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

[Bessie]

Which is why season four sucked for so many people who like Sam. I hated it. I never rewatch any of the episodes. And I'm glad the demondean story was wrapped up before the writers could do the same thing to Dean because I would've hated that too. I probably wouldn't have watched it. It was bad enough going through it once with Sam, I never wanted to repeat it with Dean.

[Reganne]

41 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

 

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

Never said that.  I said he was triggered with rage after Dean's comment about him being a monster which is true.  Doesn't make it right on Sam's part.  Then again, the series isn't all mean Sam and sad and hurt Dean like some people like to paint it either.  Both brothers have their not so great moments and their times where they are the ones who are hurt.

[Res]

6 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

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. 

I'm not saying that it's not terrible but is killing a known terrorist, spy, etc., so that his superiors don't know that you are on to them, thus saving more lives at the expense of one acceptable collateral damage? This is something that happens everyday in war zones, be it a gang turf war, or Desert Storm, or the war against terrorist who are bombing people all the time without regard for personal life. Do I think it's terrible to make these decisions? Definitely. But if it keeps bombs, warfare, etc. away from other innocents (which is what they were doing), would you do it to keep your family safe? This is the world we are in now and this is definitely the world that they live in.

Do they like doing it? I guarantee they don't but what choice do they have against an enemy that has NO regard for human life? Do I like seeing it? Hell, no, but I understand the necessity. I did NOT understand the necessity of slowly draining the life out of someone to give yourself relief from your withdrawal pains.

[DeeDee79]

24 minutes ago, Res said:

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.

I agree especially considering when they exorcised 1st Meg even while her body was dying she thanked them & spoke about all of the horrific things that the demon did while possessing her body.

[Wayward Son]

5 minutes ago, Res said:

I'm not saying that it's not terrible but is killing a known terrorist, spy, etc., so that his superiors don't know that you are on to them, thus saving more lives at the expense of one acceptable collateral damage? This is something that happens everyday in war zones, be it a gang turf war, or Desert Storm, or the war against terrorist who are bombing people all the time without regard for personal life. Do I think it's terrible to make these decisions? Definitely. But if it keeps bombs, warfare, etc. away from other innocents (which is what they were doing), would you do it to keep your family safe? This is the world we are in now and this is definitely the world that they live in.

Do they like doing it? I guarantee they don't but what choice do they have against an enemy that has NO regard for human life? Do I like seeing it? Hell, no, but I understand the necessity. I did NOT understand the necessity of slowly draining the life out of someone to give yourself relief from your withdrawal pains.

My point though it wasn’t it’s about gaining relief from his withdrawal pains, he had Ruby for that. The purpose of killing the nurse possessed demon was to gain enough blood to have the strength needed to kill Lilith. Again, is killing a demon and it’s meat suit to take out the strongest demon  around any less justified than killing a demon to protect their location? Personally, I don’t find either better than the two. 

[DeeDee79]

19 minutes ago, Bessie said:

Which is why season four sucked for so many people who like Sam. I hated it. I never rewatch any of the episodes. And I'm glad the demondean story was wrapped up before the writers could do the same thing to Dean because I would've hated that too. I probably wouldn't have watched it. It was bad enough going through it once with Sam, I never wanted to repeat it with Dean.

I binge watched when I first got into this show and after the season 4 finale I couldn't believe how much Sam had changed from the beginning of the season. I'm more Dean leaning but I  liked Sam & I wondered how the writers were going to redeem him from all that had transpired. It didn't color my overall feelings for the character because I was able to enjoy Sam again in the following seasons but I don't rewatch the majority of season 4.

[Res]

5 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

My point though it wasn’t it’s about gaining relief from his withdrawal pains, he had Ruby for that. 

I was referring to the demon he killed and drank in front of Dean and Cas at the end of the "Rapture", not the nurse, as far as withdrawal symptoms. For all we know, he put the nurse out when he went for powering up. That was off screen and equally bad but we didn't observe it. 

I understand that both scenarios are aberrant but our rights to express ourselves, such as this message board and other freedoms, are ours because of others making these tough decisions that you don't like and don't agree with which is fine for you. We have that luxury to judge and condemn as we want because others do that for us, just to be looked down on it by some, IMO. But this is getting off topic.

I just find the torturous, slow death of the drinking scene worse than the quick kills for the reasons stated. YMMV.

[DeeDee79]

Double post...

Edited October 15, 2017 by DeeDee79

[Wayward Son]

10 minutes ago, Res said:

I was referring to the demon he killed and drank in front of Dean and Cas at the end of the "Rapture", not the nurse, as far as withdrawal symptoms. For all we know, he put the nurse out when he went for powering up. That was off screen and equally bad but we didn't observe it. 

Ah OK. I thought you were referring to the nurse so we had our wires crossed. My apologies. 

 

I dont want to get into a big discussion about the other part of your post. I’m not a big fan of bringing real life into things as it feels like being backed into a corner where I can’t respond for fear of personally insulting other posters. However, all Ill say is that one difference between killing a terrorist like you mention and killing a ‘meat suit’ is the choice involved. For the most part, Terrorists choose to join a terrorist organisation. Those possessed by the demons had no choice and are more like innocent bystanders

Anyway, like I said I’m gonna stop this discussion here for fear of causing upset to other users. 

