences, Dean could have done with more time processing Sam’s actions and reaching a point where he was ready to begin building bridges / forgiving Sam. IMO he was far from ready when they reunited. Likewise, I think Sam needed more time apart from it all! Time to reflect and consider what led to his downfall in the first place, time to recover before he is ready to jump back into things. 

Edited October 15, 2017 by Wayward Son

[companionenvy]

1 hour ago, Airmid said:

Back when Dean was raised from hell and understandably freaked out was Sam even contactable by those close to him? Nope, Dean had to track him by cell

How can Sam be blamed for not being there for Dean when he had zero way of knowing that Dean would ever be back, unless Sam himself found a way to do it? 

 

1 hour ago, Airmid said:

Then when Dean went to face what had brought him up after Pamela's blinding, Sam was off fucking around with Ruby.

Dean deliberately chose not to tell Sam where he was going. Furthermore, since as far as Sam knew, Dean had no memories of his time in Hell, Sam didn't have any reason to think Dean needed more support than he usually did. 

 

1 hour ago, Airmid said:

In fact, during season four, all Sam seemed capable of doing was sneaking around and lying to his brother.

This is hyperbole. Sam does plenty of things during season four. While it is true that he was consistently lying and often sneaking around during this period, there were stretches of the season where the boys had at least a reasonably functional relationship and were hunting more or less as they always did. There are also occasions on which Sam supported Dean. He told him that he shouldn't blame himself for breaking in hell and lasted longer than anyone else should have, for one. Yes, there were other occasions on which he was less sympathetic -- I especially wanted to smack him for his sneering "How was hell?" -- but that wasn't the whole story ,and of course some of Sam's nastier moments in s4 were influenced by the demon blood. 

 

1 hour ago, Airmid said:

Sam gets out, chooses a demon over his brother

This has come up before, but I really dislike the framing of what Sam did as "choosing a demon over his brother." He made the decision to listen to a demon against his brother's wishes. This is not choosing Ruby over Dean - it is acting in a manner with which Dean disagrees. It isn't like Dean and Ruby were both in a burning building and Sam rescued Ruby. 

 

1 hour ago, Airmid said:

happily slurps demon blood believing in the party line

I wouldn't say he did so happily.  We see in the flashbacks that he was conflicted, and he tried to stop at one point during S4. He was doing what he thought he needed to do. As for the "party line," as both the angels and demons actually wanted the seals to break, both Sam and Dean were at times playing into their hands during the season. Dean wanted Lillith dead, too. 

[catrox14]

11 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

1 hour ago, Airmid said:

 

This has come up before, but I really dislike the framing of what Sam did as "choosing a demon over his brother." He made the decision to listen to a demon against his brother's wishes. This is not choosing Ruby over Dean - it is acting in a manner with which Dean disagrees. It isn't like Dean and Ruby were both in a burning building and Sam rescued Ruby. 

Sam kind of did when he refused to part company with her after it was known he was drinking demon blood and after strangling Dean and protecting Ruby.

I think if Sam had taken a minute to think about it , Dean just spent time in hell with demons of which he had to know were torturing Dean but IMO by the time Dean got out hell , Ruby already had her claws into Sam so he wouldn't have listened anyway.

[Reganne]

19 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Sam kind of did when he refused to part company with her after it was known he was drinking demon blood and after strangling Dean and protecting Ruby.

 

Personally I never saw it that way.  Sam was angry about being called a monster and being given an ultimatum about his leaving.  Sam wanted Dean to join them, but Dean wanted to kill Ruby.  Sam however felt he needed Ruby to complete the task of finishing off Lilith so he stopped Dean from killing her.  I still firmly believe Sam even in his demon blood addicted state believed all his decisions were for the greater good.   I never saw it as Sam choosing Ruby over Dean no matter how much the show itself paints it that way.  I saw it as Sam thinking he was choosing to stop the apacalypse over letting Dean kill the only means of assisting him in completing the task.

Edited October 15, 2017 by Reganne

[ILoveReading]

6 minutes ago, Reganne said:

Personally I never saw it that way.  Sam was angry about being called a monster and being given an ultimatum about his leaving.  Sam wanted Dean to join them, but Dean wanted to kill Ruby.  Sam however felt he needed Ruby to complete the task of finishing off Lilith so he stopped Dean from killing her.  I still firmly believe Sam even in his demon blood addicted state believed all his decisions were for the greater good.   I never saw it as Sam choosing Ruby over Dean no matter how much the show itself paints it that way.  I saw it as Sam thinking he was choosing to stop the apacalypse over letting Dean kill the only means of assisting him in completing the task.

Dean didn't tell Sam to ditch Ruby because he was trying to control Sam, he told him to ditch her because he knew she couldn't be trusted and she was stringing Sam along.  Dean and others pointed out this multiple times that Ruby was using him. 

So he was choosing Ruby all season long before Dean said me or her. 

42 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

Dean deliberately chose not to tell Sam where he was going. Furthermore, since as far as Sam knew, Dean had no memories of his time in Hell, Sam didn't have any reason to think Dean needed more support than he usually did. 

 It's his brothers first night back from hell.  Maybe Sam for one night could have prioritized his brother, and been there in case Dean needed him.

 

45 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

There are also occasions on which Sam supported Dean. He told him that he shouldn't blame himself for breaking in hell and lasted longer than anyone else should have, for one. Yes, there were other occasions on which he was less sympathetic -- I especially wanted to smack him for his sneering "How was hell?" -- but that wasn't the whole story ,and of course some of Sam's nastier moments in s4 were influenced by the demon blood. 

 

Sam threw that confession back in Dean's face.   In the Siren ep.  The siren didn't put those things in Sam's head, it just removed his inhibitions and allowed him to say it.   He also said it again in On the Head of a Pin when he told Ruby Dean was too weak.  Sam's time in his head in when the Levee breaks also showed he met every word he said under the Siren's influece.  He kept telling himself it was him and only him that could do it and Dean was weak.

48 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

but I really dislike the framing of what Sam did as "choosing a demon over his brother." He made the decision to listen to a demon against his brother's wishes. This is not choosing Ruby over Dean - it is acting in a manner with which Dean disagrees. It isn't like Dean and Ruby were both in a burning building and Sam rescued Ruby. 

 

"Doing it against his brothers wishes" makes it sound like Dean is being some kind of bossy meany.  He wasn't trying to control Sam, he was trying to save him from himself.  Something Sam asked Dean to do if he went down that road.

Sam was addicted to demon blood.  He was controlled his addiction, and Ruby was pulling his strings like a puppet master.   When I say Sam chose Ruby, I believe he made that decision way back in the premier when he left his brother alone the first night back from hell.

[Reganne]

25 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

Dean didn't tell Sam to ditch Ruby because he was trying to control Sam, he told him to ditch her because he knew she couldn't be trusted and she was stringing Sam along.  Dean and others pointed out this multiple times that Ruby was using him. 

So he was choosing Ruby all season long before Dean said me or her.

 

Sam threw that confession back in Dean's face.   In the Siren ep.  The siren didn't put those things in Sam's head, it just removed his inhibitions and allowed him to say it.   He also said it again in On the Head of a Pin when he told Ruby Dean was too weak.  Sam's time in his head in when the Levee breaks also showed he met every word he said under the Siren's influece.  He kept telling himself it was him and only him that could do it and Dean was weak.

 

 

IMO Sam chose to continue his addiction and still hang with Ruby.  It's not like he completely ditched Dean and decided not to hunt or be with him anymore.  I know why Dean wants to kill Ruby and I don't blame him, but that still doesn't change the way I see Sam's actions.  

 

As far as Dean being weak in terms of killing g Lilith... I don't think Dean had the power to kill Lilith so in that aspect Dean was too "weak" to kill Lilith.

Edited October 15, 2017 by Reganne

[DeeDee79]

1 hour ago, Wayward Son said:

I agree with this! I also think both brothers could have done with more time apart at the beginning of season 5. Nothing too drastic but 5-6 episodes rather than the two we got. IMO, again I’m trying to put aside my preferences, Dean could have done with more time processing Sam’s actions and reaching a point where he was ready to begin building bridges / forgiving Sam. IMO he was far from ready when they reunited. Likewise, I think Sam needed more time apart from it all! Time to reflect and consider what led to his downfall in the first place, time to recover before he is ready to jump back into things. 

I absolutely agree with this. Furthermore, when Dean came back from Purgatory the discord between them due to not looking vs wanting out of the life there would have been a good reason for a brief separation as well. Dean could have gone off to take care of Kevin himself & Sam could resolve what he felt he was giving up with Amelia and decide if he wanted to keep the relationship going. Likewise In season 9 Sam could have spent more time with Cas helping him find Gadreel and figuring out Metatron's next move while Dean & Crowley could hunt for the blade while figuring out Abbadon's next move. Realistically when the average person is hurt or pissed at someone more than a few days is needed before it's all water under the bridge. Considering the rollercoaster of emotions that is the Winchester relationship it definitely needed more time than they were given before their lives could resume comfortably.

