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

DeeDee79 · February 5, 2018

1 hour ago, Myrelle said:

But we're talking about fictional characters here, and people can and will feel about them however they want to or are able to; and no one's feelings are "wrong" in that regard. Not IMO, anyway.

This is very true. While I don't have a problem with Sam ( or Jared ) I liked the character a bit more before I got online and got into fandom. Yes, I thought that their relationship was problematic and codependent but after I ventured online to see what the SPN fandom was like I was annoyed by the way Dean would get blasted for bad decisions and vilified by some of the more rabid Sam fans while Sam was largely excused for his. Yes, Dean girls can be that way also but there seems to be a tendency to paint Sam as helpless in the face of ogre Dean. Please understand that I am in no way saying that all of Sam fans are this way; this is just my personal experience with fandom.

catrox14 · February 5, 2018

2 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

Rather than the camera following Sam into the hallway and showing his conflict as he realised he went too far in his anger the episode ends with a look at how devastated his mean words made Dean feel. T

IMO, that scene was all about an impasse at hand between the brothers. They both fully believed they were right and the other was wrong and neither was going to understand the others' POV in that moment because as calmly as Sam gave the words, he was pissed at Dean. REALLY pissed. And rightly so.

Sam is allowed to say mean things and mean them in a moment.Dean being devastated doesn't mean Sam was necessarily wrong. It just mean Dean was hurt by it. Dean being hurt doesn't mean he was being made to be more sympathetic than Sam in that situation. It was just showing that Dean really didn't get what Sam was saying. So Dean got to hold his position of not getting it and leaving it up to the viewers to decide whether they wanted to feel sorry for Dean or not. I think it was the better choice for both characters in that situation to end on Dean. To show Sam immediately regretting his words would have undermined his position too quickly. JMHO

trxr4kids · February 5, 2018

2 hours ago, catrox14 said:

I think I might just take the position now that Bob Singer is to blame for all the shitty things in the show LOL.

I've felt that way often. After watching the comments he made after they killed Charlie, I got the impression that he the man behind the curtain. I mean how else could one explain the continued existence/employment of Buck/Lemming? However I still think Carver was petty and Singer reveled in it for as you said the DRAMA!

catrox14 · February 5, 2018

So I follow this writer on Tumblr. I found this interesting. I want to forward it to Buck Lemming LOL

Quote

annerocious

February 5th 2018, 11:10:53 am · 2 hours ago

The Tunnel Vision Problem

Originally posted by wavegrower

In your plot, events (hopefully) will happen that move the story forward. Often, they only happen to put a necessary condition into the plot.

When you prioritize your own convenience in putting those conditions in place, you miss big chunks of the emotional story.

frinstance - you need the protagonist’s dad out of the way so the young protagonist has to protect the homestead on some Purge-like night. So, what to do with the dad? Anything will do, right? Business trip. But you can still get him on the phone, right? He’s not physically there, but he’s still available.

So you just put him in a coma in the hospital and call it done. But is it? This is a bad choice because everyone in the family, even though the plot is about something else, is going to be overwhelmingly concerned about dad.

And if you don’t make a commensurately large amount of storywork out of that, it’s going to look weird that no one in the family is thinking about dad, suspended in a life or death struggle, off in the hospital.

So this is the tunnel vision problem to be aware of. While you’re focused on how important it is for the kid to save the family, it’s easy to not notice what you let drop to get there.

You need dad incommunicado and away, and it seems not particularly important how you do it. It is actually a very big part of the emotional story, and depending on your ending and your thematic choices, he could be anywhere from deployed to in prison to living off the grid in New Mexico and the impact on your story is going to be very different, even if we never see his face.

TL;DR When you need a piece of plot to accomplish one thing, make sure you consider ALL the ways that piece of plot figures into the lives of your characters and relates to your theme.

#screenwriting #how to plot

Res · February 6, 2018

3 hours ago, trxr4kids said:

I've felt that way often. After watching the comments he made after they killed Charlie, I got the impression that he the man behind the curtain. I mean how else could one explain the continued existence/employment of Buck/Lemming? However I still think Carver was petty and Singer reveled in it for as you said the DRAMA!

I agree with all of this except the last statement as I don't know what that is referring to.

Plus, hearing how he feels about Dean being mentally deficient, etc. really could explain why Carver is the only one willing to carry through a storyline for Dean. I will always like him best out of the showrunners just for getting that aired, something none of the others have ever accomplished.

AwesomO4000 · February 6, 2018

27 minutes ago, Res said:

Carver is the only one willing to carry through a storyline for Dean.

For me I guess this depends on what you consider a "storyline." For me, I thought that Dean's link to the YED and him killing the YED - with John, who as Dean's main family who also lost Mary along with Dean on that night was a good choice - was a pretty good storyline. It was even revisited later in "In the Beginning" where Dean saw the origin of the YED and his family and told the YED to look at his face and know that he would be the one to kill him. Sam's connection with the YED mostly had to do with the not carried through "boy king" storyline and with Lucifer and that was pushed over into season 4 and 5 when Lucifer showed up.

But for me the YED storyline and Dean's part in it mostly wrapped up at the end of season 2 and for me it was a complete storyline which was later revisited to cement it's importance. Killing YED also helped to finish the John arc and concluded that storyline - Dean's connection to his Dad and the guilt he felt, etc... but since that's an emotional storyline, it's probably more the YED one which would be considered the main storyline.

And though not as long, Gamble did have Dean vowing that he would kill Dick Roman and then had the follow through for that. So while not huge, to me, it was a carried through storyline with a great set up for potentially more when Dean went to purgatory. Dean saving Sam in season 6 might also count, because there was a supernatural resolution to that and Dean did have to fight against a few people to prove that he was right and to get Sam's soul back. He even had to push back some against his surrogate father figure and his best friend in order to prevail. Both of those storylines were arguably as long or longer than the trial storyline (which was only 10 episodes long, including "Trial and Error.") It wasn't uncommon, in my opinion, for storylines after Kripke's reign to be only half a season long.

DeeDee79 · February 6, 2018

37 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

For me I guess this depends on what you consider a "storyline." For me, I thought that Dean's link to the YED and him killing the YED - with John, who as Dean's main family who also lost Mary along with Dean on that night was a good choice - was a pretty good storyline. It was even revisited later in "In the Beginning" where Dean saw the origin of the YED and his family and told the YED to look at his face and know that he would be the one to kill him. Sam's connection with the YED mostly had to do with the not carried through "boy king" storyline and with Lucifer and that was pushed over into season 4 and 5 when Lucifer showed up.

Personally I don't consider this to be a Dean centric storyline. Considering the fact that Sam was the one infected with his blood, add in his connection with the psychic kids SL, the visions and the "boy king" mantle that the YED set up for Sam and I would say that it was firmly a Sam centric SL. Dean & John factored in due to the fact that the YED's actions affected their entire family. Even in "In The Beginning" it was ultimately about Sam since Castiel took him back to that time period as a lead in to talk to him about what Sam was doing that the angels couldn't figure out. Just my opinion.

catrox14 · February 6, 2018

I think it's a matter of what one sees as mytharc vs SL. I think Dean had SL that were character related and he did have those things related to him but I think he's had 3 mytharcs that I would count and only one that was solely Dean's from beginning to end (well mostly)

The Michael Sword/Righteous Man -abandoned if you think it didn't come to fruition. Or if you think Dean was never meant to be the Michael sword then it was fulfilled by him not being it. That's all a matter of how one sees that thing. But since it was supernaturally related with angel connections
The Leviathans but that wasn't solely Dean's. I think it was a character SL more than mytharc

MoC and demon!Dean - This is the only one that I count as mytharc for and about Dean from beginning to end, with a side of Sam redemption IMO.

DeeDee79 · February 6, 2018

2 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

MoC and demon!Dean - This is the only one that I count as mytharc for and about Dean from beginning to end, with a side of Sam redemption IMO.

I agree with this.

ahrtee · February 6, 2018

46 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

For me I guess this depends on what you consider a "storyline." For me, I thought that Dean's link to the YED and him killing the YED - with John, who as Dean's main family who also lost Mary along with Dean on that night was a good choice - was a pretty good storyline. It was even revisited later in "In the Beginning" where Dean saw the origin of the YED and his family and told the YED to look at his face and know that he would be the one to kill him. Sam's connection with the YED mostly had to do with the not carried through "boy king" storyline and with Lucifer and that was pushed over into season 4 and 5 when Lucifer showed up.

But for me the YED storyline and Dean's part in it mostly wrapped up at the end of season 2 and for me it was a complete storyline which was later revisited to cement it's importance. Killing YED also helped to finish the John arc and concluded that storyline - Dean's connection to his Dad and the guilt he felt, etc... but since that's an emotional storyline, it's probably more the YED one which would be considered the main storyline.