[RulerofallIsurvey]

1 hour ago, ILoveReading said:

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. 

1 hour 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! 

Actually, Sam draining the nurse dry was never depicted on the show at all.  It was heavily implied that he drank all her (demon) blood,  but he was never shown ripping out her throat with his teeth and bleeding her dry.

A few episodes later, Dean, Bobby, Cas, and Sam bled at least 4 demon-possessed meatsuits dry in order to get all the 'go-juice' Sam would need to host Lucifer.  Why isn't that just as bad as what Sam did to the nurse?  I don't remember those 4 victims giving their consent for Dean and Cas to take their lives.  

[Res]

3 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

Ah OK. I thought you were referring to the nurse so we had our wires crossed. My apologies. 

 

I dont want to get into a big discussion about the other part of your post. I’m not a big fan of bringing real life into things as it feels like being backed into a corner where I can’t respond for fear of personally insulting other posters. However, all Ill say is that one difference between killing a terrorist like you mention and killing a ‘meat suit’ is the choice involved. For the most part, Terrorists choose to join a terrorist organisation. Those possessed by the demons had no choice and are more like innocent bystanders

Anyway, like I said I’m gonna stop this discussion here for fear of causing upset to other users. 

I figured I should clarify which one I was talking about. No apologies necessary.

I understand what you are saying about RL which I why I pulled back to topic. Those rivers run deep but I wanted to clarify where I was coming from. And I see what you say about consent but that's hard as well as some terrorist are literally born and brain-washed into it while others do give consent. Even some homegrown types like Timothy McVey of the OK bombing. In some ways, the brain-washed ones are much like demon possessed where they didn't really give consent or "join up" but still sometimes do terrible things. That's what I was equating it to, just for clarification. 

Anyways, I do understand both are bad but I can see where sometimes it can be necessary, unfortunately.

[AwesomO4000]

8 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

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. 

They did? Castiel maybe thought / expressed "hmm that might be not a bad idea considering I don't care about you nearly as much as Dean anyway, so yeah, okay." Whereas I think Dean said a lot "no way in hells" for quite a bit before it took Death convincing him to change his mind. And even Bobby asked Sam if he was crazy and took a while to convince. And then when Sam did fail to stop Lucifer when he first said "yes" Castiel and Bobby declared "oh well, there wasn't really all that much hope to begin with anyway, let's drink while the world ends." Yup, I was really feeling the "Sam's our guy to get it done" vibes. *sarcasm*

Quote

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.   

We don't even know if Dean is going to be wrong this season yet. I'm guessing that even if Spawn somehow turns out to be "good," completely bad things are goig to happen which will end up being Sam's fault, because that's generally how the show rolls now, even when they have to make something up that makes no sense - like Sam's joining the BMoL last season - to make it happen.

Quote

 

 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. 

 

Which is why I said those two things together - plus all of the other finale kills/sacrifices Dean got - do.  If Dean directly starts even one apocalypse, then I'll maybe consider this some slight to Dean. But right now it just seems like asking for equal - or more - heroics for Dean while he gets to have all of his bad choices justified and gets to be the one to clean up after incompetent Sam and Castiel.

Quote

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.

You might not consider season 8-9 and the end of 10 humiliating for Sam, but I do. In that time period, Dean is shown as heroic in purgatory, saves Sam during the trials, saves Sam from dying, kills Abbadon, kills Cain, helps defeat Metatron, and in the end of season 11, Dean saves the world. In the same period of time Sam doesn't complete the trials, is knocked out while Castel and Dean save the world, starts an apocalypse, and plays cheerleader. That's it. Comparing Dean's role in the season 5 finale where after previously securing the final ring and killing Zachariah he is the one to rally the troops to go to Stull cemetery and is there for his brother at the end to Sam's role in season 9's finale where Sam is shown to be a hypocrite, has to declare his former tormentor a "friend," is knocked unconscious and misses the entire battle only to come running in not in time to save his brother or help him in any way, and if that's not bad enough, gets dissed by Crowley of all people, then yes, I would say that it isn't balanced. I would say that Sam's experience / portrayal was more in your words "humiliating."

Quote

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. 

Dean got a full season of a chosen one quest - be the only one who could have a connection to and get through to Amara - which he actually did instead of less than half a season of being the chosen one for a quest that he wouldn't even complete. And, in my opinion, super strength and ability to not die counts as "super powers" in my book. Dean was martyred to purgatory - solving an apocalypse he didn't even start, so Dean must even sacrifice or be willing to sacrifice to fix things that aren't his fault. He is the only character on this show to have gotten to do this - twice. Three times if you count his delaying his leaving from purgatory in order to try to rescue Castiel.

Quote

His "big" actions have no consequences like that because the writers don`t care.

I disagree. I think his big actions have plenty of consequences. The after effects just end up getting validated (Gadreel) or twisted into getting blamed on someone else - usually Sam (the mark of Cain). Even killing Death turned out to have a big consequence, it just turned out to be a good one: of course it did!

Quote

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. 