[companionenvy]

1 hour ago, ILoveReading said:

"Doing it against his brothers wishes" makes it sound like Dean is being some kind of bossy meany.  He wasn't trying to control Sam, he was trying to save him from himself.  Something Sam asked Dean to do if he went down that road.

Sam was addicted to demon blood.  He was controlled his addiction, and Ruby was pulling his strings like a puppet master.   When I say Sam chose Ruby, I believe he made that decision way back in the premier when he left his brother alone the first night back from hell.

It wasn't my intent to paint Dean as a "bossy meany." As we both know, Dean was absolutely right about Ruby. That doesn't change my belief that framing Sam's relationship with Ruby as a personal betrayal of Dean -- let alone choosing her over him -- is unfair.

If Sam had not been in Ruby's thrall, he probably wouldn't have left Dean that night, simply because he wouldn't have been ready himself to leave the brother he had just gotten back. But leaving wasn't - based on the information Sam had -- insensitive toward Dean. Dean was sleeping.  Sam intended to be back before Dean woke up - when Dean calls Sam from the car, Sam asks what he's doing up. But in any event, if Dean really had had no memories of hell, there was absolutely no reason that Sam needed to be extra attentive to him. Not only had he told Sam he remembered nothing, Dean had been acting normally throughout the day. He greeted Baby, complained about Sam's musical choices, flirted with Pamela, and acted confident with the demon waitress, even when she threatened to send him back to hell. There was not yet any visible sign that he was undergoing trauma. 

[Myrelle]

4 hours ago, companionenvy said:

But leaving wasn't - based on the information Sam had -- insensitive toward Dean. Dean was sleeping.  Sam intended to be back before Dean woke up - when Dean calls Sam from the car, Sam asks what he's doing up. But in any event, if Dean really had had no memories of hell, there was absolutely no reason that Sam needed to be extra attentive to him. Not only had he told Sam he remembered nothing, Dean had been acting normally throughout the day. He greeted Baby, complained about Sam's musical choices, flirted with Pamela, and acted confident with the demon waitress, even when she threatened to send him back to hell. There was not yet any visible sign that he was undergoing trauma. 

This is all Sam POV, which is fine if it's that's what you're trying to get across, but what and how do you think Dean might have felt like when he was woken up-again less than 24 hours after he was back from Hell-and, again, in the manner that he was woken up? And they had no idea how or by whom he'd been brought back at that point. Sam couldn't stay by his brother's side, under those conditions, for even that one night? Sheesh. Something must have been REAL important to him to leave. I guess hungry for a burger worked for Dean, but not for me.

Sam chose Ruby and her promise of power over Dean many times. No one will ever convince me that he didn't do that after that first night that Dean came back from Hell-and the demon blood addiction was shown to be stronger than his love for his brother numerous times over the course of S4, IMO.

Edited October 15, 2017 by Myrelle

[mertensia]

Dean came back from the dead. Don't you think Sam might want to stick around his brother because, I don't know, regardless of Dean's mental state his brother is back?

[Wayward Son]

6 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

Sam threw that confession back in Dean's face.   In the Siren ep.  The siren didn't put those things in Sam's head, it just removed his inhibitions and allowed him to say it.   He also said it again in On the Head of a Pin when he told Ruby Dean was too weak.  Sam's time in his head in when the Levee breaks also showed he met every word he said under the Siren's influece.  He kept telling himself it was him and only him that could do it and Dean was weak.

I’m sorry if I misunderstood your post, but I think there’s a minor but important distinction us fans should make. 

 

IMO I don’t think Sam thought Dean was weak because he broke under torture in hell. What I mean is I don’t think his mindset was “I can’t believe that weakling couldn’t even withstand a bit of torture what a loser”. I think he meant every word about Dean lasting longer than anyone could have. However, I think he thought the guilt that came as a result of breaking made Dean weaker than normal. It made him more hesitant and less confident in himself and his abilities. 

 

IMO there were two layers to Sam’s motivation. On a deeper level I think he genuinely wanted to help Dean and relieve him of a burden he couldn’t cope with while he was so psychologically damaged. In addition to this, as he consumed more and more demon blood this desire became twisted and it became just as much about proving he was the stronger brother. 

 

* Personally, I see the demon blood as similar to the Mark of Cain. Neither takes over its victim completely in the way something like possession does. However, it influences its victims and twists their mindset and previously pure motivations into something darker. 

 

6 hours ago, DeeDee79 said:

I absolutely agree with this. Furthermore, when Dean came back from Purgatory the discord between them due to not looking vs wanting out of the life there would have been a good reason for a brief separation as well. Dean could have gone off to take care of Kevin himself & Sam could resolve what he felt he was giving up with Amelia and decide if he wanted to keep the relationship going. Likewise In season 9 Sam could have spent more time with Cas helping him find Gadreel and figuring out Metatron's next move while Dean & Crowley could hunt for the blade while figuring out Abbadon's next move. Realistically when the average person is hurt or pissed at someone more than a few days is needed before it's all water under the bridge. Considering the rollercoaster of emotions that is the Winchester relationship it definitely needed more time than they were given before their lives could resume comfortably.

Oh yes, I agree! I didn’t mention those occasions because I was replying to @ILoveReading who had already mentioned the brothers should have had time apart during season 8 and late season 9 :)

[companionenvy]

2 hours ago, Myrelle said:

This is all Sam POV, which is fine if it's that's what you're trying to get across, but what and how do you think Dean might have felt like when he was woken up-again less than 24 hours after he was back from Hell-and, again, in the manner that he was woken up?

Honestly? Had he actually remembered nothing of his hell time, I don't think he would have been hurt. Even as it is, I'm not sure that he was upset. This wasn't season 8 and the return from purgatory. Sam had obviously been thrilled and deeply moved at seeing him. He confirmed that he had been trying to save him, up to and including making demon deals. He had been wearing Dean's amulet around his neck the whole time.  In light of all that, I think Dean should be and was able to cope with Sam going out while Dean was sleeping without seeing it as a sign that Sam didn't care. And it wasn't like Sam was passing up quality time with Dean to hang out with Ruby; he waited until Dean was asleep. 

[AwesomO4000]

On 10/14/2017 at 4:57 AM, Aeryn13 said:

Who fell in line? Not a bunch of outside hunters in a scene where he speechified to them and they gazed up at General Winchester adoringly. 

No, Castiel and Sam fell in line... the same Sam who Dean had wronged - and here I'm talking about the lying. I don't even hold the initial Gadreel thing against Dean. And Sam even had been supportive before that, telling Dean that Dean was right, they needed to stop Abbadon at all costs, but Sam dared to complain about being tricked by Dean (i.e. lied to again) about his role in helping with Abaddon, and so was told to fall in line or hit the road. Sam did fall in line, and further had to humiliate himself by calling his former tormentor a "friend" and telling Dean he lied, while once again being tricked - this time being punched out.

As for the other hunters "gazing adoringly" at Sam... that's not what I saw. I pretty much think they would've been ready to storm the castle anyway.

Quote

You know me, flash and the bells and whistles is important to me. So in talking comparatevily how Sam "being wrong" about the BMOL ended in a leadership acknowledgment in the hunting community, I would need the same for Dean to say he actually got the same positive reinforcement from the writers for being wrong this year. It´s not gonna happen, I think we all know that.

First I have no idea that Sam is somehow going to become some leader in the hunting community. Even last season, the hunters were asking "well isn't your brother coming?" *hint hint, hope hope,* so with Dean an option, I'm pretty sure they'd go right back to Dean just as easily and probably preferentially... that's even if the other hunters are brought into things ever again - which I strongly doubt.

As for the other, since the comparison was to season 9, not to Dean's season 12, I'm sticking with season 9. The main reason the parallel can't be the same is because Dean wasn't really wrong. Gadreel was a good guy in the end and Sam would do the same thing, so really Dean wasn't wrong ad he never had to admitt that he was wrong. But he still got to be the leader. Dean also wasn't wrong in season 12 either concerning the BMoL.

Quote

Same as 5.22, I have never gotten the same for Dean because there has never been the same bells and whistles scenario in a Season Finale ending for Dean. Both the second Season and 11th Season Finale had some parts of it but it doesn`t add up to the whole.

I'm not sure why not myself. There were plenty of bells and whistles in the season 2 finale. There were slow-mo special effects as the only big bad in the series up to that point was killed by Dean. Yes, Dean had an assist from John, but Sam wasn't in the picture. In the season 11 finale, Dean was the only one - via something supernaturally special about Dean - who could stop Amarra... so those two things together, in my opinion pretty much equal Sam's season 5 save, just over two different saves. And on top of that Dean also has another season finale kill that leaves him in a heroic sacrifice situation in purgatory and he has another finale where he provides an important assist with Metatron. In all 4 of those finales, Sam wasn't even in the room and/or area. I mean, I understand you dislike Sam, but exactly how many more heroic season finales does Dean have to have over Sam, most where Sam isn't even present, but it's just Dean? Sam had one and a lame speech which made little difference (imo). Since this is a show about two brothers - not one - Sam should sometimes get to do something, in my opinion, besides cause apocalypses (which Dean also doesn't do, so his wins are on top of not causing an apocalypse). If things were more equal, Sam would get a story where he gets to have supernatural powers that he gets to use without being blamed for starting an apocalypse... but that's never going to happen, since Sam gets blamed even when Dean is the one with the powers.