And though not as long, Gamble did have Dean vowing that he would kill Dick Roman and then had the follow through for that. So while not huge, to me, it was a carried through storyline with a great set up for potentially more when Dean went to purgatory. Dean saving Sam in season 6 might also count, because there was a supernatural resolution to that and Dean did have to fight against a few people to prove that he was right and to get Sam's soul back. He even had to push back some against his surrogate father figure and his best friend in order to prevail. Both of those storylines were arguably as long or longer than the trial storyline (which was only 10 episodes long, including "Trial and Error.") It wasn't uncommon, in my opinion, for storylines after Kripke's reign to be only half a season long.

I think maybe we're confusing "getting the kill" with "getting the storyline." Yes, Dean got the kill, both the YED and Dick Roman, but the SL wasn't focusing on him. As @DeeDee79 pointed out above, most of the attention was on Sam in the YED storyline, and IMO both were invested in the DIck Roman SL, though Dean probably had a little more edge with that one because of his reaction to Bobby's death, while Sam had his own story with his hell wall crumbling.

And IA that they started doing shortened SLs (or at least, dual SLs), starting in s.6, with the first half being SS and the back half being Eve; but it seems to me it's not the number of episodes that's the issue, but the attention paid to each character.

As a non-SPN example of my thought processes: there are episodes that show up often in "buddy" cop shows with two equal leads where one hero (partner, brother, whatever) is badly injured and out of the action. The other, uninjured one spends the rest of the show trying to save his friend/catch whoever did it, while simultaneously worrying himself sick. So...in a balanced story (without the healthy one going into superman mode and single-handedly wiping out all the evildoers in revenge,) it's still the one who's on the point of death that's the emotional focus, the one that all the story revolves around, even if the other gets the majority of the screen time. Most h/c stories focus on the "h" character who is receiving the "c", not the caregiver/worrier who's sitting at his bedside. (Of course, as a longtime h/c addict, that's my preference, so I may be biased.) :)

I'm not even going into "mytharc" vs. standalone SLs--that's a whole different post.

DeeDee79 · February 6, 2018

6 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

I think maybe we're confusing "getting the kill" with "getting the storyline." Yes, Dean got the kill, both the YED and Dick Roman, but the SL wasn't focusing on him. As @DeeDee79 pointed out above, most of the attention was on Sam in the YED storyline, and IMO both were invested in the DIck Roman SL, though Dean probably had a little more edge with that one because of his reaction to Bobby's death, while Sam had his own story with his hell wall crumbling.

And IA that they started doing shortened SLs (or at least, dual SLs), starting in s.6, with the first half being SS and the back half being Eve; but it seems to me it's not the number of episodes that's the issue, but the attention paid to each character.

As a non-SPN example of my thought processes: there are episodes that show up often in "buddy" cop shows with two equal leads where one hero (partner, brother, whatever) is badly injured and out of the action. The other, uninjured one spends the rest of the show trying to save his friend/catch whoever did it, while simultaneously worrying himself sick. So...in a balanced story (without the healthy one going into superman mode and single-handedly wiping out all the evildoers in revenge,) it's still the one who's on the point of death that's the emotional focus, the one that all the story revolves around, even if the other gets the majority of the screen time. Most h/c stories focus on the "h" character who is receiving the "c", not the caregiver/worrier who's sitting at his bedside. (Of course, as a longtime h/c addict, that's my preference, so I may be biased.) :)

I'm not even going into "mytharc" vs. standalone SLs--that's a whole different post.

I agree with this overall post and the part that I've bolded is a good point. This brings to mind a prominent SL throughout seasons 2-5 of The X-Files. Scully had cancer ( through supernatural means ) and the overall affect that the diagnosis and her mortality had on her was a large focal point. At the same time, Mulder was scrambling to find a way to cure her while dealing with the fact that his best friend and only ally would die if he couldn't figure out a way to save her. Both equal leads with a strong SL that gave equal attention to both of them and kept the viewers invested no matter who their favorite was out of the two. SPN doesn't always get this right.

AwesomO4000 · February 6, 2018

1 hour ago, ahrtee said:

I think maybe we're confusing "getting the kill" with "getting the storyline." Yes, Dean got the kill, both the YED and Dick Roman, but the SL wasn't focusing on him. As @DeeDee79 pointed out above, most of the attention was on Sam in the YED storyline, and IMO both were invested in the DIck Roman SL, though Dean probably had a little more edge with that one because of his reaction to Bobby's death, while Sam had his own story with his hell wall crumbling.

Actually I was more going with the important part being "carry through." Yes, the supernatural aspect of the YED storyline did more focus on Sam, but, for me - and I understand that miles will vary - that storyline in relation to Sam ended somewhat like Dean and Michael, maybe even moreso. Sam's supposed destiny was to be the "boy king," but much like Dean with Michael, he didn't fulfill that role, and in the case of the boy king storyline, it just kind of faded out with no real follow through. Dean's YED connection was more emotional - and arguably fed into his making the deal which lead to another aspect of the storyline - but for me there was a connection. What the YED did in terms of Mary affected Dean's entire life, and when Dean killed the YED, he arguably got some closure for that - "That was for out mom." That was the part of the YED storyline for me that got closure and "carry through." The boy king part never really went much of anywhere in relation to Sam.

And that's what I was going with in terms of "carry through." I didn't count the YED/Sam aspect of the storyline so much, because for me there wasn't much carry through there except in relation to Lucifer - which is why I said that was concluded in season 4 and 5.

As for Dick Roman, for me, the connection there was much more with Dean. Dean was the one who obsessed over him and that's why Frank - who was related to the finding Dick Roman arc - was almost exclusively associated with Dean after their first meeting. Sam more wanted to do regular cases, and even sometimes tried to get Dean to stop obsessing over Dick Roman. Even in the finale, Sam's focus was to help Kevin stop the tainted food going out. He wasn't even in the room when Dick Roman was killed, and when Sam showed up, it was more about Dean being gone than Dick Roman. Dean was the first one to see Dick Roman - at the hospital - and he was the one to tell Dick Roman that he would kill him. And he did follow through and kill him. For me, Dean was much more invested in killing Dick Roman than Sam was. Sam was invested in solving the leviathan problem in general, but for Dean it was all about Dick Roman.

2 hours ago, DeeDee79 said:

Personally I don't consider this to be a Dean centric storyline. Considering the fact that Sam was the one infected with his blood, add in his connection with the psychic kids SL, the visions and the "boy king" mantle that the YED set up for Sam and I would say that it was firmly a Sam centric SL. Dean & John factored in due to the fact that the YED's actions affected their entire family. Even in "In The Beginning" it was ultimately about Sam since Castiel took him back to that time period as a lead in to talk to him about what Sam was doing that the angels couldn't figure out. Just my opinion.

The Dean centric part wasn't supernatural in nature, but for me, it was there, because of what I described above. It was like John and the YED. Just because there wasn't a supernatural aspect to their connection - until John traded his soul - it was very much a storyline in the show.

As for Sam being the focus of "In the Beginning," I don't entirely agree. I'm pretty sure the angels knew exactly what happened with Sam. The point of Castiel sending Dean back was for Dean to see the truth. "Now you know everything we do." And it could be argued that by the angels sending Dean back, they might even have caused Dean to influence what happened so that the YED narrowed in on Mary in the first place, making even more of a connection between Dean and the YED. I guess it depends on how you look at it.

ahrtee · February 6, 2018

10 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Actually I was more going with the important part being "carry through." Yes, the supernatural aspect of the YED storyline did more focus on Sam, but, for me - and I understand that miles will vary - that storyline in relation to Sam ended somewhat like Dean and Michael, maybe even moreso

I can see that. I just didn't get it out of your original post, which I thought was more about "storyline" than "carry through":

3 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

For me I guess this depends on what you consider a "storyline."

Sorry for the confusion.

AwesomO4000 · February 6, 2018

1 minute ago, ahrtee said:

I just didn't get it out of your original post, which I thought was more about "storyline" than "carry through":

Ah sorry about that. I tried to cover it with the quote I was answering and this part:

3 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

... Sam's connection with the YED mostly had to do with the not carried through "boy king" storyline and with Lucifer and that was pushed over into season 4 and 5 when Lucifer showed up.

But for me the YED storyline and Dean's part in it mostly wrapped up at the end of season 2 and for me it was a complete storyline which was later revisited to cement it's importance.

and this part..

3 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

And though not as long, Gamble did have Dean vowing that he would kill Dick Roman and then had the follow through for that. So while not huge, to me, it was a carried through storyline with a great set up for potentially more when Dean went to purgatory.

(I'm still getting used to this short and to the point posting thing... ; ) so I probably should've repeated that "carry through" part again.)

12 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

Sorry for the confusion.

No problem. Probably my fault.

I was assuming the original post was focusing on follow through, because the idea was that Carver actually had a storyline for Dean that was carried through. I sometimes think because it was so early in the series, the YED storyline sometimes gets forgotten in the dust. It was quite a while ago.