An arc did spring from Dean killing Death. As I said above it was a positive one. Billie ends up being involved with Sam and Dean and she ends up being a crucial help in helping get Dean ready to confront Amara. Dean already had the Amara arc here, so that was just icing on the already positive cake.

Quote

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. 

And my point is that there isn't anything like that any more. We know that Dean is also book smart. We got examples way back in season 5 and even again just recently where Dean compares and contrasts the Bible and Aesop. We've seen Dean express just as much computer savvy as Sam in recent years - maybe even more so, since Dean taught Sam how to hack security cameras, and they even made a few jokes about how Sam was jealous because Dean had showed him up in the computer tech department. I was asking for a "Sam trait" that Sam even has that Dean doesn't, and I don't really think there is any unless you count serial killer trivia.  

Quote

 

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. 

 

If Dean's season 4 and 5 arc doesn't qualify - even though Dean killed Zachariah and got the final ring - then I argue Sam's trial arc doesn't really count - since Sam didn't close the gate and nothing happened. Sam had the Psy-kids arc, but that didn't really go anywhere either. He didn't have a part in killing Azazel, the demon boy king arc was a red herring, and it melded into his Lucifer's vessel arc. Also I contend that in my opinon, Sam's Gadreel arc was in the end Gadreel's arc. It would have been an interesting emotional arc if the writers had bothered to follow through with it, but in the end, they seemed mostly interested in redeeming Gadreel by giving him a cool redemption story, so Sam's feelings about being possessed were left by the wayside and instead Sam just decides that he was wrong about Gadreel and he was really a friend after all. I wouldn't call that much of an arc myself.

2 hours ago, Myrelle said:

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.

For me, I'm not sure how there was much "Sam is mature" way to play what was written for him. Thinking of "Citizen Fang" there is just nothing there redeeming for Sam. Same with the Kevin thing - highlighted by the "Eeeeat me"s. And as has been talked about here, if they have multiple takes, the director is going to find the one that shows what the writer and director want. And having Sam ditch Kevin, in my opinion, was a huge thing that in no way could ever mesh with Sam being "mature" in his decisions. I think "mature" was a backtrack thing myself. I don't believe at all that they meant it. Sam moving on - as @catrox14 talked about earlier - yes, but that was to service Dean's part of the arc. His coming back and everyone having gone on without him. I don't think Carver cared what it would do to Sam's character beyond "ooh angst!"

7 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. 

Dean at the end of season 11 where Dean is a key figure in stopping an apocalypse he is given full pardon from starting (while blaming it all on Sam) is trashing him? Can they trash Sam similarly please?

7 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

If I stanned Sam, last Season would have been a virtual feast for me.

Interesting, because I prefer Sam and I found the Sam joins the BMoL and is of course wrong thing quite annoying and saw the kills as a kind of make up thing that didn't. Since characterization is my thing, I would much rather have Sam not done something that stupid and Dean could've had as many kills as he wanted. I found Sam's speech to the hunters lame and an attempt to just showcase "Sam was wrong and now he has to tell everyone else how wrong he was and beg them to help him anyway." Basically I can only say at least it wasn't as bad Carver's reign where Sam had to do that, too, and also not kill anything either and fail spectacularly. But that's not what I would call a "virtual feast." For me, a virtual feast in terms of a good Sam season? Seasons 2, 5, 6, and 7. And season 11 was pretty good too even though I did have to swallow "Amara is all Sam's fault and even God says so." So that says a lot about the post Gamble years that season 11 is one of the better years given that.

2 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

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".

I think it was entirely meant to be a comeuppance. The writers had been tearing down Sam's character all season.

And just because Sam said that Ruby made him feel strong, I didn't see that as a good thing or Sam saying it was. Sam readily admitted that if he had to do it all again, he would take it all back. And it was apparent that he knew it was a false strong feeling by his actions throughout the rest of the season and how he actively didn't want to succumb to that false feeling again... Such as "My Bloody Valentine." Obviously your opinions vary, but I think mine are just as valid.

[catrox14]

2 hours 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.  

I don't really fault Sam that much for punching Dean or even shoving him through a room divider. The problem for me is that Sam didn't stop his attack at that point. He had clearly beaten Dean who was down on the floor and could NOT fight back anymore. The fight was over. And then Sam took a moment, loomed over Dean and then made a clear and deliberate choice to wrap his hands around his brother's neck and choke off his air supply, intentionally. It's irrelevant to me whether Sam  stopped himself or did it as a power play, it was act of brutality that was highly personal.

And the narrative not only didn't ever address the specificity and brutality of the act of strangulation and even made Dean the bad guy for deigning to consider Sam a lost cause at that point by having Bobby chew out Dean for distancing himself from Sam.

And what I find even more baffling is that somehow Dean shouting at Sam and telling him to never come back if he leaves is somehow worse than Sam strangling Dean. I'll never understand that defense of Sam in that situation.

[Reganne]

16 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I don't really fault Sam that much for punching Dean or even shoving him through a room divider. The problem for me is that Sam didn't stop his attack at that point. He had clearly beaten Dean who was down on the floor and could NOT fight back anymore. The fight was over. And then Sam took a moment, loomed over Dean and then made a clear and deliberate choice to wrap his hands around his brother's neck and choke off his air supply, intentionally. It's irrelevant to me whether Sam  stopped himself or did it as a power play, it was act of brutality that was highly personal.