So we're likely never to agree on this.

Quote

Same for the poker episode where Sam excels in something previously a Dean domain. A little moment here or there in an episode is not comparable to that. I would need an entire episode structured like that and culminating on Dean saving the day and besting Sam in a Sam domain.

I'm not trying to be snarky here, I'm really wondering like what? What would be a Sam domain that Dean doesn't already do by now in the series? We know Dean's also book smart and has used it to figure things out over Sam and Dean has proven lately to be just as good at computer skills. Sam hasn't really used languages in ages, and Dean already used languages to save the kid in "Repo Man" after freeing himself from a chair.

And it wasn't like Sam used incredible poker skills to win that game. He used false emotion and/or faked sincerity - which in your opinion is a Sam trait. I entirely disagree, but if Sam's going to be accused of using fake empathy, then using those kinds of techniques to win a poker game should be considered within Sam's skill set.

Quote

Same with that werewolf episode with the physical Superman stuff for Sam. We haven`t had an episode where Dean is mortally wounded, rises from his death bed and saves the day and Sam. 

"Live Free or Twihard" and "Baby." In the first he doesn't save Sam, but he takes out a ton of vamps and saves a bunch of people all while overcoming incredible odds and hunger. In "Baby," it's pretty damn close considering the beating he took, and he saved an entire family along with Sam.

Quote

I actually believe giving Dean a storyline at all in Season 9 was a course correction. I mean, until then it was "Purgatory dropped nearly immediately in terms of Dean and switched to the mystery about Cas - which is a Cas storyline",

Since Dean made up in his head a different history and Castiel helped Dean recover the true memories, in my opinion, it was just as much a Dean story... not necessarily a good one, but a Dean one nonetheless. And Benny lasted much longer into the season, and Benny was part of purgatory.

Quote

followed by Sam`s Gadreel story (Dean was just being trashed there but it`s still not a Dean-story in my book).

We'll agree to disagree, since I thought it was Sam who really ended up being trashed there, since he ended up getting turned into the hypocrite. Dean ended up being right about everything on that one, and Gadreel was redeemed.

Quote

The MOC story only started in ep 14. Seemingly out of nowhere. It hadn`t previously been hinted at or build up really. So, I don`t know why that happened. Why Carver took pity, I`m just glad he did. Previous history doesn`t make me think he planned it from the start, though. And nope, I can not see how 9.B build on 9.A in that matter, they are almost entirely unrelated stories in my book.  

Not in my book, since Abbadon had been building up since season 8 and the mark of Cain was to kill her. Dean partially took the mark of Cain recklessly in episode 11 exactly because of the Gadreel situation and his guilt about Kevin, so in my opinion the stories were related and it had been building from the beginning of the season. The thing that was dropped for me was Sam's part of the story... Gadreel ended up being Gadreel's story, especially by the second half of the season. It was all about Gadreel's redemption. Sam was mostly there to create sympathy for Dean, because he was being so mean and unsympathetic. His trauma over being possessed, manipulated, and screwed over was turned into a non-entity.

Quote

I think they didn`t mean to do it with Sam but if they tackled the same storyline with Dean, they would mean to. Singer shows perfectly how that hypocrisy is not a problem for them. One character doing A deserves heaps of praise, the other character doing A deserves a pinched ear for being a naughty boy. Only when Sam does it, its good.

And I still contend that if they didn't mean to do it with Sam, they wouldn't have included Kevin in the deal... and then hung a lampshade on it. Or at least they would have fixed it. But almost everything they did - having Sam abandon Kevin, having Sam be pissy and touchy (because he knew he did wrong,) making Benny a cuddly vampire, making Sam jealous of Benny, not really showing Sam's grief over Dean's death in a flashback - that was all so that Dean would be the one feeling left in the cold. As @catrox14 said, that he'd be the soldier coming back to a family that had moved on. And to do that they trashed Sam's character for the sake of the "story." And Carver didn't really care, apparently. He got his Dean angst, and he had his shiny new Benny character to play with, so who cares if Sam got turned into a jerk? Carver created Benny, and he'd showed some contempt for Gamble's set up and character development, so why wouldn't he want to make his own character Benny the best character ever and turn him into a sacrificing savior? He ended up doing almost the exact same thing with Gadreel. Both had heroic sacrifices to save others and multiple episode redemption arcs.

As for "only when Sam does it, it's good" I don't get that at all. It's usually the opposite, imo. Sam does something risky to save Dean = apocalypse (decidedly not good). Dean does something risky to save Sam = no bad effects and even some good ones, including helping to fix the apocalypse Sam started. In my opinion that's the total opposite of only if Sam does it, it's good. How about Sam trusts a demon, she's evil, and it's the worst betrayal of Dean ever, but Dean trusts multiple demons and/or monsters and they all turn out to be helpful: Crowley, Meg, Benny?

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

17 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

See, it`s all Dean`s fault. Especially Sam`s decision. Even Sam being hypocritical is Dean`s fault. That`s why the Sam`s teflon armour gets on my nerves. 

No, it's Sam's. And I'm not seeing the teflon armor... Sam was blamed for Amara. Dean got the pass. Even God said so. Just like Cas said it wasn't Dean's fault in season 4 (it was fate) ... but it was Sam's (he made the "wrong choice".) If you are talking about "Fallen Idols," in my opinion that's thin at best, especially since before and after that episode, Sam and other characters blamed Sam. And even what Sam said in "Fallen Idols" - in my opinion - isn't blaming Dean for his (Sam's) choices. That's only viewer interpretation. Someone being bossy - especially a big brother who's job it is to be bossy - isn't a cause for bad decisions, and even Sam said so. In my opinion, it's a loose interpretation of one bad episode that is contradicted by multiple episodes before it and after.

And I really don't want to talk about that any more, so agree to disagree again. Considering everything that Sam gets blamed for, I personally find the idea of Sam having teflon armor unrealistic.

8 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

Sam was addicted to demon blood.  He was controlled his addiction, and Ruby was pulling his strings like a puppet master.   When I say Sam chose Ruby, I believe he made that decision way back in the premier when he left his brother alone the first night back from hell.

3 hours ago, Myrelle said:

but what and how do you think Dean might have felt like when he was woken up-again less than 24 hours after he was back from Hell-and, again, in the manner that he was woken up? Sam couldn't stay by him one night? Sheesh. Something must have been REAL important to him to do that.

I don't think it was less than 24 hours. There was a previous night  - they were on the road to Pamela's in the dark - and then it was day at Pamela's. They do their look-see, and Pamela is blinded, someone has to get her to the hospital. Even if that's Bobby, Sam and Dean first have to return and then they have a run in with the demons in the diner. At the least when it was night again and Dean was sleeping, that was the second night. And that was just after finding Sam. It doesn't even count the time of Dean going from Pontiac, Illinois to Bobby's and then back again with Bobby to Pontiac to find Sam. When they talk to Sam - at night - we find out that Sam headed towards Pontiac because he was following the demons who made a beeline, When Dean asked when, Sam said "yesterday morning" and Dean confirms "when I busted out." So technically, the diner incident would be at least Dean's third night back from hell.

And Sam did have something important to do. He wanted to try to get more information from and/or exorcise the demons they'd left behind earlier that day, Because when Sam had insisted they should kill the demons, (because yeah, demons!), Dean says (paraphrase) "nah, there's at least 3 of them, we only have one knife. We'll just let 'em go." And when Sam said that he'd been killing lots of demons lately, Dean says "Not anymore - the smarter brother's back in town." So when Sam left he'd gone back to kill the demons and try to save the hosts. He didn't tell Dean, because Dean had told Sam, "no."*** Sam didn't go out with Ruby... he went on his own to the diner and Ruby showed up way later. And then before Sam even goes into the diner - he was casing it first - he'd gotten a call from Dean, so he knew Dean was okay, because Dean says he's going for a beer with Bobby. Then Bobby and Dean go to call up Castiel.

*** To be fair, Sam had nixed Dean's plan to call up "Castiel" and question him, but considering what happened with Pamela, I can understand Sam's hesitation on that.

Edited October 15, 2017 by AwesomO4000

[Aeryn13]

Quote

No, Castiel and Sam fell in line

And Dean, Cas and Bobby fell in line with Sam in 5.22 like the unimportant noobs they were to Sam`s chosen-one-ness. 

I`m talking specifically about outside acknowledgment of leadership in the hunting community. Which IMO, yes, ONLY Sam has gotten in that scene. And they made a conscious and pointed choice to portray Dean as just another one of the hunter flunkies and solely Sam as the leader. With Dabb at the helm, I`m pretty sure this is gonna continue.

In the hunter`s wake episode they were both described as legends, well, Berens` episode was IMO course-correcting that and setting Sam up as the superior figure now. Thanks for nothing.

If Sam being wrong last year and Dean being wrong this year is supposed to equal out somehow in a balanced way, I damn well want the good part for Dean also. If Dean only gets the "being wrong" thing but not the big "look at our leader" scene at the end or something similar, how is that balanced? It isn`t IMO.   