Wayward Son · February 6, 2018

On 2/5/2018 at 6:01 PM, catrox14 said:

I really think Carver wanted to break the co dependency. I think he put Dean through the Mark of Cain arc as a way to 1) give Dean and Jensen something more than supporting Sam. 2) Give Crowley a SL as much as anything and tie Crowley to Dean. 3) Give Sam something to do since Dean was getting an emotional and mytharc SL.

I'm asking this out of interest in hearing a differing viewpoint rather than an attempt to argue the point.

Why do you think Carver included the details I see as unneeded and only there to highlight the fact Sam's stance is wrong. To avoid confusion I'll repeat them.

What was the point of the scene where Dean plays out Kevin's scared and angry voicemails to Sam from the past year? What was the point of depicting him giving up hunting in such a reckless manner? If the show wasn't interested in showing Sam suffering from a mental break (and thus providing us with a suitable reason for such reckless behaviour on Sam's part) then why did they take this approach if it wasn't to make Sam's position appear incorrect? IMO there still would have been room for hurt and conflict if we had been told Sam assumed Dean was dead and decided to not try and resurrect him, that he rescued Kevin (or at the very least set Garth or someone similar on the task) and left his phones with Garth before sailing off into the sunset with Amelia. Dean could have easily still been hurt that Sam wouldn't have at least made sure he was dead before moving on.

On a similar note what was the need for the blanket statement "You are certainly willing to do the sacrificing as long as you're not the one being hurt" which I've observed has earned Sam much ire from the audience because of how untrue it is. Even I, as a non Dean fan, will admit there are numerous occasions such as the deal to go to hell in exchange for Sam's life or even the general life he lives that proves this fault. Sam had enough legitimate points to make against Dean. He could have just stuck to the fact he was pissed at him for lying to him, that he believed Dean saved him for Dean's sake rather than Sam's as Sam was ready to die. Why needlessly add to that with a nonsensical blanket statement about Dean's whole life?

I'm not trying to make Sam look good by removing things. IMO no matter the circumstances there are fans who would have been pissed at Sam for 'abandoning' Dean and many would have objected to Sam stating Dean saved Sam out of a selfish need on Dean's part. But IMO the additions I highlighted above serve no real purpose beyond making Sam and his viewpoint look as bad as possible. So I'm genuinely curious to hear from someone who doesn't believe they wanted to make Sam bad why they included those things :).

Edited February 6, 2018 by Wayward Son

catrox14 · February 6, 2018

11 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

I'm asking this out of interest in hearing a differing viewpoint rather than an attempt to argue the point.

Why do you think Carver included the details I see as unneeded and only there to highlight the fact Sam's stance is wrong. To avoid confusion I'll repeat them.

What was the point of the scene where Dean plays out Kevin's scared and angry voicemails to Sam from the past year? What was the point of depicting him giving up hunting in such a reckless manner? If the show wasn't interested in showing Sam suffering from a mental break (and thus providing us with a suitable reason for such reckless behaviour on Sam's part) then why did they take this approach if it wasn't to make Sam's position appear incorrect? IMO there still would have been room for hurt and conflict if we had been told Sam assumed Dean was dead and decided to not try and resurrect him, that he rescued Kevin (or at the very least set Garth or someone similar on the task) and left his phones with Garth before sailing off into the sunset with Amelia. Dean could have easily still been hurt that Sam wouldn't have at least made sure he was dead before moving on.

On a similar note what was the need for the blanket statement "You are certainly willing to do the sacrificing as long as you're not the one being hurt" which I've observed has earned Sam much ire from the audience because of how untrue it is. Even I, as a non Dean fan, will admit there are numerous occasions such as the deal to go to hell in exchange for Sam's life or even the general life he lives that proves this fault. Sam had enough legitimate points to make against Dean. He could have just stuck to the fact he was pissed at him for lying to him, that he believed Dean saved him for Dean's sake rather than Sam's as Sam was ready to die. Why needlessly add to that with a nonsensical blanket statement about Dean's whole life?

I'm not trying to make Sam look good by removing things. IMO no matter the circumstances there are fans who would have been pissed at Sam for 'abandoning' Dean and many would have objected to Sam stating Dean saved Sam out of a selfish need on Dean's part. But IMO the additions I highlighted above serve no real purpose beyond making Sam and his viewpoint look as bad as possible. So I'm genuinely curious to hear from someone who doesn't believe they wanted to make Sam bad why they included those things :).

I can't respond quickly to this at all. I think I've made some remarks elsewhere in this or other places why I think that's what he was doing. I'll have to dig them up again. It's a lengthy reply.

Res · February 7, 2018

23 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

For me I guess this depends on what you consider a "storyline." For me, I thought that Dean's link to the YED and him killing the YED - with John, who as Dean's main family who also lost Mary along with Dean on that night was a good choice - was a pretty good storyline. It was even revisited later in "In the Beginning" where Dean saw the origin of the YED and his family and told the YED to look at his face and know that he would be the one to kill him. Sam's connection with the YED mostly had to do with the not carried through "boy king" storyline and with Lucifer and that was pushed over into season 4 and 5 when Lucifer showed up.

But for me the YED storyline and Dean's part in it mostly wrapped up at the end of season 2 and for me it was a complete storyline which was later revisited to cement it's importance. Killing YED also helped to finish the John arc and concluded that storyline - Dean's connection to his Dad and the guilt he felt, etc... but since that's an emotional storyline, it's probably more the YED one which would be considered the main storyline.

And though not as long, Gamble did have Dean vowing that he would kill Dick Roman and then had the follow through for that. So while not huge, to me, it was a carried through storyline with a great set up for potentially more when Dean went to purgatory. Dean saving Sam in season 6 might also count, because there was a supernatural resolution to that and Dean did have to fight against a few people to prove that he was right and to get Sam's soul back. He even had to push back some against his surrogate father figure and his best friend in order to prevail. Both of those storylines were arguably as long or longer than the trial storyline (which was only 10 episodes long, including "Trial and Error.") It wasn't uncommon, in my opinion, for storylines after Kripke's reign to be only half a season long.

I didn't forget about the YED but that was not IMO Dean's storyline. It was Sam's and John's. They both became obsessed with the thing after it killed their women and they vowed revenge. Yes, it screwed up Dean's life royally but Dean was always more concerned with keeping family together and saving other people than he ever was with the YED. In fact, he even states that in the S1 finale. He'd rather have both his family members with him or even Sam in college and John hunting without him as long as they were safe rather than sacrifice themselves to the thing like they were both trying to do with their single minded vengeance. Now, of course, Dean would shoot YED if he'd the chance but that was never his mytharc or storyline. His was about family and keeping everyone safe, preferably in his opinion together, but ultimately alive and safe. So, I really don't see your reading of the YED storyline or agree. Dean just happened to get the kill because YE seemed to have more fun taunting him and gloating than Sam. Plus, he needed Sam for his army since Jake was dead. So still Sam's storyline and mytharc IMO.

Also, Sam's "Boy king" storyline was still going on through S3 and S4 because that is what Ruby and Lilith were doing in resurrecting Lucifer. That's why the YED dropped blood into the babies' mouths, etc. They were all following Lucifer's bidding to release him. YED's army got released and Sam succeeded (unintentionally) in doing his "boy king" part of breaking the last seal that set Lucifer free. Heck, Ruby even gloats about it afterward. So basically Sam's "boy king" storyline/mytharc had 4 complete seasons (S1=visions, S2=psykids, S3=befriending Ruby to save Dean, S4=lovers with Ruby to kill Lilith for revenge even after Dean was returned from the dead). And if you take "boy king" to be Lucifer's vessel it actually had 5 seasons which ended in fruition. Of course, all IMO and YMMV.

I agree with @catrox14 that Dean being Micheal's true vessel was also a Dean SL that was reassigned to a lesser character to show how that was apparently never really Dean's SL either. Or if it was, it was definitely dropped/switched to another which is even worse than dropped in someways.

Lastly, Dean's revenge vow on Dick was something that was less than half a season and not really an actual storyline partial to Dean as has already been stated as all hunters were trying to eliminate the Leviathan threat. Killing the lead one didn't really make it Dean's storyline when that had to happen anyway. So that IMO is stretching really hard to make it Dean's alone since he didn't do it alone. It was also Cas's redemption storyline and was in fact Cas's way before Dean's and way more personal than Dean's, again, IMO.

Dean trying to resoul Sam was more about Sam and what is a soul, in addition to once again, Cas's storyline how he failed to know what he'd done because he was too distracted by the once-again impending apocalypse. Dean was once again just the character that connected everything and was trying to keep everyone in one piece and safe, mentally, spiritually, and physically.

No, I just Dean getting a storyline as the story being about Dean and Dean alone, not the people Dean is trying to keep safe and together. Something that could actually give Dean a chance to be something by himself and not in relation to everyone else. In fact, I actually really liked Demon!Dean because he was actually allowed to voice things that normal Dean never would but could have thought in low moments. He was actually to be worry free and burden free for a time and it was interesting to figure out what was demonic and what was just Dean cutting loose for a change.