And the narrative not only didn't ever address the specificity and brutality of the act of strangulation and even made Dean the bad guy for deigning to consider Sam a lost cause at that point by having Bobby chew out Dean for distancing himself from Sam.

And what I find even more baffling is that somehow Dean shouting at Sam and telling him to never come back if he leaves is somehow worse than Sam strangling Dean. I'll never understand that defense of Sam in that situation.

Who's saying Dean's ultimatum is worse that Sam's violent outburst?  Just because I think there is more to the situation then Sam chose a demon over his brother ... in that I feel there was more at play doesn't mean I think Sam was in the right and Dean was in the wrong.  Maybe it's the same thing for others who speak about the situation.  Just because Sam has done something wrong, that doesn't mean there werent other triggers and factors in play that helped shape his decisions or anger.  I don't think it is all black and white.

[Bessie]

I thought the whole point of the fight scene and the nurse begging for her life was to show that Sam was off-the-rails. He was gonzo. There was no sense in Bobby trying to get through to him. Dean was bobbys only option. 

Pretend that Bobby was around when Dean was a demon. If Sam told Bobby he was going to write Dean off as a lost cause, who do you think Bobby would try to get through to?  Demondean or Sam? I expect he'd have gone after Sam not demondean. 

[catrox14]

Just now, Reganne said:

Who's saying Dean's ultimatum is worse that Sam's violent outburst?  Just because I think there is more to the situation then Sam chose a demon over his brother ... in that I feel there was more at play doesn't mean I think Sam was in the right and Dean was in the wrong.  Maybe it's the same thing for others who speak about the situation.  Just because Sam has done something wrong, that doesn't mean there werent other triggers and factors in play that helped shape his decisions or anger.  I don't think it is all black and white.

I think to an extent the show was saying that by never addressing what Sam did to Dean.  They had Bobby tell Dean to stop whining about Sam not being his brother and making the comparison to what John told Sam when Sam left home.

And I am not saying you're saying it's worse..  I'm saying I've seen that argument made. Along with other arguments that the fight was Dean's fault because:

He deserved Sam's attack because he called Sam a monster. That Dean should have KNOWN better than to say something like that given Sam's insecurities and it was a low blow so Dean deserved whatever Sam did to him.   

That Dean should have known that a "drug addict" would be not be reasonable.

That Dean was cruel and awful for saying to Sam something similar to what John told Sam when Sam left. That the ultimatum was literally a worse thing for Dean to have said and harmed Sam further.

[Reganne]

6 minutes ago, Bessie said:

I thought the whole point of the fight scene and the nurse begging for her life was to show that Sam was off-the-rails. He was gonzo. There was no sense in Bobby trying to get through to him. Dean was bobbys only option. 

Pretend that Bobby was around when Dean was a demon. If Sam told Bobby he was going to write Dean off as a lost cause, who do you think Bobby would try to get through to?  Demondean or Sam? I expect he'd have gone after Sam not demondean. 

I agree.  Sam's dark side had been hinted at and built up seasons before.  He was off the rails.  Became more easily enraged, made poor choices and didn't listen to his loved ones.  

[Reganne]

4 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I think to an extent the show was saying that by never addressing what Sam did to Dean.  They had Bobby tell Dean to stop whining about Sam not being his brother and making the comparison to what John told Sam when Sam left home.

 

I never saw it that way.  Did Bobby even know about Sam strangling Dean?  At that moment I felt Bobby needed to try to get through to Dean in order to try to put things back together.  Sam wasnt in the vicinity and he most likely thought Sam and Dean would be better united.  Them united would have a better outcome overall.  For themselves and saving the world from the apacalypse. You may not agree with how he did it, but that is how I think he sees it.

[trxr4kids]

5 minutes ago, Bessie said:

I thought the whole point of the fight scene and the nurse begging for her life was to show that Sam was off-the-rails. He was gonzo. There was no sense in Bobby trying to get through to him. Dean was bobbys only option. 

Pretend that Bobby was around when Dean was a demon. If Sam told Bobby he was going to write Dean off as a lost cause, who do you think Bobby would try to get through to?  Demondean or Sam? I expect he'd have gone after Sam not demondean. 

I personally think Bobby would have captured demondean and told him how much he was failing Sam with his demon ways. He would probably further have gone on to expound on how Sam needed his non demonic brother back because he was being too hard on himself and needed a pep talk, so suck it up, buttercup, Sam's your responsibility, no karaoke for you! 

[catrox14]

Just now, Reganne said:

I never saw it that way.  Did Bobby even know about Sam strangling Dean?  At that moment I felt Bobby needed to try to get through to Dean in order to try to put things back together.

If Bobby knew that Sam strangled Dean and still gave him the Boo hoo princess speech then Bobby is the biggest asshole ever. And I doubt the show wanted us to see Bobby as the biggest asshole.

What narrative reason would the show have for Dean not telling Bobby what Sam did?