Quote

I'm not sure why not myself. There were plenty of bells and whistles in the season 2 finale. There were slow-mo special effects as the only big bad in the series up to that point was killed by Dean. Yes, Dean had an assist from John

 It doesn`t compare because I see Sam in 5.22 at getting the biggest moment of the entire show as a big Chosen One win all by himself, overpowering the devil. Remember I can not credit Dean with anything here. And the car/toy soldiers are inanimate objects, it takes less from the character if those helped than another person.

Dean`s win in Season 2 had some bells and whistles, yes. But it wasn`t him being a Chosen One and he especially needed 50 % help by ghost!John. That is less than Sam in 5.22.

Then in the 11th Season Finale, Dean had the Chosen One-ness but they diluded the scene with pigeon lady earlier already and it wasn`t bells and whistles at all. 

At this point in the show, Dean can never realistically balance out Sam. There won`t be a big five year arc of Chosen-one-ness for him where Sam got to play for two years but thrown out in a humiliating manner at the last second and Dean performs a God-mode-Sue moment with big flash and pomp, saving the world in the end. It`s not gonna happen. He also won`t get half a Season of a Chosen one quest or half a Season of being altered or multiple Season of having visible supernatural powers that make appearances in lots of episodes. He won`t get to martyr himself to some supernatural prison where he stays for - depending on who you ask - five million years and will suffer unspeakable torture. He won`t get to play an angel even once, let alone multiple times.    

This show is way too long in the tooth to pretend now that he is conceptionalized as a main character. And that his stories matter. Or that they aren`t later redone bigger and better with another character. His "big" actions have no consequences like that because the writers don`t care.

If Sam had killed Death, an arc would have sprung from this, yes, possibly with negative connotations, yes.  But IMO not because the writers deliberately want to mistreat Sam but because when Sam does it, it is monumental enough to warrant further exploration. With Dean, we are lucky, they remember his name in interviews and tell all the exciting tells about how low and depressed he will be in any given Season.    

Quote

I'm not trying to be snarky here, I'm really wondering like what? What would be a Sam domain that Dean doesn't already do by now in the series?

I mean an entire episode where the case relates to something consider book-smart domain, have the villain use that particular thing and have Sam go in to try it as the obvious choice but fail spectacularly. Then have Dean go in and the entire final act show how he manages to outsmart the villain in a Sam-area when Sam couldn`t do it. 

Quote

And it wasn't like Sam used incredible poker skills to win that game. He used false emotion and/or faked sincerity - which in your opinion is a Sam trait. I entirely disagree, but if Sam's going to be accused of using fake empathy, then using those kinds of techniques to win a poker game should be considered within Sam's skill set.

Reading your opponent and using manipulation to throw them off/outsmart them IS the epitome of incredible poker skills. Since the cards you get are a draw of luck (unless you are cheating), that is what you are left with. So if Dean has previously been depicted at being good at poker, that is something he would have been able to do.

Nope, when it counts for the first and only time in the show, he sucks apparently.    

Quote

"Live Free or Twihard" and "Baby." In the first he doesn't save Sam, but he takes out a ton of vamps and saves a bunch of people all while overcoming incredible odds and hunger. In "Baby," it's pretty damn close considering the beating he took, and he saved an entire family along with Sam.

Taking a beating and being so "dead", you are actually mistaken for dead are not in the same wheelhouse. Sam got kicked around like a ragdoll in the Season 13 Premiere but he could still easily outsmart the two angels by drawing a banishing symbol. 

If the brothers were different position in the episode, I`m sure Sam would have finished off the mouthy angel outside, then run in to see Dean uselessly being kicked around by the two other angels and managed to kill them too, saving him. Or maybe Jack would have. But Dean wouldn`t have gotten Sam`s save and kill duo. Not anymore. 

It was a wonder he was allowed to hold his own a little bit against mouthy angel. Maybe Dabb threw him a pity-bone or something. 

Quote

Since Dean made up in his head a different history and Castiel helped Dean recover the true memories, in my opinion, it was just as much a Dean story... not necessarily a good one, but a Dean one nonetheless. 

It doesn`t fit my criteria for a story, namely "who is it about". Dean having false memories about Cas was part of the "myster of Cas", therefore a Cas-story in my book.

If there had been any mystery or powers or anything supernatural related to Dean after or due to Purgatory, then it would have been a Dean-story. 

Same as I don`t see anyone having a story in Season 7, other than the Leviathans and Bobby in all fairness. The ghost plot was about the latter and the main arc about the former. 

Since I don`t count emo and one-episode-things don`t count, Dean has had the following stories so far in the show:  the deal, the MOC (including the short demon-stint) and Amara. Season 4 and 5 disqualify in retrospect because the entirety of righteous man/ true vessel was a red herring. 

Sam has had: Azazel`s psy-kids with powers, Lucifer`s one true vessel (I would put the demon-blood powers and Season 5 together here because it is basically one big story), soullessness + wall, the trials and Gadreel.    

Cas actually had the most, now that I think about it, just with way less screentime and botched execution. But he has been de-powered a few times, been angelic enemy, angelic leader, Leviathan-Cas. 

Edited October 15, 2017 by Aeryn13

[companionenvy]

24 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

I`m talking specifically about outside acknowledgment of leadership in the hunting community. Which IMO, yes, ONLY Sam has gotten in that scene.

This came up last year, but there were only a handful of hunters on the raid, most of whom are now dead. I hardly think Jody thinks Sam is the unquestioned leader of the Winchester brothers, let alone the hunting community. Especially as she's the one who got the biggest kill. Sam didn't wind up doing anything more impressive on that raid than anyone else.

 

27 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

If Sam being wrong last year and Dean being wrong this year is supposed to equal out somehow in a balanced way, I damn well want the good part for Dean also. If Dean only gets the "being wrong" thing but not the big "look at our leader" scene at the end or something similar, how is that balanced? It isn`t IMO.   

If Dean were wrong this year, it still wouldn't really "balance" anything, because Sam has been directly responsible for two apocalypses, and is usually wrong on big-picture, hunting related issues. Unless Dean's mistrust of Jack causes an apocalypse-level catastrophe -- which, by the way, I don't want it to -- and/or leads to Dean being repeatedly blamed and called out, we're not even in the ballpark of balance. In addition, as Awesome0's fantastic post noticed, Dean has gotten plenty of big moments during the series. IMO, arguing about whether multiple big Dean kills that may be almost but not quite as heroic as Sam's sacrifice in Swan Song equals the one big climactic scene from 5.22 or not is splitting hairs. Similarly, it is splitting hairs to assess whether or not Dean has ever had a single ep quite as impressive as Sam's werewolf episode - we could argue about it all day, but there's not an objective answer, and even if there were, it would be pretty close.

Dean is, as you suggest, never going to have a total Swan Song equivalent. Part of that is because SS was the end of a five year arc, and the show doesn't operate like that anymore. But he's also never going to have a Swan Song equivalent because two scenes are never precisely equivalent.  There are always going to be differences that make it possible to argue that one action was more or less heroic than the other. Personally, I think Dean sacrificing himself as a soul bomb to stop Amara was pretty similar to Sam's gambit, but no, you're not going to get an equivalent scene unless a five year arc in which Dean is the "chosen one" (which, recall, wasn't exactly a good thing - Sam was Lucifer's chosen one) ends with Dean throwing himself into the depths of hell to save the world. Which probably ain't gonna happen, and shouldn't, since it would be repetitive. So it seems to me you've, created a no-win situation for the writers in which anything heroic that Dean does -- and no matter how often he does it -- still isn't good enough because it isn't Swan Song, and anything heroic that Sam does (even if it is accompanied with major screwups, and even if it is after Sam hasn't had a substantial win for seasons) is just rubbing salt in the wound created by the season 5 finale.

49 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

He also won`t get half a Season of a Chosen one quest or half a Season of being altered or multiple Season of having visible supernatural powers that make appearances in lots of episodes. He won`t get to martyr himself to some supernatural prison where he stays for - depending on who you ask - five million years and will suffer unspeakable torture. He won`t get to play an angel even once, let alone multiple times.    

It seems arbitrary to hold these things up as the be all and end all of what makes a character important. Dean has traveled in time more than Sam has. He is much more likely to get emotional focus. Most of the supporting players are more "his" characters than Sam's - Cas, Mary, even Crowley all have or had more significant emotional beats with Dean than with Sam. He is also less likely to spend half a season as someone other than himself -- which I see as a good thing, not a bad one. When Sam was soulless, in effect, we didn't have the actual Sam Winchester around for half a season. When Sam was hosting Gadreel, pretty much every action scene involving him was Gadreel's, not Sam's.  And Dean has been supernaturally affected: the MOC/demon arc (which was multi-season) and Amara's influence were both major plotlines in which Dean was under supernatural influence. Whether or not he had as many episodes being supernaturally-influenced as Sam has doesn't matter, to me, because its a random metric. There are metrics by which Dean will come out ahead, and metrics on which Sam will. I don't see why "being supernaturally altered" is more important than "number of season-arc big bads killed/defeated" or "amount of emotional focus." 