I know some would say that him going to a bar and hooking up would be better for that but he's in the bar and hooking up to escape, not cutting loose without a care in the world. There is a difference and I would have loved to see where they could have gone with D!Dean. After all, Dean hunted with Soulless!Sam for half a season.

And if I were to be completely honest, I don't think they even did the MoC SL right after the "Supposed" LOL!Canon Cure because afterward most of the focus went to Sam and we really didn't get to see too much how exactly Dean was handling it. We were "told through Sam" who was constantly terrified after seeing D!Dean. There could have been a lot more to it all but we had to start the makeshift amateur hunter hour and Charlie Sue Ninja Warrior through reading book club stuff and other stuff because they didn't really want to think too much about exactly how far they could actually take Dean before through Charlie under the bus.

Anyway, I'll end that rant now because it's ticking me off remembering IMO the crap that ended D!Dean and MoC!Dean.

Also, IMO there are no really emotional storylines for Dean because most of the time when he shows them, he's told he's doing them wrong, suck it up and boo hoo princess. That's no different than the norm so not seeing how that's a storyline.

belbar · February 7, 2018

50 minutes ago, Res said:

I didn't forget about the YED but that was not IMO Dean's storyline. It was Sam's and John's. They both became obsessed with the thing after it killed their women and they vowed revenge. Yes, it screwed up Dean's life royally but Dean was always more concerned with keeping family together and saving other people than he ever was with the YED. In fact, he even states that in the S1 finale. He'd rather have both his family members with him or even Sam in college and John hunting without him as long as they were safe rather than sacrifice themselves to the thing like they were both trying to do with their single minded vengeance. Now, of course, Dean would shoot YED if he'd the chance but that was never his mytharc or storyline. His was about family and keeping everyone safe, preferably in his opinion together, but ultimately alive and safe. So, I really don't see your reading of the YED storyline or agree. Dean just happened to get the kill because YE seemed to have more fun taunting him and gloating than Sam. Plus, he needed Sam for his army since Jake was dead. So still Sam's storyline and mytharc IMO.

Also, Sam's "Boy king" storyline was still going on through S3 and S4 because that is what Ruby and Lilith were doing in resurrecting Lucifer. That's why the YED dropped blood into the babies' mouths, etc. They were all following Lucifer's bidding to release him. YED's army got released and Sam succeeded (unintentionally) in doing his "boy king" part of breaking the last seal that set Lucifer free. Heck, Ruby even gloats about it afterward. So basically Sam's "boy king" storyline/mytharc had 4 complete seasons (S1=visions, S2=psykids, S3=befriending Ruby to save Dean, S4=lovers with Ruby to kill Lilith for revenge even after Dean was returned from the dead). And if you take "boy king" to be Lucifer's vessel it actually had 5 seasons which ended in fruition. Of course, all IMO and YMMV.

I agree with @catrox14 that Dean being Micheal's true vessel was also a Dean SL that was reassigned to a lesser character to show how that was apparently never really Dean's SL either. Or if it was, it was definitely dropped/switched to another which is even worse than dropped in someways.

Lastly, Dean's revenge vow on Dick was something that was less than half a season and not really an actual storyline partial to Dean as has already been stated as all hunters were trying to eliminate the Leviathan threat. Killing the lead one didn't really make it Dean's storyline when that had to happen anyway. So that IMO is stretching really hard to make it Dean's alone since he didn't do it alone. It was also Cas's redemption storyline and was in fact Cas's way before Dean's and way more personal than Dean's, again, IMO.

Dean trying to resoul Sam was more about Sam and what is a soul, in addition to once again, Cas's storyline how he failed to know what he'd done because he was too distracted by the once-again impending apocalypse. Dean was once again just the character that connected everything and was trying to keep everyone in one piece and safe, mentally, spiritually, and physically.

No, I just Dean getting a storyline as the story being about Dean and Dean alone, not the people Dean is trying to keep safe and together. Something that could actually give Dean a chance to be something by himself and not in relation to everyone else. In fact, I actually really liked Demon!Dean because he was actually allowed to voice things that normal Dean never would but could have thought in low moments. He was actually to be worry free and burden free for a time and it was interesting to figure out what was demonic and what was just Dean cutting loose for a change.

I know some would say that him going to a bar and hooking up would be better for that but he's in the bar and hooking up to escape, not cutting loose without a care in the world. There is a difference and I would have loved to see where they could have gone with D!Dean. After all, Dean hunted with Soulless!Sam for half a season.

And if I were to be completely honest, I don't think they even did the MoC SL right after the "Supposed" LOL!Canon Cure because afterward most of the focus went to Sam and we really didn't get to see too much how exactly Dean was handling it. We were "told through Sam" who was constantly terrified after seeing D!Dean. There could have been a lot more to it all but we had to start the makeshift amateur hunter hour and Charlie Sue Ninja Warrior through reading book club stuff and other stuff because they didn't really want to think too much about exactly how far they could actually take Dean before through Charlie under the bus.

Anyway, I'll end that rant now because it's ticking me off remembering IMO the crap that ended D!Dean and MoC!Dean.

Also, IMO there are no really emotional storylines for Dean because most of the time when he shows them, he's told he's doing them wrong, suck it up and boo hoo princess. That's no different than the norm so not seeing how that's a storyline.

Wish I could vote this more than once

AwesomO4000 · February 7, 2018

16 hours ago, Res said:

Now, of course, Dean would shoot YED if he'd the chance but that was never his mytharc or storyline. His was about family and keeping everyone safe, preferably in his opinion together, but ultimately alive and safe. So, I really don't see your reading of the YED storyline or agree. Dean just happened to get the kill because YE seemed to have more fun taunting him and gloating than Sam. Plus, he needed Sam for his army since Jake was dead. So still Sam's storyline and mytharc IMO.

You were talking about storylines that were "carried through." I don't deny that Sam and the YED was a storyline. My point was that there was no real follow through. There never was an army, but the Lucifer storyline happened anyway. The two weren't really that connected in my opinion. Now if when the YED fed Sam the demon blood, Sam's powers were derived exclusively from that, I would agree more with carry through. But that didn't happen. Sam had to drink demon blood for his powers to materialize and continue to drink it to keep them. In my opinion, YED wanted his army for something other than Lucifer's rising. We just don't know what the "other" was supposed to be, because it never happened.

Instead the story shifted to Dean's hell storyline and "Did Sam come back wrong" (which was a red herring and more about Dean's reaction, in my opinion). We mostly took a break from Sam's mytharc in that season in my opinion, because...

16 hours ago, Res said:

S3=befriending Ruby to save Dean,

If saving Sam's soul supposedly wasn't really a storyline for Dean, then Sam trying to save Dean in season 3 shouldn't really be one either in my opinion. Sam's Lucifer storyline really mostly picked up at the very end of season 3 and through season 4.

16 hours ago, Res said:

S4=lovers with Ruby to kill Lilith for revenge

And again, I don't see why this part is a storyline for Sam if Dean's wanting revenge on Dick Roman for killing Bobby wasn't a storyline for Dean. Sam had Ruby. Dean had Frank. Yes Castiel was in need of some redemption there, but in my opinion, he more got it later. Dean had to drag Castiel almost kicking and screaming into killing Dick Roman. For me, Dean was the driving force behind it. Your miles may vary.

16 hours ago, Res said:

Lastly, Dean's revenge vow on Dick was something that was less than half a season and not really an actual storyline partial to Dean as has already been stated as all hunters were trying to eliminate the Leviathan threat.

It was 14 episodes, more than half a season. And half-season arcs were often the norm after Kripke left.

And I think I gave just as much evidence as to why Dean was more focused on Dick Roman while Sam was more about the leviathans as a whole and other hunts. Other hunters didn't even come into it as far as I remember. The only hunters I remember seeing that season - besides Bobby - were hunting other monsters, not leviathan. I'm not even sure other hunters even knew about leviathans that we saw. We never even got a scene of Sam and Dean talking to or informing them of how to dispatch them. (Maybe Bobby did?)

I think my opinion / evidence is just as valid.

16 hours ago, Res said:

And if I were to be completely honest, I don't think they even did the MoC SL right after the "Supposed" LOL!Canon Cure because afterward most of the focus went to Sam and we really didn't get to see too much how exactly Dean was handling it. We were "told through Sam" who was constantly terrified after seeing D!Dean.

For me, this isn't all that much different than Sam and the demon blood-drinking in season 4. That was more looked at from Dean's perspective, and we didn't even know what exactly was going on with Sam until more than 2/3 way through the season, but that doesn't mean that it wasn't a Sam storyline. So I don't agree that somehow the mark of Cain storyline was no longer Dean's in season 10. They showed the effects of the mark of Cain on Dean more than Sam and the blood-drinking, in my opinion.