[Reganne]

2 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

If Bobby knew that Sam strangled Dean and still gave him the Boo hoo princess speech then Bobby is the biggest asshole ever. And I doubt the show wanted us to see Bobby as the biggest asshole.

What narrative reason would the show have for Dean not telling Bobby what Sam did?

If it wasn't discussed on the show... I would probably think  Dean didn't feel the need to discuss it.   TBH I could see him being more upset that Sam left after the ultimatum than the actual physical violence therefor that is where the discussion went.

[catrox14]

Just now, Reganne said:

If it wasn't discussed on the show... I would probably think  Dean didn't feel the need to discuss it.   TBH I could see him being more upset that Sam left after the ultimatum than the actual physical violence therefor that is where the discussion went.

Why would Dean hide that from Bobby?

[Reganne]

2 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Why would Dean hide that from Bobby?

I don't think he was hiding it.  I think he was discussing the issue that was upsetting him the most.  That Sam left after the ultimatum.  For example.... when Dean talks to Sam about what he was upset about... he says he feels Sam chose Ruby over him.  He never brings up being strangled by Sam ever to my knowledge.  It's not like he was trying to hide it from Sam either because Sam knows it happened.

[ahrtee]

15 minutes ago, Reganne said:

If it wasn't discussed on the show... I would probably think  Dean didn't feel the need to discuss it.   TBH I could see him being more upset that Sam left after the ultimatum than the actual physical violence therefor that is where the discussion went.

If Dean showed up at Bobby's beat all to hell with bruises around his neck, wouldn't Bobby ask?  (And no matter what magic healing cream they had, he should have had many visible marks of the fight for a long time.)  Even if Dean brushed it off as "it's not important," Bobby would still know how far Sam had gone.  

[Reganne]

8 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

If Dean showed up at Bobby's beat all to hell with bruises around his neck, wouldn't Bobby ask?  (And no matter what magic healing cream they had, he should have had many visible marks of the fight for a long time.)  Even if Dean brushed it off as "it's not important," Bobby would still know how far Sam had gone.  

Yeah IF he did, I would say so.  I don't think they showed him having marks though.

[Bessie]

6 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

Even if Dean brushed it off as "it's not important," Bobby would still know how far Sam had gone.  

Which is exactly why he’d choose dean as the person to reason with and not sam.

I understand if people don’t like how bobby went about it, but he only had two choices. Somehow get through to a despondent dean or agree to write sam off and allow Lilith to do whatever she was going to do. 

I think bobby made the right choice in a desperate and time-sensitive situation.  And the boo-boo princess speech, while harsh, worked. 

[ahrtee]

3 minutes ago, Reganne said:

Yeah IF he did, I would say so.  I don't think they showed him having marks though.

We didn't see him coming back to Bobby's, so we have no way of knowing what he looked like then.  And IIRC, he did have marks right after the fight (not to mention sore or possibly cracked ribs, judging by his wincing and the way he was holding them.)  So unless the Impala's supersonic speed (anywhere in the world in 2 hours or less) suddenly went offline and it took a week or more to get back to SD, he would have had marks.

[Reganne]

6 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

We didn't see him coming back to Bobby's, so we have no way of knowing what he looked like then.  And IIRC, he did have marks right after the fight (not to mention sore or possibly cracked ribs, judging by his wincing and the way he was holding them.)  So unless the Impala's supersonic speed (anywhere in the world in 2 hours or less) suddenly went offline and it took a week or more to get back to SD, he would have had marks.

It didn't seem like there was a great time lapse between the episodes... however Dean may have taken time to get to Bobby's.   We don't know.  So I don't really know if we can take it into consideration as we saw Dean talking to Bobby without marks on him.  I am only going by what was shown.  We weren't shown Dean and Bobby together with Dean having obvious marks on him to my knowledge.

[Bessie]

Let's say Dean returned to Bobby's covered in bruises from head to toe, with five broken ribs. Dean then tells Bobby every single thing that went down, including the strangulation. Does this somehow change Bobby's dilemma? 

[catrox14]

14 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

So unless the Impala's supersonic speed (anywhere in the world in 2 hours or less) suddenly went offline and it took a week or more to get back to SD, he would have had marks.

I am 100% convinced that Baby has an FTL drive under Dean's weapons cache in the trunk.

[DeeDee79]

29 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

If Dean showed up at Bobby's beat all to hell with bruises around his neck, wouldn't Bobby ask?  (And no matter what magic healing cream they had, he should have had many visible marks of the fight for a long time.)  Even if Dean brushed it off as "it's not important," Bobby would still know how far Sam had gone.  

I agree and also were we shown how much time had passed between the fight and the aftermath when Dean was with Bobby? I actually don't remember the beginning all that well. Personally I think that Bobby was in the know in regards to what had gone down and his "boo hoo princess" speech was because he felt that it wasn't important enough to write Sam off. It wouldn't make sense for Dean to have not told Bobby especially if he felt comfortable enough to tell him that he told Sam not to come back IMO.

[ahrtee]

9 minutes ago, Bessie said:

Let's say Dean returned to Bobby's covered in bruises from head to toe, with five broken ribs. Dean then tells Bobby every single thing that went down, including the strangulation. Does this somehow change Bobby's dilemma? 