It is similar to the discussion we had at the end of last season. Sam had the better episode in that he got his "action hero" moment (although again, he didn't actually do anything really major during the raid, and even that "hero" speech involved a mea culpa), while Dean had the better episode in that he had the much meatier emotional role, and made the major save of the episode (Mary). He also put up a really great show against Ketch while seriously wounded, -- arguably more physically impressive than anything Sam did -- and wound up being the one to allow them to escape the bunker after Sam's plan failed.  There's no obvious "winner" here, IMO.

[ILoveReading]

2 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

No, Castiel and Sam fell in line.

Actually, Sam and Cas didn't fall into line.  They ended up locking Dean in the bunker dungeon because they felt he was a danger to himself and others.  Dean escaped and went off with Crowley.  Dean ended up having to knock Sam out to keep him out of the way.  That doesn't come across as falling into line to me. 

[Aeryn13]

Quote

. So it seems to me you've, created a no-win situation for the writers in which anything heroic that Dean does -- and no matter how often he does it -- still isn't good enough because it isn't Swan Song, and anything heroic that Sam does (even if it is accompanied with major screwups, and even if it is after Sam hasn't had a substantial win for seasons) is just rubbing salt in the wound created by the season 5 finale.

The writers created the no-win-situation because they let the time to give an equal heroic moment to Dean come and go without doing it. The opportunity has passed now - which, I didn`t write that way - so yeah, that makes me bitter. And they keep adding to that bitterness by the hellhole that was Season 12 for Dean.

Quote

There are metrics by which Dean will come out ahead, and metrics on which Sam will. I don't see why "being supernaturally altered" is more important than "number of season-arc big bads killed/defeated" or "amount of emotional focus." 

I have repeatedly said that certain metrics are important to ME. So whenever someone argues that emo is important, it might be for them but it doesn`t make a storyline in my book. And most certainly not the emo drivel they keep using these days to portray the character as weak/passive/wrong or whatever else negative. 

This show is called Supernatural so supernatural stuff is important for me. I wouldn`t watch "Soapnatural" because I don`t care about the emo so much. Hence, being supernaturally altered for half a Season is a very good thing in my book. Noone can convince me otherwise, just as probably the reverse is true for you.

Like you posited, Dean is likely get a supernatural plot again so the only thing that would even remotely be entertaining and positive in my book is if he was at least portrayed as a capable badass hunter. But we can`t even get that now, can we.   

Quote

 while Dean had the better episode in that he had the much meatier emotional role, and made the major save of the episode (Mary).

A scene that had dialogue all about Sam`s hard life. And ended with Mary fretting about Sam because pushover!Dean had just given her forgiveness. Then of course Super!Mary had to be the one to save him and kill Ketch. 

Nothing in that remotely made up for that scene earlier with the hunters where Sam deliberately makes his speech about himself and leadership. Whereas Dean sits there like the sidekick. And nothing in the earlier scene even acknowledged or tackled anything about Dean and leadership.

I disliked that episode far more than the Finale and most certainly wouldn`t give it to Dean as the better episode. If for others it is different, fine, but that doesn`t make the episode any less aggravating for me. It didn`t make the scene with the hunters any less like major salt in the wound after at least the second half of the Season where I wanted Dean to be mercy-killed off rather than seeing more of it.

And what do we get for Season 13? Dean will be "lower than we`ve ever seen him". Wow, any lower than Season 12 and we`ve reached the Earth`s core in my book.  

[Wayward Son]

2 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

 Cas actually had the most now that I think about it, just with way less screentime and botched execution. But he has been de-powered a few times, been angelic enemy, angelic leader, Leviathan-Cas. 

As a Cas fan that’s my biggest complaint! IMO the writers want to have it both ways. They want to treat him like a main character with his own plots and allies, but they want to do it in less than half the screen time a main character gets. This results in uneven and botched storytelling, which often makes the character look the worst possible because we aren’t allowed to truly see his mindset. Id actually rather smaller well done storylines than large poorly done ones but that’s just me.

[companionenvy]

26 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

I have repeatedly said that certain metrics are important to ME. So whenever someone argues that emo is important, it might be for them but it doesn`t make a storyline in my book. And most certainly not the emo drivel they keep using these days to portray the character as weak/passive/wrong or whatever else negative. 

This show is called Supernatural so supernatural stuff is important for me. I wouldn`t watch "Soapnatural" because I don`t care about the emo so much. Hence, being supernaturally altered for half a Season is a very good thing in my book. Noone can convince me otherwise, just as probably the reverse is true for you.

"Emotional" does not equal the pejorative "emo" in my book. And I don't think there's any genre in which characterization isn't or shouldn't be fundamentally important. In addition, while Dean may not have had as many "under the influence" moments as Sam, given that his key relationships beats involve the angel who saved him from perdition, the mother that God's sister resurrected as a favor to him, and the King of Hell he palled around with during an (admittedly too brief) stint as a demon, it would be hard to argue that Dean isn't integrally involved with the supernatural world. He had Sam are involved with supernatural plots in literally every episode. Dean doesn't need to be repeatedly possessed to be a main character in a show called "Supernatural." To use an analogy, in Game of Thrones, Sansa is the only (surviving) Stark sibling who has never shown magical abilities of any kind. I don't think that means she is automatically less important to the show. And, of course, the difference between Sam's role and Dean's is a lot less dramatic than the difference between, say, Sansa and Arya's. 

We're entitled to our different opinions on what does and doesn't count as a good plot. What I have trouble with is reconciling this MMV approach with repeated claims that the showrunners hate Dean. If, devoted fans of the show, as is apparent from this board, have widely divergent ideas on what constitutes a good character arc, why jump to the assumption that any particular writer or showrunner has it in for Dean on the basis of him not getting the arc or scene of your preference? 

[Wayward Son]

18 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

We're entitled to our different opinions on what does and doesn't count as a good plot. What I have trouble with is reconciling this MMV approach with repeated claims that the showrunners hate Dean. If, devoted fans of the show, as is apparent from this board, have widely divergent ideas on what constitutes a good character arc, why jump to the assumption that any particular writer or showrunner has it in for Dean on the basis of him not getting the arc or scene of your preference? 

Well said! And I think it is something fans all too often forget when discussing episodes such as Swan Song! Just because they have a particular preference re storyline types doesn’t mean that the writers share those same preferences nor does this difference of opinion mean the writers hate said character. 

[Aeryn13]

Quote

the mother that God's sister resurrected as a favor to him

The mother which they try to sell as some uber-badass. Meanwhile Dean was Deansel in distress last year.

And of course the interaction they did have was painted as lots of lessons how Dean does feelings wrong and has unreasonable, childish expectations of her to be a Mommy who makes him sandwiches while Mary just wants to be her own person and does what she thinks is best. 

I do not believe Sam Smith made that up as entirely her own headcanon, I think that is the party line from the writers. Since it was in the scripts. Especially the Raid which ended with Dean having to apologize for said expectations that she be his Mommy. And not actually that he was angry because of her lying, subterfuge and making no attempt whatsoever to learn anything about her son`s lifes. No, HE was wrong. Urgh.    

Quote

 What I have trouble with is reconciling this MMV approach with repeated claims that the showrunners hate Dean. 

For comparism, I believe Kripke had Sam as his avatar, the special, important one and the sole main character. Dean was only conceptionalized as this negative figure sidekick to highlight how great Sam was. Now some people luckily talked Kripke out of this initial pilot script idea but it`s not like Dean wasn`t second banana during his reign. Sam was the main character of Kripke`s show and plot. 

But Dean still got something to balance it out, he was allowed to shine in MOTWs to make up for stepping into the background for the mytharc. He was allowed to be a badass to make up for being comedy relief fodder they would not besmirch Sam with - see Misery. 

Now Dabb, that is an entirely different story. He writes episodes that harp on super!Sam and portray Dean as weak(er). Singer could not say a positive thing about Dean to save his life anymore in interviews. The duo? Well, one is Snger`s wife so I guess it runs inthe family. Perez? Well, I don`t know what introductory speech he got but oh boy, three episodes and three strikes. 

Sam getting several major kills last Season in a row wasn`t noticeable? And Sam wasn`t supernaturally enhanced during that time or Dean didn`t suffer from a physical condition to explain that. The Goat God episode was just like "seriously? with extra humiliation on top?" 

They gave the reason for Sam killing the Prince of Hell (with the Michael lance, woohoo, here is more salt, Dean-fans) as tit for tat, because Sam needed his own Prince of Hell kill. Next up is a hellhound kill (not just any but THE hellhound) episodes. Who killed one previously? Sam. Does Dean maybe have some history with hellhounds? Well yes, he got ripped apart by one. So by the logic of the writer`s room who in the interest of fairness kills THE hellhound? Yup, Sam. 

Dabb says in an interview "the Winchesters will be generals" in the hunting community. Lo and behold in the episode, the scene very clearly only singles out Sam. 

So, sorry but I`m less than inclined to think favourable thoughts about most of these writers and how they view Dean. I can`t in all seriousness watch their episodes and come up with the idea that they like him. Save Glynn and Yockey last year.