Edited February 7, 2018 by AwesomO4000

Res · February 8, 2018

21 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

. . . And I think I gave just as much evidence as to why . . . I think my opinion / evidence is just as valid.

Um, not trying to start anything but could you please point out exactly where in the post you just quoted that I ever stated or even implied that your opinion/evidence was invalid? I would like to correct that because my rebuttal was to your post stating

On 2/5/2018 at 7:15 PM, AwesomO4000 said:

For me I guess this depends on what you consider a "storyline."

You went on to clarify what you considered a "storyline" and my rebuttal was simply and ONLY to clarify what MY opinion/POV was of your evidence. IOW, simply how I saw things as much of our differing opinions are based on how we see/interpret things. I thought that was what you were looking for clarification on and I thought I had been very careful to state repeatedly that the entire post was IMO. I'm not sure how you concluded that I considered YOUR opinion/interpretation of the show wrong. I am not you, therefore there is NO way for me to state that. I know based on your other posts that we see things VERY differently so if you were just wanting to state your opinions without any clarification on my part, I definitely misunderstood the above statement. My bad, I guess, but I don't understand why you are able to state that my opinion/evidence aren't valid either.

So agree to disagree?

AwesomO4000 · February 8, 2018

8 minutes ago, Res said:

You went on to clarify what you considered a "storyline" and my rebuttal was simply and ONLY to clarify what MY opinion/POV was of your evidence.

And in my post above, I agreed with you that Sam / YED was a storyline - I didn't need convincing of that point, because we agree ; ) - but that I didn't think that there was follow through - which is what I thought that the focus of the discussion was: That Carver was the only one who gave Dean a storyline that "carried through." If that wasn't your original meaning then I apologize.

It was actually a good point in terms of Dean's Michael storyline - which I agree was a storyline, but that it didn't follow through as expected. My point was just that under Kripke, I personally didn't think only Dean was a victim of that since Kripke seemed to get bored of the special kids / boy king storyline and dropped that, too. And that Dean did have some of what I thought of as followed through storylines under Gamble... mostly because I'm partial to how Gamble seemed to give all the characters - even Castiel and Crowley - some storylines. I get that not everyone liked the Lisa/Ben thing - and I agree the end of it was awful!*** - but the soul arc, Eve mini-arc, and Dick Roman arc made up for it - for me anyway.

But I understand that you don't agree on that. My main reason I was disagreeing is below...

*** Not quite Sam/Amelia awful but close: at least the end. Sam/Amelia was mostly bad all the way through (the not-dead husband: ugh! So bad, in my opinion.) I thought that the Dean/Lisa/Ben arc at least explored some interesting questions for Dean even if it ended badly.

11 minutes ago, Res said:

Um, not trying to start anything but could you please point out exactly where in the post you just quoted that I ever stated or even implied that your opinion/evidence was invalid?

45 minutes ago, Res said:

I'm not sure how you concluded that I considered YOUR opinion/interpretation of the show wrong.

For me, it was the quote that I quoted and was answering. It seemed to be stating that the Leviathan storyline wasn't partial to Dean almost as a fact which had already been shown, and giving that other hunters were also trying to kill the leviathans as proof of that* and that this had been stated already. My point was that I disagreed and that my opinion was just as valid. (In other words, I didn't believe it was a statement of fact that had already been shown.) If that is not what you meant, I apologize, but that is what that sentence seemed to be saying to me. Maybe the "as has already been shown" part wasn't meant to be interpreted that way, and again if so, I apologize for the confusion.

* Which I guess it could be argued that Dean wanted Lilith dead / the apocalypse stopped also and was trying in his own way to accomplish that, but that didn't mean it wasn't an arc partial to Sam. I think the same applies here to Dean. Just because other hunters may have been hunting leviathans - to me - doesn't invalidate Dean's connection with Dick Roman in terms of his revenging Bobby and his obsession with killing Dick Roman.

And I'm fine with agreeing to disagree. I think I made my point and I don't want to belabor my opinions.

RulerofallIsurvey · February 8, 2018

I haven't logged in in quite awhile, so apologies if some of these are rather old:

On 2/1/2018 at 6:00 PM, Reganne said:

Exactly.... which is why I don't understand the whole complaint against Sam fans only. For example, I find the whole argument against Sam pushing Dean towards Jack to be a way of blaming Sam for Deans actions. I personally see more finger pointing towards Sam myself, but that could be because there seem to be more Dean fans.

I agree.

On 2/1/2018 at 6:01 PM, DeeDee79 said:

No one has stated that Dean doesn't make mistakes. In fact as @ahrtee stated in her post many Dean fans acknowledge that he is flawed and has made many mistakes.

Many Sam fans also acknowledge that he is flawed and has made many mistakes. I see it all the time. Maybe that gets lost or overlooked in the relevant posts because many Dean-centric fans tend to focus in on the real or perceived insult toward Dean? (Just as, I'm sure many Sam-centric fans tend to focus in on any real or perceived insult toward Sam in any posts by Dean fans.)

Or...the slightly snarky and only meant as a joke reply is: why would Sam fans need to acknowledge his mistakes when there are so many Dean fans on the site who do it so well? ;)

On 2/2/2018 at 8:21 AM, ILoveReading said:

It's okay for them to have different feelings but I was referring to things that were happening on screen. On screen the narrative said it wasn't okay for Dean to have conflicted feelings about Jack. He was automatically expected to see Jack as a nougat loving cinnamon roll because Sam asked him too.

I didn't see this at all. See also: what @Katy M said.

On 2/2/2018 at 4:57 PM, Lemuria said:

Seriously, in this universe, that's not enough? I don't think that demons should get the benefit of the doubt; I think they should have to prove it first. JMO. YMMV.

Tru dat. Same should hold for vampires too, though, no? But since there was already a very long discussion about Benny et. al, I'll just say: YMMV.

On 2/4/2018 at 11:12 PM, trxr4kids said:

Meanwhile, Dean's S9 off putting/offensive behavior is generally attributed to :

A) Selfishness

B) Control issues

C) Dean's a Dick, the show even said so, repeatedly, it's totally fine!

FWIW - I don't remember attributing Dean's overall S9 behavior to those things. It's been awhile since I watched S9, but at the time I watched, I remember thinking they were both being Dicks, and I barely made it through the season (and I only kept going because I was watching on Netflix and already knew there was a S10 and S11, so it must get better....) It might be nice if not all Sam fans were painted with the same brush, just I'll bet there are plenty of Dean fans who would like the same.

ILoveReading · February 8, 2018

23 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

I didn't see this at all. See also: what @Katy M said.

IMO, actions speak louder then works, so even if Sam told Dean at some point he understood he was struggling the following events occurred:

Sam flat out said that if Jack went bad it would be Dean's fault. The therapist didn't bother to ask Dean why he was hostile toward Jack. Dean's issues were not adressed or even touched upon in the grief ep. It was about Sam and Jack. Sam keep saying that Dean had to help. He told him he couldn't leave the bunker because he had to stay. Sam tried to guilt trip him by implying that if Dean felt Jack was bad then he must feel Sam was bad. (This is something Jared himself talked about at comic con). Dean was made to call himself a dick. When Dean finally was pushed to his limit and laid it down in no uncertain terms why he couldn't be around Jack, Sam's response was to push Jack on Dean even harder.

Sam only told Dean "lets get out of here, just us." Only after he got his own way with Jack.

IMO, the show doesn't match the tell. I see nothing on screen that actually supported or gave sympathy to Dean's position.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Edited February 8, 2018 by ILoveReading

RulerofallIsurvey · February 8, 2018

19 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Yup!!

DeeDee79 · February 8, 2018

2 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Many Sam fans also acknowledge that he is flawed and has made many mistakes. I see it all the time. Maybe that gets lost or overlooked in the relevant posts because many Dean-centric fans tend to focus in on the real or perceived insult toward Dean? (Just as, I'm sure many Sam-centric fans tend to focus in on any real or perceived insult toward Sam in any posts by Dean fans.)

Or...the slightly snarky and only meant as a joke reply is: why would Sam fans need to acknowledge his mistakes when there are so many Dean fans on the site who do it so well? ;)

I never said that they didn’t.

catrox14 · February 8, 2018

2 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

Sam flat out said that if Jack went bad it would be Dean's fault.

That's the part for me where I think the narrative definitely, canonically was laying the blame for anything bad that occurs with Jack at Dean's feet. And it has not been retracted thus far.

Edited February 8, 2018 by catrox14

companionenvy · February 8, 2018

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

And it has not been retracted thus far.

I think it was tacitly retracted when Dean accepted Jack, making it a moot point. If Jack goes bad now, it can't be because of Dean's hostility, because Dean is not being hostile, and has in fact explicitly praised and accepted him. It might be because of a desire to prove himself, but that's something Sam and Cas are as responsible for as Dean, IMO.

trxr4kids · February 8, 2018

On 2/5/2018 at 4:17 PM, Res said:

I agree with all of this except the last statement as I don't know what that is referring to.