Sorry--I wasn't addressing your comment about how Bobby should have handled things.  I personally think you're right--that Bobby really had no other choice but to appeal to Dean (though I would have preferred another way than the "suck it up" speech.**)  But I was specifically addressing the question of if Bobby knew about the fight between Dean and Sam.  Sorry if the two questions got confused.

**ETA: Especially if he knew how bad the fight actually was.

Edited October 15, 2017 by ahrtee

[DeeDee79]

6 minutes ago, Bessie said:

Let's say Dean returned to Bobby's covered in bruises from head to toe, with five broken ribs. Dean then tells Bobby every single thing that went down, including the strangulation. Does this somehow change Bobby's dilemma? 

It doesn't change the issue at hand but maybe Bobby wouldn't have brushed it off as "family is supposed to make you miserable" and actually shown some empathy instead of the princess speech. I know that it was seen by many fans as being the most effective way to get through to Dean but it was a big "eff you Bobby" moment for me.

[trxr4kids]

25 minutes ago, Bessie said:

And the boo-boo princess speech, while harsh, worked. 

Eh, so does kicking a puppy for peeing on the rug eventually, does that make it okay? Sorry rhetorical question, I loathe the boo hoo speech and will never see it as necessary.

ETA: or what DeeDee just posted.

Edited October 15, 2017 by trxr4kids

[catrox14]

4 minutes ago, Bessie said:

Let's say Dean returned to Bobby's covered in bruises from head to toe, with five broken ribs. Dean then tells Bobby every single thing that went down, including the strangulation. Does this somehow change Bobby's dilemma? 

It doesn't change the dilemma but it might let Bobby know that Dean was not being a princess and a whiny crybaby which is exactly what he called him. You know, Dean actually does respond  to more gentle handling pretty often. Bobby could have sat down with Dean and said 'Okay, I get it. Sam tried to kill you. It's shitty and if you want to tell him to buzz off if we stop the Apocalypse, I understand why you would. But right now, we are out of options. I know you don't want to be around him but we have a bigger problem and I need you to get your head back in the game". 

There is nothing in Dean's personality and history of his relationship with Bobby that warranted that kind of tirade from Bobby. Nothing.

IMO that whole thing was just so Kripke could get off on his weird idea that family is supposed to make you miserable. Well, miserable =/= murder each other.

[Bessie]

7 minutes ago, trxr4kids said:

Eh, so does kicking a puppy for peeing on the rug eventually, does that make it okay?

That's really harsh. I'm out. 

ETA:   

Quote

Sorry if the two questions got confused.

No worries. I'm the one who confused them. 

Edited October 15, 2017 by Bessie

[Wayward Son]

Watching Heartache and it’s a strong example of why I take issue with Dean’s s8 characterisation.

 

If you want to spend the rest of your days on the road hunting that’s swell Dean. That’s completely your choice. But if Sam doesn’t then he doesn’t have to. He’s not obliged to spend the rest of his life chasing after you like a little lap dog. Get over yourself and stop being such a bully! 

 

And in this episode most of Dean’s words aren’t about his “abandonment” they’re about trying to emotionally manipulate Sam into promising to eternally hunt against his will. 

4 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

It doesn't change the issue at hand but maybe Bobby wouldn't have brushed it off as "family is supposed to make you miserable" and actually shown some empathy instead of the princess speech. I know that it was seen by many fans as being the most effective way to get through to Dean but it was a big "eff you Bobby" moment for me.

That was a “eff you Dean” moment for Dean because he didn’t keep to the subject. He used it as an excuse to whine yet again about Sam’s decision to go to Stanford. Siblings go to university all the time so “boo boo princess” is entirely appropriate.

[ahrtee]

2 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

Watching Heartache and it’s a strong example of why I take issue with Dean’s s8 characterisation.

 

If you want to spend the rest of your days on the road hunting that’s swell Dean. That’s completely your choice. But if Sam doesn’t then he doesn’t have to. He’s not obliged to spend the rest of his life chasing after you like a little lap dog. Get over yourself and stop being such a bully! 

 

And in this episode most of Dean’s words aren’t about his “abandonment” they’re about trying to emotionally manipulate Sam into promising to eternally hunt against his will. 

YMMV.

[ILoveReading]

8 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

 

If you want to spend the rest of your days on the road hunting that’s swell Dean. That’s completely your choice. But if Sam doesn’t then he doesn’t have to. He’s not obliged to spend the rest of his life chasing after you like a little lap dog. Get over yourself and stop being such a bully!

Dean didn't chain Sam to the car.  If he wanted to leave the door was wide open.  Maybe Sam needs to grow up and stop acting like teenager.  He's in his 30s, if he wants to leave, be a man and say, "Dean sorry but I'm leaving."

Sam has never had a problem walking away before.  Why would it be a problem this time?

Sam also told Dean that he wanted his time to count for something.  That is also Sam being a bully because he's disparaging Dean's life's work as if saving people, hunting things isn't important.