And of course it also comes down to preference in watching. If Dean wasn`t my favourite, I might think what he gets is good enough. Who knows. Back on Stargate, I wasn`t in the fandom and while even I noticed one character (whose actors wanted out, to be fair) was written kinda dumber and less competent than before but I noticed it more on the periphery. Later I read some fan accounts who very disappointed, bitter and livid about it. Which, yeah, it just hit closer to home.

If I stanned Sam, last Season would have been a virtual feast for me. I mean, the Stu-ing might have bordered on too much because it is just never good to do that but for a while it can enjoyable for your favourite. On a show where I like multiple characters roughly the same that would have been a problem, I admit because good god, diminishing one or more so much for the sake of another? Yikes. It depends on where my starting off point is. 

Thing is, I doubt Dabb will pull a Carver and give Dean something after trashing him for 1.5 years. No idea why Carver did it but I do not even see it as a remote possibility for Dabb.      

Edited October 15, 2017 by Aeryn13

[ILoveReading]

1 hour ago, companionenvy said:

and doesn't count as a good plot. What I have trouble with is reconciling this MMV approach with repeated claims that the showrunners hate Dean. If, devoted fans of the show, as is apparent from this board, have widely divergent ideas on what constitutes a good character arc, why jump to the assumption that any particular writer or showrunner has it in for Dean on the basis of him not getting the arc or scene of your preference? 

I have no idea if there is something going on behind the scenes, but I know how I feel.  What I feel is very reminiscent of how I felt watching the back half of s2 of Dark Angel.  Alec started to figure in less and less.  Strengths and characteristics that should have been central to his character disappeared.   His character was becoming very marginalized.   It turned out that behind the scenes politics very much played a part in part in all this.  So it wasn't just a conspiracy theory.

  I will say that I didn't own a computer when Dark Angel was on.  So I wasn't online.  So my thoughts about how Alec was portrayed were not biased by outside opinions. 

These things do happen.  Google Ricky Whittle and his treatment on The 100 for another example.

Writers have said they identify with Sam more.  Sera admitted to being preferential to Sam.   Kripke said he was a younger brother and seeing Sam as his avatar.  Buck/Lemming have repeatedly said they view Dean as a killer.  The writers admitted that Dean's name didn't even come up in the planning of the trial story line.  

There was Singer pinching Jensen's ear.  Carver called Dean boring.  Carver saying that Dean is only the person he is because of the people around him.  I saw on Twitter the other day that Ross/Lemming called Dean a deeply flawed character so it was a good thing Sam was there to balance him out.   Carver couldn't be bothered to actually address important points about the Amara storyline.    Dean's past and history was repeatedly ignored in episodes last season or downplayed to highlight how much worse Sam had it.  Why was his the only hell hound interaction left out of the previouslies in the hell hound episode? Why are is Dean suddenly unable to fight or hold a weapon?

All this available on Google for anyone that wants to look. 

For me the little things matter, and all those little things start to add up after while.  Even if they dont'  hate Jensen it does point to a lack of respect for Dean's character. 

Edited October 15, 2017 by ILoveReading

[Aeryn13]

Quote

 I saw on Twitter the other day that Ross/Lemming called Dean a deeply flawed character so it was a good thing Sam was there to balance him out.  

Figures. Because they couldn`t make it about equality and both being flawed characters balancing each other out. Nope, Dean is all that is negative and Sam is all that is good for them. Their episodes make that clear.

[Pondlass1]

Dean spent 40 yrs being tortured and torturing in hell and yet the writers had him skipping back down those hell steps as if it were nothing.  Thank goodness for Jensen who hesitated and kind of steeled himself before entering (it was noticed and there was a question at a con). 

Our writers are a bit too flippant about past history (emotional states and often established canon).   It's frustrating.  

TPTB behind Buffy and Angel did a much better job at linking how the past affects the present.

[gonzosgirrl]

@Aeryn13 wrote:

Quote

Taking a beating and being so "dead", you are actually mistaken for dead are not in the same wheelhouse. Sam got kicked around like a ragdoll in the Season 13 Premiere but he could still easily outsmart the two angels by drawing a banishing symbol. 

Doh! Now I realize why this scene went to Sam. It's virtually identical to what Dean did at the hospital in 9x01 - of course Sam has to do it. There aren't many iconic Dean moments/experiences that they don't eventually give to Sam to repeat, usually in spades. I fully expect Sam to declare his pride in them with his dying breath in the near future. Heck, according to Jared, he already did. *snerk*

Edited October 15, 2017 by gonzosgirrl
clarity

[ILoveReading]

42 minutes ago, Pondlass1 said:

Dean spent 40 yrs being tortured and torturing in hell and yet the writers had him skipping back down those hell steps as if it were nothing.  Thank goodness for Jensen who hesitated and kind of steeled himself before entering (it was noticed and there was a question at a con). 

Contrast that with Sam's return the cage where we even got an episode that revolved around how Sam felt about this.

So I don't think Sam's emotional focus is ignored. 

[mertensia]

1 hour ago, Aeryn13 said:

Figures. Because they couldn`t make it about equality and both being flawed characters balancing each other out. Nope, Dean is all that is negative and Sam is all that is good for them. Their episodes make that clear.

If convincing Amara that saving the universe is a negative thing, I don't want Dean to be a positive thing.

And for the record, Eugenie said once in an episode commentary that in the Supernatural world there is always a price to be paid. Then paused and said "usually by Dean". . And she is right. And Dean accepts that. And that is part of what makes Dean a hero.

[Pondlass1]

3 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

So I don't think Sam's emotional focus is ignored. 

Sam gets loads of emotional focus.  Those eyebrows get a good workout. 

Dean drinks, yells, punches walls, etc.  Dean's called a princess if he dares show a crack in his armour.

We must remember it all started as the story of Sam.................................. oh, and he's got a wild & crazy brother.  I get the impression Jim Michaels reminds everyone of this fact at the start of every season.

[DittyDotDot]

1 hour ago, ILoveReading said:

Writers have said they identify with Sam more.  Sera admitted to being preferential to Sam.   Kripke said he was a younger brother and seeing Sam as his avatar.  Buck/Lemming have repeatedly said they view Dean as a killer.  The writers admitted that Dean's name didn't even come up in the planning of the trial story line.  

I have never heard any of the writers say they identify with Sam OR Dean more, so I can't comment on that.

As I recall, Sera said she preferred to write for Sam when he was bad or evil, but preferred to write Dean's dialogue because he was a smartass and a geek, like herself. 

While Kripke was a younger brother, he also said that he wished he could say he was more like the big hero Dean was, but in reality was probably more like Chuck hiding in his house in his bathrobe.

I wouldn't use anything Buckner/Lemming-Ross says myself but, I think, in their own wack-a-doodle way, they're paying Dean a compliment in their comments. I think they find the flawed killer infinitely more interesting. Which, to me, suggests they actually prefer Dean.

My recollection is Carver stated they considered both Sam and Dean for the trials, but ultimately decided the better closure to the season was having Sam do the trials. I may disagree with his conclusion, but I've never heard anyone say that Dean's name didn't come up.

Edited October 15, 2017 by DittyDotDot

[ILoveReading]

15 minutes ago, Pondlass1 said:

Dean drinks, yells, punches walls, etc.  Dean's called a princess if he dares show a crack in his armour.

Bolding mine.  This is what bothers me most of all and why I could care less about Dean being the "emotional focus"  His emotions are usually constantly invalidated, the majority of the time.  The only time I can think of off hand where they weren't was the Amy storyline.

I'm dreading the return of a certain character because of this

Edited October 15, 2017 by ILoveReading

[Aeryn13]

Quote

The writers admitted that Dean's name didn't even come up in the planning of the trial story line.  

I remember this interview. The interviewer even asked Carver something about Dean and he launched into a really looooong answer about Sam. After being smacked in the face with the trials going to Sam, that was just perfect. 

Again, Carver did redeem himself somewhat by being the only showrunner in existance to give Dean a mytharc and seeing it through. I might have spent every single episode from 9.11 onwards absolutely terrified the MOC would go to Sam - and nearly had a coronary when God wanted to give it to him - but Amara saved us, well me. This is more than Kripke and the red herring of 5.22 ever did.

Quote

I'm dreading the return of a certain character because of this

What, you don`t like him being called stupid over and over again? To hammer home the point how the audience is supposed to agree the character is really stupid. And how he needs to be put in his place all the time and suck it up? 

I`m sure that will be awesome comic relief. *sarcasm*  

Edited October 15, 2017 by Aeryn13

[Wayward Son]

So I just rewatched the Cabin scene and I still don’t think that Sam was in anyway out of line here. As far as I interpreted things went like

 

- A angsty Dean jumps Sam and forces a Levithian, demon and shifter test on Sam. This insistence is enough to convince Sam it’s really Dean, but Dean does the tests on himself anyway. Maybe it could be argued Sam was too easily convinced, but I think this could be explained as his guard is down due to the year away from hunting. 

- The two sure a reunion hug during which Sam is smiling. 