I was referencing this portion of my previous post:

On 2/4/2018 at 8:12 PM, trxr4kids said:

MO is that Carver was pissed his maturity/breaking the co dependence sl went over like a lead balloon in S8 because he just didn't get it and so in S9 he was like fine, you want it, you got it and fuck you for not getting my vision!

4 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

It might be nice if not all Sam fans were painted with the same brush, just I'll bet there are plenty of Dean fans who would like the same.

I didn't and don't do that and frankly I don't like finger pointing at any faction even those I vehemently disagree with since I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion and everyone is going to perceive things differently since we're not living in a clone world last I checked.

On 2/4/2018 at 8:12 PM, trxr4kids said:

I'm not trying to flog a dead horse but how else am I supposed to justify my internet search history ( they come in purple, people! ) I prefer black but I digress ; ) .

*flogs away* In S8 Sam's off putting/offensive behavior is generally attributed to (in the tiny segment of fandom I engage in)

A) mental breakdown

B) being portrayed as OOC

C) outright character assasination

Meanwhile, Dean's S9 off putting/offensive behavior is generally attributed to :

A) Selfishness

B) Control issues

C) Dean's a Dick, the show even said so, repeatedly, it's totally fine!

Same show runner, different fan backlash. MO is that Carver was pissed his maturity/breaking the co dependence sl went over like a lead balloon in S8 because he just didn't get it and so in S9 he was like fine, you want it, you got it and fuck you for not getting my vision!

You'll note that nowhere in my post did I point fingers at segments/factions of the fandom, I said generally with an admittedly small sample size, that that was what I saw/perceived. I didn't state that it was just my opinion/perception only because I assumed that was obvious, my bad.

Edited February 8, 2018 by trxr4kids
missing word/s

catrox14 · February 8, 2018

13 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

I think it was tacitly retracted when Dean accepted Jack, making it a moot point. If Jack goes bad now, it can't be because of Dean's hostility, because Dean is not being hostile, and has in fact explicitly praised and accepted him. It might be because of a desire to prove himself, but that's something Sam and Cas are as responsible for as Dean, IMO.

Since the show, explicitly on screen had Sam hold Dean responsible for Jack's dark side, then the show MUST IMO also explictly on screen have Sam say that Dean is off the hook.

Jack already learned how to move the pencil and find cases and wanted to help before Dean gave him the thumbs up. So his good behavior happened before Dean associated his being good with resurrecting Castiel. Dean gave the full seal of approval after he tried to find Mary which was in The Bad Place, which also featured Dean being cruel to Kaia.

What I'm saying is the horse was already out of the barn that Mean Dean was negatively affecting Jack's "early childhood development"so to speak, and thus, if and when he goes bad, they can say well it happened when Dean was mean because no child is born evil, not even the spawn of satan. Everyone but Dean said so. Even in the most recent episode it was nurture not nature in the argument with Lucifer and Castiel.

Sadly, I think the writers were completely going for a wrong headed Dean = John parallel and it can't be undone. Though an apology from Sam would be nice but that won't happen because Sam fully believed he was in the right and well Jack thus far is good, so Dean was wrong, and the approval came after Jack was trying to be good, which was under Sam's guidance, not Dean's. Castiel had nothing to do with Jack's development post birth because he was dead. Jack just had the memories of Castiel and Kelly's loving advice, plus a Shifterpist treatment. So that was Castiel, Kelly, Sam, and the Shifterpist saying he is only evil if chooses to be. And ironically, it's Lucifer and Dean who have said that it's nature that would make him bad. Dean being shown to be wrong doesn't erase that Dean was on the Jack is born evil train.

IMO, that's a "negative mark" on Dean's CV as a human being that will never be erased by the show.

JanetWaldo · February 8, 2018

24 minutes ago, trxr4kids said:

You'll note that nowhere in my post did I point fingers at segments/factions of the fandom, I said generally with an admittedly small sample size that that was I saw. I didn't state that it was just my opinion/perception only because I assumed that was obvious, my bad.

IMO, I think the "generally attributed to" phrases imply a bit of finger pointing at factions of the fandom. Because who else is generally attributing these behaviors to either being OOC or being a dick but different factions of the fandom? But that's just my interpretation of that phrase.

trxr4kids · February 8, 2018

13 minutes ago, JanetWaldo said:

IMO, I think the "generally attributed to" phrases imply a bit of finger pointing at factions of the fandom. Because who else is generally attributing these behaviors to either being OOC or being a dick but different factions of the fandom? But that's just my interpretation of that phrase.

Well I'm not sure because this site doesn't have a fandom faction reveal option, so I have no clue in general which posters fall into which neat little categories and which ones bisect/trisect factions. For that matter I'm not even aware of all of the factions and have no desire to be. I try not to put people into boxes and see everyone as a unique individual. JMO MMV etc.

companionenvy · February 8, 2018

57 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Since the show, explicitly on screen had Sam hold Dean responsible for Jack's dark side, then the show MUST IMO also explictly on screen have Sam say that Dean is off the hook.

I just can't see how you could write a credible scene where this happened. Maybe if Jack does go bad, and Dean says "It is my fault," Sam can say "No it isn't," but I just don't think it would be natural. Depending on your perspective, it might or might not have been a fair charge from Sam, but it wasn't such a brutally cruel comment that it demanded an apology, IMO. Certainly, it doesn't demand an apology or explicit revocation months later, by which point Sam and Dean are on the same page re: Jack.

It would be frankly bizarre for Sam to say "Hey Dean, I just want you to know, I take back what I said about it being your fault if Jack goes darkside." Because under present circumstances, I don't think anyone would consider it Dean's fault, as it would make very little sense to do so.

Bobcatkitten · February 8, 2018

I step away from this thread sometimes and hop back in wondering if it's better. Never is. No one in here seems to like the show. They predetermine whether an upcoming episode will suck. And everything is based on perceived slights on their fave character. Seems exhausting constantly cutting apart what is an otherwise entertaining show with heart.

JanetWaldo · February 8, 2018

10 minutes ago, trxr4kids said:

Well I'm not sure because this site doesn't have a fandom faction reveal option, so I have no clue in general which posters fall into which neat little categories and which ones bisect/trisect factions. For that matter I'm not even aware of all of the factions and have no desire to be. I try not to put people into boxes and see everyone as a unique individual. JMO MMV etc.

Okay? I was simply trying to explain how perhaps @RulerofallIsurvey mistook your comment even if it wasn't what you intended. I wasn't making any kind of judgement, soI don't understand your response at all.

Agree to disagree? (Even though I have no idea about what we are disagreeing...)

Edited February 8, 2018 by JanetWaldo

trxr4kids · February 8, 2018

2 minutes ago, JanetWaldo said:

Okay? I was simply trying to explain how perhaps @RulerofallIsurvey mistook your comment even if it wasn't what you meant. I wasn't making any kind of judgement, soI don't understand your response at all.

Agree to disagree? (Even though I have no idea about what we are disagreeing...)

I was just clarifying what I meant since it seemed I was unclear originally, one of the drawbacks of online discussions, no special font to signify mood or intent . : )

Aeryn13 · February 8, 2018

Quote

I just can't see how you could write a credible scene where this happened. Maybe if Jack does go bad, and Dean says "It is my fault," Sam can say "No it isn't," but I just don't think it would be natural.

I don`t think Jack will go bad but if he does, IMO that would be organic. Dean saying something like "come on, Sam, you said so yourself, I made him afraid of me and bla bla" and then Sam could go into "that`s not how I meant it, you came around on him and even if you never did, his actions are not your fault, he made his own choices bla bla". Other than that, I don`t see it happening either because the matter has been dropped.

Personally, I`d much rather some parts from the Purge speech adressed. There can easily be an episode where it comes up organically, as in something like that angel chick who basically told Dean he is so selfish and cares for nothing but his own interests. Which, along with cowardly and delusional, was the gist of that speech. The "I lied" at the end of Season 9 adressed nothing. Maybe the one part in that speech I never had a problem with, namely the "I wouldn`t save you by all means necessary". That was the one part that was fine. All the other parts were horrible. And I saw so many metas and fans who completely agreed with the entire blanket speech as some "harsh truths".

Wayward Son · February 8, 2018

7 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

I don`t think Jack will go bad but if he does, IMO that would be organic. Dean saying something like "come on, Sam, you said so yourself, I made him afraid of me and bla bla" and then Sam could go into "that`s not how I meant it, you came around on him and even if you never did, his actions are not your fault, he made his own choices bla bla". Other than that, I don`t see it happening either because the matter has been dropped.