Edited October 15, 2017 by ILoveReading

[DeeDee79]

5 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

That was a “eff you Dean” moment for Dean because he didn’t keep to the subject. He used it as an excuse to whine yet again about Sam’s decision to go to Stanford. Siblings go to university all the time so “boo boo princess” is entirely appropriate.

That's your opinion based on your feelings towards the character. I'm talking about Bobby's perspective based on his relationship with Dean.

[Wayward Son]

11 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

Dean didn't chain Sam to the car.  If he wanted to leave the door was wide open.  Maybe Sam needs to grow up and stop acting like teenager.  He's in his 30s, if he wants to leave, be a man and say, "Dean sorry but I'm leaving."

Sam also told Dean that he wanted his time to count for something.  That is also Sam being a bully because he's disparaging Dean's life's work as if saving people, hunting things isn't important.

Sam didn’t say “I want to leave right now” he said he wanted Dean to be open to the possibility it might come to that one day. A pretty reasonable request IMO and preparing Dean for the possibility is much more considerate than one day out of the blue proclaiming  “ok, so I’m done! See ya around” and leaving. 

It was Dean who persisted on making little digs and jibes and trying to tell Sam he’d be the worst person in the world for leaving. One dig back, and I’ll concede that was indeed a dig back from Sam,  doesn’t negate a whole episodes worth of them from Dean IMO. 

 

11 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

That's your opinion based on your feelings towards the character. I'm talking about Bobby's perspective based on his relationship with Dean.

And I’m pointing out perhaps Dean getting off topic and over the top is what made Bobby snap. It was only after that ridiculous statement that Sam going to college meant they were probably never really brothers that Bobby snapped at him. 

Edited October 15, 2017 by Wayward Son

[DeeDee79]

1 minute ago, Wayward Son said:

And I’m pointing out perhaps Dean getting off topic and over the top is what made Bobby snap. It was only after that ridiculous statement that Sam going to college meant they were probably never really brothers that Bobby snapped at him. 

Fine; thanks for the clarification.

[ILoveReading]

7 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

It was Dean who persisted on making little digs and jibes and trying to tell Sam he’d be the worst person in the world for leaving. One dig back doesn’t negate a whole episodes worth of them from Dean IMO.

Sam also did this.  "I had something I never had before."  Kind of insulting to tell the guy who raised you that you were never happy with him.  That condescending "organic" remark in episodes to.  The "I want my time to count" remark.  I'm sure I can find more if I re watched the ep.

Again Dean is such a horrible person who only bosses Sam around bullies him, he needs to man up and leave.  

Again he's a grown man who is more than capable of giving as good as he gets. 

It's also not realistic.  Sam is a legally dead serial killer.  How is he supposed to go back to school?

Besides I thought family was allowed to make you miserable.  Or does that only apply to how people treat Dean?

We'll have to agree to disagree. 

Edited October 15, 2017 by ILoveReading

[ahrtee]

7 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

Dean didn't chain Sam to the car.  If he wanted to leave the door was wide open.  Maybe Sam needs to grow up and stop acting like teenager.  He's in his 30s, if he wants to leave, be a man and say, "Dean sorry but I'm leaving."

Sam has never had a problem walking away before.  Why would it be a problem this time?

 

Or, in the immortal words of Ellen, "Hey, don't do me any favors. Look, if you don't want my help, fine. Don't let the door smack your ass on the way out."

 

2 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

preparing Dean for the possibility is much more considerate than one day out of the blue proclaiming  “ok, so I’m done! See ya around” and leaving. 

I think the fact that Sam has been holding that "possibility" over his head since season 1 should have been preparation enough, and hardly "out of the blue" 8 years later.  Maybe it was time just to get off his ass and do it.  

As to your perception that Dean "persisted on making little digs and jibes and trying to tell Sam he’d be the worst person in the world for leaving,"  all I will say is YMMV.  

[Wayward Son]

3 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

 

Again Dean is such a horrible person who only bosses Sam around bullies him, he needs to man up and leave.  

 

I don’t think he is throughout the entire show. I think seasons 1-7 did a good job of keeping his positive and negative traits balanced. But throughout seasons 8-9 I would say yes he was pretty horrible, which is when I went off the character. 

 

6 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

Besides I thought family was allowed to make you miserable.  Or does that only apply to how people treat Dean?

I never actually said I agreed with that sentiment. I said I agreed that Dean was acting overly whiny when he moved the subject from the fight with Sam to Sam going to Stanford. The fight was something Dean was entitled to feel hurt and betrayed by. Sam going to Stanford was not and it certainly wasn’t something that meant “we were never really brothers”. 

[catrox14]

To the point of Dean bullying Sam in s4 about college, I need a refresher of when he brought up Sam going to college after s1. I'm not being snarky. I have no recollection of that happening at all until it was dredged out of Kripke/Gamble's asses pens in 4.22. AFAIR, the only time Dean brought up Sam going to school between s1 and 4.22 was in Scarecrow when he was apologizing and telling Sam he was RIGHT to leave for school. But I could be forgetting something.