- Sam begins to question what happened to Dean. “You were in purgatory for the whole year?” He questions with clear surprise when Dean informs him of what happened. 

- He asks how he’d get out? A reasonable question in my opinion considering their history.

-Dean gives a super vague answer and Sam lets the subject drop. This could be interpreted as either a further sign his guard is down, or he simply recognises its a sensitive topic for Dean. 

- He proceeds to ask about Cas (again a reasonable thing to query about imo)  and offers condolences when Dean gives the impression Cas is dead. 

- Dean moves the subject on to the issue of Sam not taking his calls. Sam’s demeanour becomes more hesitant and he finally admits to the fact “I don’t hunt anymore”. IMO this reluctance makes sense. Sam isn’t an idiot. He knows Dean is not going to like that.

- Dean exclaims his surprise with a touch of anger in his voice IMO. He explains that he thought Dean was dead, that Cas was dead, his allies were gone.

- Dean goes on the attack and proclaims “so you just turned tale on the whole family business?” IMO Sam doesn’t react to this angrily. He tries to explain that he’d lost (from his perspective) his whole family. 

- Dean grows angry then standing and proclaiming he wasn’t dead and was doing what Sam should have been doing i.e. killing monsters. 

- Sam grows more defensive at this point and yet again has to explain that he had no one, that’s he lost everyone, he had no plan and just fixed the impala and ran. 

- Dean asks did Sam look for him in spite of the fact Sam repeatedly told him he thought he was dead. Dean’s anger and bitter that Sam didn’t look for him due to his “deep and abiding” love. Dean then storms off in a huff.

- An exasperated Sam sighs and sarcastically states “welcome back”. 

 

So yeah, I still don’t see it as Sam being all “ew the pleb is back” and still maintain his annoyance only grew after Dean went on the attack. 

Now perhaps it could be argued that Sam should have shown more patience with Dean, but his reaction to the return certainly wasn’t “oh it’s you”. 

Edited October 15, 2017 by Wayward Son

[Myrelle]

3 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

Thing is, I doubt Dabb will pull a Carver and give Dean something after trashing him for 1.5 years. No idea why Carver did it but I do not even see it as a remote possibility for Dabb.      

I think Carver did it because it was contract time, IIRC and I remember reports from some JA M&Gs at cons that stated that Jensen wasn't very happy with the "guilty cheerleader" role that the  wrtiers had saddled him with yet again, and the he was even more concerned about the lack of follow through and poor resolutions that many of Dean's storyline had been getting for some time and that he had a meeting with the writers about those concerns.

So Jensen speaking up will likely be the only thing that works and I'm just not sure that he goes to the writers to complain that much. I mean it took him almost 4 years to speak up when his fandom had been begging for more for both actor AND character since both were frozen out of the 5 season-long Apocalyptic myth-arc-and at least as being portrayed as a lead actor and main character were concerned, and after being lead-on by the Michael red herring.

IOW, IMO Carver wrote that storyline because Jensen was unhappy with the writing for Dean and finally voiced much of what his fanbase had been saying for years to the writers/showrunners. And I think that's the main reason that the MOC storyline was hatched for Dean, and it's possible that the instruction might even have come down from higher up for Carver to do that.

3 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

The mother which they try to sell as some uber-badass. Meanwhile Dean was Deansel in distress last year.

And of course the interaction they did have was painted as lots of lessons how Dean does feelings wrong and has unreasonable, childish expectations of her to be a Mommy who makes him sandwiches while Mary just wants to be her own person and does what she thinks is best. 

I do not believe Sam Smith made that up as entirely her own headcanon, I think that is the party line from the writers. Since it was in the scripts. Especially the Raid which ended with Dean having to apologize for said expectations that she be his Mommy. And not actually that he was angry because of her lying, subterfuge and making no attempt whatsoever to learn anything about her son`s lifes. No, HE was wrong. Urgh.    

For comparism, I believe Kripke had Sam as his avatar, the special, important one and the sole main character. Dean was only conceptionalized as this negative figure sidekick to highlight how great Sam was. Now some people luckily talked Kripke out of this initial pilot script idea but it`s not like Dean wasn`t second banana during his reign. Sam was the main character of Kripke`s show and plot. 

But Dean still got something to balance it out, he was allowed to shine in MOTWs to make up for stepping into the background for the mytharc. He was allowed to be a badass to make up for being comedy relief fodder they would not besmirch Sam with - see Misery. 

Now Dabb, that is an entirely different story. He writes episodes that harp on super!Sam and portray Dean as weak(er). Singer could not say a positive thing about Dean to save his life anymore in interviews. The duo? Well, one is Snger`s wife so I guess it runs inthe family. Perez? Well, I don`t know what introductory speech he got but oh boy, three episodes and three strikes. 

Sam getting several major kills last Season in a row wasn`t noticeable? And Sam wasn`t supernaturally enhanced during that time or Dean didn`t suffer from a physical condition to explain that. The Goat God episode was just like "seriously? with extra humiliation on top?" 

They gave the reason for Sam killing the Prince of Hell (with the Michael lance, woohoo, here is more salt, Dean-fans) as tit for tat, because Sam needed his own Prince of Hell kill. Next up is a hellhound kill (not just any but THE hellhound) episodes. Who killed one previously? Sam. Does Dean maybe have some history with hellhounds? Well yes, he got ripped apart by one. So by the logic of the writer`s room who in the interest of fairness kills THE hellhound? Yup, Sam. 

Dabb says in an interview "the Winchesters will be generals" in the hunting community. Lo and behold in the episode, the scene very clearly only singles out Sam. 

So, sorry but I`m less than inclined to think favourable thoughts about most of these writers and how they view Dean. I can`t in all seriousness watch their episodes and come up with the idea that they like him. Save Glynn and Yockey last year.

And of course it also comes down to preference in watching. If Dean wasn`t my favourite, I might think what he gets is good enough. Who knows. Back on Stargate, I wasn`t in the fandom and while even I noticed one character (whose actors wanted out, to be fair) was written kinda dumber and less competent than before but I noticed it more on the periphery. Later I read some fan accounts who very disappointed, bitter and livid about it. Which, yeah, it just hit closer to home.

If I stanned Sam, last Season would have been a virtual feast for me. I mean, the Stu-ing might have bordered on too much because it is just never good to do that but for a while it can enjoyable for your favourite. On a show where I like multiple characters roughly the same that would have been a problem, I admit because good god, diminishing one or more so much for the sake of another? Yikes. It depends on where my starting off point is. 

Thing is, I doubt Dabb will pull a Carver and give Dean something after trashing him for 1.5 years. No idea why Carver did it but I do not even see it as a remote possibility for Dabb.      

I wish I could like this post 100 times.

[Myrelle]

15 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

It's his brothers first night back from hell.  Maybe Sam for one night could have prioritized his brother, and been there in case Dean needed him.

The first thing Dean did when he realized something was happening was to look at Sam's bed and it was empty. He was looking for back-up, of which there was none; and very soon after he'd been resurrected by he didn't know what or whom.

Sam was using the powers to kill demons with Ruby at that time. And he liked the feeling of being able to do that, in the way that Ruby was encouraging him to do it. and he felt that it was more important to be doing that than staying with his recently back from Hell brother. Sam made his choices in S4 and when it came down to listening to Ruby or Dean, he more often than not chose to listen to Ruby and her encouragement of his use of the powers was the biggest reason, IMO, and this, even though it wasn't only Dean who told him to think twice before going fully down the road of the powers and him being the "only one" who was capable of taking out Lilith. It was a demon who was feeding him that line. and no other. He should have known better, but they negated this by making the demon blood drinking into an addiction parallel and then they tefloned it even further by making it a necessary component to being the sole Savior of Humanity in Swan Song-which is why I constantly wonder where the idea that Dean was shown to be "right" concerning the demon blood drinking ever came from. Sam couldn't have saved the world without sacrificing himself in that way, too-so just like Gollum with Frodo, the demon blood slurping became a necessary component to Sam becoming the sole Savior of the World, so how could he have been entirely "wrong" about doing it, even from the beginning. And according to Kripke afterwards, that was a "cool" way to defeat the devil, and Dean needed to realize that. Ugh. I hate Swan Song so much.

And I'm 99.9% sure that the spawn sl is going to go the same way because these writers are nothing, if they're not unoriginal.

[catrox14]

3 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

IMO I don’t think Sam thought Dean was weak because he broke under torture in hell. What I mean is I don’t think his mindset was “I can’t believe that weakling couldn’t even withstand a bit of torture what a loser”. I think he meant every word about Dean lasting longer than anyone could have. However, I think he thought the guilt that came as a result of breaking made Dean weaker than normal. It made him more hesitant and less confident in himself and his abilities. 

Sams hubris started long before he found out about Deans hell time. Sam made no distinction that it was Dean's guilt that he thought made him weak. He told Ruby  that Dean couldn't get the job done, that he wasn't strong enough.  That's why he was begging Ruby for demon blood,which  was an excuse for Sam to justify his own behavior and desire to be better and stronger than Dean. When Dean was torturing Alastair,  Sam was off with Ruby sucking demon blood from her. Once he got there to find that  Alastair had nearly killed Dean, IMO, that was all the confirmation bias Sam needed to support his own position that he had to keep with the demon blood, and Ruby, to beat Lilith.