Personally, I`d much rather some parts from the Purge speech adressed. There can easily be an episode where it comes up organically, as in something like that angel chick who basically told Dean he is so selfish and cares for nothing but his own interests. Which, along with cowardly and delusional, was the gist of that speech. The "I lied" at the end of Season 9 adressed nothing. Maybe the one part in that speech I never had a problem with, namely the "I wouldn`t save you by all means necessary". That was the one part that was fine. All the other parts were horrible. And I saw so many metas and fans who completely agreed with the entire blanket speech as some "harsh truths".

I agree with everything in the Purge speech except “I'll give you this much. You are certainly willing to do the sacrificing as long as you're not the one being hurt” because that certainly isn’t true, as shown by his willingness to go to Hell for Sam or his decision to live the life of a hunter. The rest of it though particularly the fact Dean did it for himself more than Sam I 100% agree with.

Aeryn13 · February 8, 2018

Quote

I agree with everything in the Purge speech except “I'll give you this much. You are certainly willing to do the sacrificing as long as you're not the one being hurt” because that certainly isn’t true, as shown by his willingness to go to Hell for Sam or his decision to live the life of a hunter. The rest of it though particularly the fact Dean did it for himself more than Sam I 100% agree with.

If the speech had been specifically focused on the Gadreel situation, I wouldn`t have remotely as much of a problem with it. But instead it was all blanket statements. Without qualifiers it relates to Dean`s entire life, meaning Dean only ever selfishly saves Sam, not once was it motivated by anything different. Then of course the "you think you are doing good but you are wrong". Again, Dean`s entire life he apparently deluded himself that he does good and he actually does more harm. Which could be a fair point but not one Sam can make or else he is a giant flaming hypocrite. Then of course the one you mentioned.

I completely understood why Sam was angry. He could have said stuff like "I hate you" or "I can`t even look at you" or "I can never forgive you for what you did" or even "right now I wish you were still rotting in hell" and I wouldn`t have cared so much. Heck, if he had seriously wanted Dean dead over it, shrug. I watched TVD and the Originals, that stuff is peanuts between brothers for me.

But the blanket devaluing someone`s entire life as garbage, that is the mountain to me. And especially the weak and cowardly accusations. There is no worse insult for me, seriously I prefer cold-blooded murderer or something like that. After all the "truth" speeches we`ve gotten on the show, under the influence and not, where Dean has been called variations of that same theme, it made me stark-raving mad. And honestly still does.

Wayward Son · February 8, 2018

12 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

If the speech had been specifically focused on the Gadreel situation, I wouldn`t have remotely as much of a problem with it. But instead it was all blanket statements. Without qualifiers it relates to Dean`s entire life, meaning Dean only ever selfishly saves Sam, not once was it motivated by anything different. Then of course the "you think you are doing good but you are wrong". Again, Dean`s entire life he apparently deluded himself that he does good and he actually does more harm. Which could be a fair point but not one Sam can make or else he is a giant flaming hypocrite. Then of course the one you mentioned.

I completely understood why Sam was angry. He could have said stuff like "I hate you" or "I can`t even look at you" or "I can never forgive you for what you did" or even "right now I wish you were still rotting in hell" and I wouldn`t have cared so much. Heck, if he had seriously wanted Dean dead over it, shrug. I watched TVD and the Originals, that stuff is peanuts between brothers for me.

But the blanket devaluing someone`s entire life as garbage, that is the mountain to me. And especially the weak and cowardly accusations. There is no worse insult for me, seriously I prefer cold-blooded murderer or something like that. After all the "truth" speeches we`ve gotten on the show, under the influence and not, where Dean has been called variations of that same theme, it made me stark-raving mad. And honestly still does.

Personally, I don’t think the entire thing was blanket statements but largely related to the situation at hand. I’m not trying to argue, but figure I should explain why.

Quote

SAM

And that... is the problem. You think you're my savior, my brother, the hero. You swoop in, and even when you mess up, you think what you're doing is worth it because you've convinced yourself you're doing more good than bad... But you're not.

[DEAN's blank eyes stare at him]

I mean, Kevin's dead, Crowley's in the wind. We're no closer to beating this angel thing. Please tell me, what is the upside of me being alive?

At first it comes across as though Sam is making a blanket statement, but then the second part from “I mean” on is meant to be a qualifier highlighting he is referring to the possession and what has happened since. Personally, I think it’s reasonable for Sam to feel his being alive has caused more harm than good due to Kevin’s death and his inability (up until that point) to help deal with the other issues he mentioned.

Quote

SAM [sighing in frustration almost leaves but then decides to explain. He come into the kitchen and sits down across from DEAN, who draws back unconsciously]

Okay. Just once, be honest with me. You didn't save me for me. You did it for you.

DEAN [totally confused]

What are you talkin' about?

SAM

I was ready to die. I was ready. I should have died, but you... You didn't want to be alone, and that's what all this boils down to. You can't stand the thought of being alone.

Since I’ve made my feelings on the possession clear several times in this thread I don’t want to go into it again, but suffice to say I definitely agree with Sam that Dean did it for himself rather than Sam.

Quote

SAM

I'll give you this much. You are certainly willing to do the sacrificing as long as you're not the one being hurt.

And I already agreed in my last post this is a bull crap blanket statement.

Quote

DEAN

All right, you want to be honest? If the situation were reversed and I was dying, you'd do the same thing.

SAM [very softly]

No, Dean. I wouldn't.

[He looks up and meets DEAN's shocked eyes.]

Same circumstances...I wouldn't. I'm gonna get to bed.

Seemed reasonable when the episode aired, but of course they ultimately made him a liar who lies and a hypocrite. One of the main reasons along with the bull crap blanket statement above I feel the scene is meant to make Sam look bad.

catrox14 · February 8, 2018

53 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

I just can't see how you could write a credible scene where this happened. Maybe if Jack does go bad, and Dean says "It is my fault," Sam can say "No it isn't," but I just don't think it would be natural. Depending on your perspective, it might or might not have been a fair charge from Sam, but it wasn't such a brutally cruel comment that it demanded an apology, IMO. Certainly, it doesn't demand an apology or explicit revocation months later, by which point Sam and Dean are on the same page re: Jack.

It would be frankly bizarre for Sam to say "Hey Dean, I just want you to know, I take back what I said about it being your fault if Jack goes darkside." Because under present circumstances, I don't think anyone would consider it Dean's fault, as it would make very little sense to do so.

There are hundreds of things that are introduced inorganically in this show that still see the light of day, be it retcons, altered canon, random character beats that come out of nowhere. . The show has done far more inorganic storytelling over lesser issues over the years, so I am A OK with a clunky, inorganic bit of exposition if it takes Dean off the hook on screen explicitly.

Aeryn13 · February 8, 2018

Quote

Since I’ve made my feelings on the possession clear several times in this thread I don’t want to go into it again, but suffice to say I definitely agree with Sam that Dean did it for himself rather than Sam.

I do think the Gadreel thing was a selfish decision but just like the deal, I don`t agree with "you don`t want to be alone". If Dean could have traded his life for Sam`s instead of angel possession or if he had been given a deal like "okay, I`ll heal your brother but he will forget you ever existed and you can never see him again" or anything like that, does anyone really think Dean would have been "okay? with those terms, nope, let him die, I only want him alive if I get him around, otherwise, thanks but no thanks"?

Because I can`t see that happening. For some super-unhealthy reason Dean can`t live with Sam dead. It`s not noble but I do not believe his motive boiled down to "don`t want to be alone". If that`s his entire hang-up when Sam dies, there is a super-easy solution. He has a multitude of guns to do it. If he doesn`t want to do it himself, he just goes onto a hunt and makes sure he dies on it. Also, super-easy.

ILoveReading · February 8, 2018

1 minute ago, Aeryn13 said:

I do think the Gadreel thing was a selfish decision but just like the deal, I don`t agree with "you don`t want to be alone". If Dean could have traded his life for Sam`s instead of angel possession or if he had been given a deal like "okay, I`ll heal your brother but he will forget you ever existed and you can never see him again" or anything like that, does anyone really think Dean would have been "okay? with those terms, nope, let him die, I only want him alive if I get him around, otherwise, thanks but no thanks"?

Because I can`t see that happening. For some super-unhealthy reason Dean can`t live with Sam dead. It`s not noble but I do not believe his motive boiled down to "don`t want to be alone". If that`s his entire hang-up when Sam dies, there is a super-easy solution. He has a multitude of guns to do it. If he doesn`t want to do it himself, he just goes onto a hunt and makes sure he dies on it. Also, super-easy.

I agree with this, becasue a lot of Dean's plans to bring Sam back, carry a high risk that he won't make it back, or will end up dead himself.

Selling his soul, he was given a year, so he'd be leaving Sam. Or trying to get Sam's soul back from death or the stunt in the episode that shall not be named.

Dean has never said he can't live without Sam. He can't live with Sam dead. I think there is a difference.