For me that Dean brought up Sam leaving in 4.22 is another example of the awful writing of 4.22 and why I say the narrative was intending to make Dean the bad guy in this situation by drawing a  IMO, a false equivalency between Sam leaving for school and John's anger with Sam for it vs Dean being strangled by his brother for deigning to be against Sam sucking down demon blood and being in cahoots with a demon. They're just not the same thing even on a surface level, IMHO.

Edited October 16, 2017 by catrox14

[Wayward Son]

4 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

To the point of Dean bullying Sam in s4 about college, I need a refresher of when he brought up Sam going to college after s1. I'm not being snarky. I have no recollection of that happening at all until it was dredged out of Kripke/Gamble's asses pens in 4.22. AFAIR, the only time Dean brought up Sam going to school between s1 and 4.22 was in Scarecrow when he was apologizing and telling Sam he was RIGHT to leave for school. 

For me that Dean brought up Sam leaving in 4.22 is another example of the awful writing of 4.22 and why I say the narrative was intending to make Dean the bad guy in this situation by drawing a  IMO, a false equivalency between Sam leaving for school and John's anger with Sam for it vs Dean being strangled by his brother for deigning to be against Sam sucking down demon blood and being in cahoots with a demon. There just not the same thing even on a surface level, IMHO.

I think there’s some confusion. Those are two different discussion I believe. 

 

Discussion one began when I stated IMO Dean was pretty much a bully during the season 8 Episode Heartache when he kept belittling Sam and trying to keep him feel like shit for wanting to leave the world of hunting one day. 

 

Discussion two  is a separate one about Bobby’s boohoo princess speech to Dean in season 4. I’ve stated my opinion that Dean’s beef with Sam re the actual fight was legimate. His decision to bring it back to Sam going to Stanford and using that as proof they weren’t brothers was over the top, dramatic and princess like IMO.

Edited October 16, 2017 by Wayward Son

[DeeDee79]

5 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

For me that Dean brought up Sam leaving in 4.22 is another example of the awful writing of 4.22 and why I say the narrative was intending to make Dean the bad guy in this situation by drawing a  IMO, a false equivalency between Sam leaving for school and John's anger with Sam for it vs Dean being strangled by his brother for deigning to be against Sam sucking down demon blood and being in cahoots with a demon. There just not the same thing even on a surface level, IMHO.

And it made zero sense for him to bring it up considering what they were discussing. Bad, bad, bad writing!!

[catrox14]

3 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

I think there’s some confusion. Those are two different discussion I believe. 

 

Discussion one began when I stated IMO Dean was pretty much a bully during the season 8 Episode Heartache when he kept belittling Sam and trying to keep him feel like shit for wanting to leave the world of hunting one day. 

 

Discussion two  is a separate one about Bobby’s boohoo princess speech to Dean in season 4. I’ve stated my opinion that Dean’s beef with Sam re the actual fight was legimate. His decision to bring it back to Sam going to Stanford and using that as proof they weren’t brothers was over the top, dramatic and princess like IMO.

I'm not confused. I was responding to this which  I quoted but for some reason it didn't save it. Weird. Anyway to clarify this is what I was responding too. 

 

37 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

That was a “eff you Dean” moment for Dean because he didn’t keep to the subject. He used it as an excuse to whine yet again about Sam’s decision to go to Stanford. Siblings go to university all the time so “boo boo princess” is entirely appropriate.

I don't understand when between s1 and 4.22 Dean had been whining about Sam going to school.

[ILoveReading]

In response to Sam leaving for college.  I don't think there is anything wrong with that.  Sam has a right to live his own life.

But I don't think Dean is a this horrible person because he was hurt by the fact that Sam left. 

Emotions are complicated and messy things that are rarely black and white.   People can feel two things at once.   I remember reading a story about Obama dropping his daughter off at college.   He said he cried, so he was both sad and happy.   Two conflicting emotions.

I think this applies to Dean as well.  He was hurt because he felt Sam cut him out of his life, but he was also proud at Sam for going his own way.  (Canon- said by Dean in Scarecrow). 

Dean has issues with abandonment.  So he would see Sam leaving as Sam leaving him.  Is that fair to Sam, no, but again its a very real issue that again doesn't make Dean this horrible controlling bully the show tries to paint him as.   Dean raised Sam.  Was responsible for his well being.  So Sam bascially saying "see ya." is bound to hurt.  It's a very human type reaction. 

We also know that sometime after Sam left, John ditched Dean too.  Despite feeling abandoned, he left Sam alone and complied with his wishes, and only came looking for Sam when John went missing.  When Sam said he was going back to school after that, Dean didn't protest. 

In Shadow, when Sam said to Dean you have to let me go my own way.  Dean's response was 'I know."

When Sam leaves on his own terms, even if Dean doesn't like he doesn't follow (Scarecrow, and slash fiction come to mind). 

So when Sam chose Ruby over him, that was bound to bring back all Dean's abandoment issues right to forfront.  In that situation, when your hurt, you get defensive.  Which is why he might have brought up Sam leaving them.  

Humans aren't preprogrammed robots who are always going to say and do the  right things.  IMO, Dean had every right to feel hurt.  Maybe he didn't use the right words to express that hurt.  But he should be allowed to feel.  So I'm going to agree to disagree that Dean was acting like a whiny brat or deserved anything Bobby said to him.