IMO, Sams hubris was out of control by the time Dean put his foot down on Sam allying with the demon who was controlling him by the demon blood. IMO Dean challenging him was an affront to Sams ego and Sam made it clear where Dean stood when, after beating Dean, he put his hands around his brother's  throat intending to take the life from Dean with his own hands. How much clearer could it have been to Dean who Sam was choosing and how little Dean meant to Sam at that point.

Yet Dean still gave him a chance to make a different choice  via the ultimatum even after being strangled. He didn't have to give him even that. Even if he didn't intend to kill Dean he was still sending the message that Dean was last on his list and that maybe he actually hated Dean. Yet Dean had to set aside his own trauma and IMO reasonable  notion that Sam was not his brother because he tried to strangle him. Funny thing that the script in 4.22 conveniently ignored that "minor" detail and then made it seem like Dean is WRONG and childish and selfish  to be wary of Sam after that. Ugh Fuck Kripke and Gamble for that BS writing.

[Myrelle]

1 hour ago, Wayward Son said:

So yeah, I still don’t see it as Sam being all “ew the pleb is back” and still maintain his annoyance only grew after Dean went on the attack. 

Now perhaps it could be argued that Sam should have shown more patience with Dean, but his reaction to the return certainly wasn’t “oh it’s you”. 

I honestly think that JP could have helped his character's cause much more through his acting choices, if he'd thought about things deeper and if he was aware that he was supposed to come off as being more "mature" or even mature in the least about the decisions he'd made while Dean was in Purgatory. And I have to assume that he knew because both Carver and Singer went on about that at CC that summer.

I can readily admit that the writing undermined that terribly by having him ditch Kevin, but other than that(and he apologized to Kevin for that early on, too), I think we were meant to take Sam's side in that cabin scene which worked on some, but not on as many as Carver/Singer had hoped, the biggest reason being that neither one of them really knew the audience they were writing to and for, even after 7 seasons. Singer even out and out dissed Dean in an interview for how he reacted to Sam and Sam leaving hunting soon after the episode aired, so we know what the writers' intentions were concerning this particular brotherly disagreement. Dean was supposed to be seen as wrong. It was just too bad for them that the majority of the fandom refused to go along with that idea.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

Sam made it clear where Dean stood when, after beating Dean, he put his hands around his brother's  throat intending to take the life from Dean with his own hands. How much clearer could it have been to Dean who Sam was choosing and how little Dean meant to Sam at that point.

I think Sam was making a power play there, by choking him like that he could make a point a la "see, you weak loser, I`m the man and you only live now because I allow it". 

Reason 54.367 why the scene where Ruby reveals it all after Lucifer is freed in the Season 4 Finale is so satisfying to me. Sam`s disbelieving face, he can`t believe he just took a tumble down that particular highhorse. I mean, Ruby is completely tone-deaf in that scene but the way she finally drones on about her own supposed awesomeness (guess, it was hard for her holding that back and telling it all to Sam previously) while Mr. "I`m stronger, smarter and better" hunter has to listen to what a complete rube she made of him.

I don`t think I was supposed to see the scene as much-deserved comeuppance but I totally did.

By Season 5 of course we are readily back to "Ruby made me feel strong" without much of the introspection that it was only faux-strong. By 5.05 it gets held up as a positive example to Dean`s "bossiness". At that point I would have given Sam what he wanted, just to fuck with him. Play the sycophantic Ruby to have my "haha, fooled ya" moment in the Finale. See how often I could pull that off. 

[Reganne]

23 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

I think Sam was making a power play there, by choking him like that he could make a point a la "see, you weak loser, I`m the man and you only live now because I allow it". 

I think Sam had just got triggered by Dean calling him a monster which resulted in him getting super angry and punching Dean.  I also think the demon blood was also enhancing not only his strength but his anger.  When Sam was choking him, he was enraged but managed to stop himself from going too far and killing Dean.  I don't remember another time in the series when Sam had punched Dean.  

[ILoveReading]

14 minutes ago, Reganne said:

I think Sam had just got triggered by Dean calling him a monster which resulted in him getting super angry and punching Dean.  I also think the demon blood was also enhancing not only his strength but his anger.  When Sam was choking him, he was enraged but managed to stop himself from going too far and killing Dean.  I don't remember another time in the series when Sam had punched Dean.  

Dean was down and out on the floor.  Sam had clearly won the fight by that that.  There is no other reason to strangle Dean other then a power play.

This is the exchange.

Quote

SAM
Stop bossing me around, Dean. Look. My whole life, you take the wheel, you call the shots, and I trust you because you are my brother. Now I'm asking you, for once, trust me.

DEAN
No. You don't know what you're doing, Sam.

SAM
Yes, I do.

DEAN
Then that's worse.

SAM
Why? Look, I'm telling you—

DEAN
Because it's not something that you're doing, it's what you are! It means—

DEAN cuts himself off.

SAM
What? No. Say it.

SAM has tears in his eyes.

DEAN
It means you're a monster.

SAM nods. A tear falls from DEAN's eye; SAM doesn't see it before he punches DEAN. DEAN goes down hard, then gets back up and watches SAM for a moment before punching back.
 

First Dean tries to let Sam off the hook by telling him he doesn't know what he's doing.  Sam is like, yes I do. 

Dean tells him its worse because if he knows what he's doing is wrong and does it anyway that makes him a monster. 

Sam ripped out a woman's throat with his teeth, and bled an innocent woman dry.  I don't remember that nurse giving consent for Sam to take her life.  Those things are pretty monstrous.  So maybe its more of a case of the truth hurts.   Plus, Dean had tears in his eyes and was crying when he said it, so it clearly hurt him to say it.

Sam wasnt' some innocent puppy in this situation who was the victim of mean Dean. 

Edited October 15, 2017 by ILoveReading

[Wayward Son]

10 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

Dean was down and out on the floor.  Sam had clearly won the fight by that that.  There is no other reason to strangle Dean other then a power play.

This is the exchange.

First Dean tries to let Sam off the hook by telling him he doesn't know what he's doing.  Sam is like, yes I do. 

Dean tells him its worse because if he knows what he's doing is wrong and does it anyway that makes him a monster. 

Sam ripped out a woman's throat with his teeth, and bled an innocent woman dry.  I don't remember that nurse giving consent for Sam to take her life.  Those things are pretty monstrous.  So maybe its more of a case of the truth hurts.   Plus, Dean had tears in his eyes and was crying when he said it, so it clearly hurt him to say it.

Sam wasnt' some innocent puppy in this situation who was the victim of mean Dean. 

I think the way the show depicted it was pretty horrific, but at the end of the day both Sam /and/ Dean kill innocent ‘meatsuits’ of demons all the time! Hell, they later use reverse exorcisms to force a demon into a body just so they can kill it (and by extension the host).

Edited October 15, 2017 by Wayward Son

[Res]

15 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

I think the way the show depicted it was pretty horrific, but at the end of the day both Sam /and/ Dean kill innocent ‘meatsuits’ of demons all the time! Hell, they later use reverse exorcisms to force a demon into a body just so they can kill it (and by extension the host).

I greatly disagree that these 2 things are equivalent. Ripping out a throat and sucking their blood out is very different than killing "innocent 'meatsuits'", IMO. 1. We have no idea if they are truly innocent and 2. which is my MAIN argument, 90%-95% of the 'meatsuits' are already dead due to what the demons have already done to them during their possession. 3. Most of them would probably be grateful for the death considering what the demon has already made them do and are most probably looking at a life time of massive, intense therapy, if not being completely locked up for the rest of their lives. No, I don't agree with killing but if I was possessed and had to watch my hands kill my entire family, including children, I would bless them for killing me and saving me a lifetime of living with that, much less dreaming of that every night.

[Wayward Son]

2 minutes ago, Res said:

I greatly disagree that these 2 things are equivalent. Ripping out a throat and sucking their blood out is very different than killing "innocent 'meatsuits'", IMO. 1. We have no idea if they are truly innocent and 2. which is my MAIN argument, 90%-95% of the 'meatsuits' are already dead due to what the demons have already done to them during their possession. 3. Most of them would probably be grateful for the death considering what the demon has already made them do and are most probably looking at a life time of massive, intense therapy, if not being completely locked up for the rest of their lives. No, I don't agree with killing but if I was possessed and had to watch my hands kill my entire family, including children, I would bless them for killing me and saving me a lifetime of living with that, much less dreaming of that every night.

But Sam and Dean don’t even bother to try and check if the “meatsuit” is still alive anymore. They go straight for the kill and I don’t think it is about mercy killing. They’ve made it clear on several occasions it is purely for tactics such as ensuring Crowley (or whoever is in charge of hell at that particular point) doesn’t know their own location. Is killing someone to protect their own asses any better than killing someone for the strength needed to take down the strongest demon in existence? 

 

I feel the need to point out I consider both to be pretty terrible, and I’m often sad about how disposable human life has become on this show.