I always thought that since it was drilled into his head from a young age that he's responsible for Sam's well being. Protect Sam is his prime directive. IMO, I always felt it was far more about Dean not being able to live with the fact that he failed Sam.

When Dean sold he soul, Sam died right in front of him, the trials, Dean felt Sam was dying because he was supposed to do them so Sam was dying because he did them in Dean's place.

So while I do think Dean wants Sam with him, its not his primary motivation.

catrox14 · February 8, 2018

I've never really understood Sam's position that Dean did it for himself because he can't stand to be alone. . Dean has already traded his life for Sam's. Sam knows this. If Dean could not live without Sam, he would have simply killed himself in s2 or in s9.

Dean has always said "I can't live with you dead". That's not the same thing as saying "I can't live without you" It's the messed up Prime Directive. It's also complicated because Dean couldn't make a demon deal again because if he did, well that means Dean didn't learn from the first Apocalypse and I have a hard time believing that the show really wanted that to be a thing again. Although, it would have ultimately been better than the possession.

Dean's life purpose as been assuring that Sam remains alive whether that's trading his soul for Sam, or finding some way to make sure he lives. That's what this was. It's the same thing as in s11 when he died to make a deal for Sam again. Dean was willing to remain dead, if Sam was able to live.

I just don't see where there is much logic to the "You did it for yourself because you can't stand to be alone". Dean has been alone before, Dean has lived pretty well on his own. Never mind that Dean wouldn't be alone. He has Castiel. So that doesn't hold water either really.

AwesomO4000 · February 8, 2018

22 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I just don't see where there is much logic to the "You did it for yourself because you can't stand to be alone". Dean has been alone before, Dean has lived pretty well on his own. Never mind that Dean wouldn't be alone. He has Castiel. So that doesn't hold water either really.

Yeah, I agree, The whole speech was filled with stuff that was obviously wrong, and left out a couple of huge things that would have been true. Which is why I agree with:

45 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

Seemed reasonable when the episode aired, but of course they ultimately made him a liar who lies and a hypocrite. One of the main reasons along with the bull crap blanket statement above I feel the scene is meant to make Sam look bad.

Yup. In my opinion, the whole thing was mostly full of strawman's arguments that were either obviously untrue or would be proved untrue by the end of the season - with other added little details like the "real friend" Gadreel stuff and having Sam say that Gadreel wasn't trying to hurt him and didn't feel evil, downplaying all the bad that Gadreel did do. Catching some rerun episodes recently on TNT, I was reminded of how viciously Gadreel lured in and killed dozens and dozens of innocent angels, and how that was just kind of swept under the rug. I think this was after he was in Sam, but either way, for me, it doesn't lend to "he didn't feel evil" or at least goes way beyond "misunderstood," because that's just vicious, imo. And at the least, it didn't deserve a "real friend" label later from Sam. That just bugged the crap out of me.

So for me, that the stuff the speech had Sam say was so untrue was there to show how unreasonable Sam was being and set up that by the end of the season - which by that point the writers likely knew how it would go - Sam would learn the error of his ways. Just my opinion, and everyone else's just as valid opinion may vary.

Wayward Son · February 8, 2018

14 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Yup. In my opinion, the whole thing was mostly full of strawman's arguments that were either obviously untrue or would be proved untrue by the end of the season - with other added little details like the "real friend" Gadreel stuff and having Sam say that Gadreel wasn't trying to hurt him and didn't feel evil, downplaying all the bad that Gadreel did do. Catching some rerun episodes recently on TNT, I was reminded of how viciously Gadreel lured in and killed dozens and dozens of innocent angels, and how that was just kind of swept under the rug. I think this was after he was in Sam, but either way, for me, it doesn't lend to "he didn't feel evil" or at least goes way beyond "misunderstood," because that's just vicious, imo. And at the least, it didn't deserve a "real friend" label later from Sam. That just bugged the crap out of me.

So for me, that the stuff the speech had Sam say was so untrue was there to show how unreasonable Sam was being and set up that by the end of the season - which by that point the writers likely knew how it would go - Sam would learn the error of his ways. Just my opinion, and everyone else's just as valid opinion may vary.

So, so true! Man I wished Jessica Jones had existed back then to recommend via tweets to the writers. Now there’s a show which handles the trauma of non-con mind control in a nuanced manner and doesnt villainise the victims of the piece.

catrox14 · February 8, 2018

37 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Yeah, I agree, The whole speech was filled with stuff that was obviously wrong, and left out a couple of huge things that would have been true. Which is why I agree with:

Let me clarify. I've thought about that speech a number of times and I don't think Sam had logic because he was reeling IMO from a terrible experience that Dean was not apologizing for. I think the intention behind that was not to make it out bounds for him but to show how much that made Sam doubt Dean and no longer trust Dean and rightly so. IMO, from his perspective Dean could not possibly care about or respect him because of what he did, which is why I think he went after Dean's entire life. That's how upset Sam was. I think part of that speech's problem IMO is that Jared underplayed it too much.

I've thought about Sam yelling at Dean. Having a lot more emotional behind those words and it would have landed differently. I'm wondering how much of that acting choice was Jared's or scripted.

I won't rehash a previous post I made upthread in which I explained more about why I don't think the closing shot was intended to garner sympathy for Dean and instead, was a choice to not undermine Sam's words. Obviously miles vary on this but that's just how I've always seen it. There was never going to be a meeting of their minds because they were coming it at from such disparate positions and frames of mind and I think the director and the writer left it up to the audience to decide who they would side with.

ahrtee · February 9, 2018

41 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I think the director and the writer left it up to the audience to decide who they would side with.

And who they felt was being thrown under the bus. Obviously, it wasn't...obvious...or there wouldn't be so many posts about it, even years later.

JanetWaldo · February 9, 2018

3 hours ago, trxr4kids said:

I was just clarifying what I meant since it seemed I was unclear originally, one of the drawbacks of online discussions, no special font to signify mood or intent . : )

Gotcha!

DeeDee79 · February 9, 2018

57 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

Obviously, it wasn't...obvious...or there wouldn't be so many posts about it, even years later.

Understatement :(

AwesomO4000 · February 9, 2018

3 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

So, so true! Man I wished Jessica Jones had existed back then to recommend via tweets to the writers. Now there’s a show which handles the trauma of non-con mind control in a nuanced manner and doesnt villainise the victims of the piece.

Heh, except that even though we agree in general here, I'm one of those people who actually didn't have a problem with Dean asking for Gadreel's help and helping him to possess Sam... which is why this speech was almost even worse for me in that my whole issue with the situation wasn't even addressed in the speech at all. Not even a hint. Weeks of build-up and... nothing.

2 hours ago, catrox14 said:

I think the intention behind that was not to make it out bounds for him but to show how much that made Sam doubt Dean and no longer trust Dean and rightly so. IMO, from his perspective Dean could not possibly care about or respect him because of what he did, which is why I think he went after Dean's entire life. That's how upset Sam was. I think part of that speech's problem IMO is that Jared underplayed it too much.

And I would agree with you more except for that important missing thing which - to me - was unfortunately a HUGE missing thing. Maybe it's because Carver and the writers of this episode weren't there for season 7 - which isn't really an excuse, because they should have to watch the previous seasons enough to understand the characters - but one of the things that has generally been Sam's whole deal, in addition to Dean not trusting him*** is Dean lying to him. One of the main reasons Sam had not to trust Dean at the time of this speech was that for weeks, maybe months Sam had been asking Dean if something was wrong and Dean lied to him.

So now Sam is supposedly angry about not being able to trust Dean, but this doesn't come up at all? For me, Sam yelling might have helped the scene a little, but what would have helped it much more is if Sam had yelled about Dean lying to him for so long, because theoretically that could have solved many of the problems - including Kevin being killed with Sam's body. And that's generally what Sam had been angry about and questioned trusting Dean for in the past - see "Slash Fiction" where that's pretty much most of what Sam was angry and yelling about. Sam hasn't before been all that angry about Dean making life and death decisions for him - see the deal where Sam was over it in no time. Sam was thankful about Dean saving his soul. Sam even admitted that he needed Dean looking out for him ("Season Seven, Time for a Wedding") and seemed fine with it, so I didn't understand Sam being this angry with Dean making this decision for him, myself (except for setting up the parallel at the end of the season where Sam would do the same thing.) Sam has even almost done the same thing himself before concerning Dean (season 3 and 4.) But being angry about and not trusting Dean for lying, to me that, yes, very much would've made Sam that angry - enough to spout those kind of nasty things.

So the show had been building up all season until Sam finding out, showing us how Dean hated lying to Sam and what that lying was doing to Sam's psyche. And Sam gets angry about being lied to. Now here's the big blow out between them and it's not even mentioned? Why not?

*** Whether or not Dean has a reason not to trust him, that's consistently one of Sam's hang-ups.

Edited February 9, 2018 by AwesomO4000

Sign In

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

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Aeryn13

BabySpinach

BabySpinach

Posted Images

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment