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

[Myrelle]

21 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

So even if some viewers think it's fine for Sam to be a lieutenant, Dabb wants him to be General, in both show and tell.And thus far, it hasn't been walked back.

Spoiler

And it doesn't sound like it's going to be either-not with Dabb adding that Sam being The Leader is a big part of the upcoming season while again all we've gotten from him on Dean within the Michael!Dean storyline is that Dean will get an emo role out of his two-episode live stint as Michael and that, according to Jensen at a recent con, he hasn't seen much of  that yet(so likely not even flashbacks, IMO, if he can make that statement), but he was "expecting" it-and they must have been filming episode 6 or 7 at that point. Nice.

I can't stand Dabb.

Edited October 9, 2018 by Myrelle

[Supafanstan]

51 minutes ago, Myrelle said:

  Hide contents

And it doesn't sound like it's going to be either-not with Dabb adding that Sam being The Leader is a big part of the upcoming season while again all we've gotten from him on Dean within the Michael!Dean storyline is that Dean will get an emo role out of his two-episode live stint as Michael and that, according to Jensen at a recent con, he hasn't seen much of  that yet(so likely not even flashbacks, IMO, if he can make that statement), but he was "expecting" it-and they must have been filming episode 6 or 7 at that point. Nice.

I can't stand Dabb.

He is the worst. He's ruined beloved characters (Mary), made me dislike characters I should love (Sam) and brought in new characters I couldn't care less about (Nougat Baby - ha, I love that) and the Waywards (don't even get me started). By all accounts he's screwing up the much anticipated Mean! story.  And still he won't let go of the Heaven and Angels crap that was stale 4 seasons ago. The worst. 

[SueB]

@AwesomO4000 I agree with the sentiment - that BMoL "shining moment" raid was more hype than reality.  And I appreciate that it loses luster for having had him trust the Brits in the first place.  They had good data.  They were making a difference.  It was just that their morals were so completley corrupt.  And that wasn't evident by Mary's accounts.  What we (the audience) saw was much more sinister than what Mary or Sam saw.  

Spoiler

The same, I think, can be said for the upcoming "leader Sam' moments.  By the current plot's nature, Sam is OF COURSE, stepping up to lead the now overpopulated group in the Bunker.  They need a leader, Sam's going to make sure they are working to save (versus kill) Dean.  But as we see almost EVERY year, the show producers and cast get their talking points for the start of the season -- and then they repeat the same basic info 82 different ways.  Makes it seem bigger than it is.  Don't get me wrong - I expect a "Sam F*cking Winchester* hero moment or three in the season opener while Dean is hostage to Michael.  But it's not the entirety of S14.  It's the talking points for the first episode and maybe two or three after.  That's it.

[ahrtee]

Brought over from Bitter Spoilers, just in case:

1 hour ago, SueB said:

As I am fond of saying "Common sense to one man is a revelation to another" (I thought that was Mark Twain but now I can't find the reference).  I think hitting a storyling that the majority of fandom simultaneously likes?  Pretty damn hard.  So they might as well keep doing what they are doing because they are still on the air. 

 

27 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

 It's making money as long as the fans keep supporting it.  But if enough fans (of any group, or several groups) get pissed off (or bored) enough and stop watching, it won't be profitable anymore, and that might show up by the end of this year, which is where my timeline is coming from.  I know I'm seriously considering dropping it, and I've been watching live and continuously for 10 years now. *sigh*

 

21 minutes ago, SueB said:

Exactly.  Maybe this'll be the year.  But we've seen talk like this since ... EVER.  I think S5 was a given once they were far enough along on S4.  I think after they got to about S8, many have expected a one-year notice like Smallville.  I really don't expect the show to tank so badly that they hastily call an end at S14.  Could be wrong, but highly doubt it.  So, I think we'll have at least S15.  And then the boys will decide to renew for two years or not.  Again.  

TBH, I'd still be watching happily if they had stayed with the original ideas and made changes to the boys and their hunts organically as they got older/wiser and started working with other hunters.  But the changes they've made over the past few years IMO have been abrupt and out of the blue: distracting at best, infuriating at worst, in between changing the main characters', um, characters (and not for the better) just for the sake of Drama (or fan requests), and the addition of new and not-very-compelling characters (or the revival of old ones that were well past expiration.)  Those are usually jump-the-shark moments when they're desperately trying to breathe new life into an old show.  But by pandering to the newer, younger crowd (bringing in Cousin Oliver, eg) they're metaphorically thumbing their noses at their old and loyal fan base, and IMO those are the ones who have been keeping the show alive.  Take away the characters they've been watching for, or change them so drastically that they're no longer recognizable, and I think they'll notice it in ratings (and profits) by the end of the year.

So we may well have one last, limping season 15, but if they keep on this trajectory and don't rethink how they're writing the characters it will be a very sad end to a show that deserves better, even if they decide to go out with a bang.  Too little, too late.  JMO, of course.

[SueB]

1 hour ago, ahrtee said:

Brought over from Bitter Spoilers, just in case:

 

 

TBH, I'd still be watching happily if they had stayed with the original ideas and made changes to the boys and their hunts organically as they got older/wiser and started working with other hunters.  But the changes they've made over the past few years IMO have been abrupt and out of the blue: distracting at best, infuriating at worst, in between changing the main characters', um, characters (and not for the better) just for the sake of Drama (or fan requests), and the addition of new and not-very-compelling characters (or the revival of old ones that were well past expiration.)  Those are usually jump-the-shark moments when they're desperately trying to breathe new life into an old show.  But by pandering to the newer, younger crowd (bringing in Cousin Oliver, eg) they're metaphorically thumbing their noses at their old and loyal fan base, and IMO those are the ones who have been keeping the show alive.  Take away the characters they've been watching for, or change them so drastically that they're no longer recognizable, and I think they'll notice it in ratings (and profits) by the end of the year.

So we may well have one last, limping season 15, but if they keep on this trajectory and don't rethink how they're writing the characters it will be a very sad end to a show that deserves better, even if they decide to go out with a bang.  Too little, too late.  JMO, of course.

Show takes a lot of gambles.  In both storylines and execution. Some pan out (Scoobynatural generally critically acclaimed and not universally hated by fandom), others not so much (Michael/Lucifer fight generally disliked/loathed/hatedwiththeheatof1000suns).  I think I've seen more praise than panning for that willingness to gamble but I think walking that line is what gets them the strong reaction.  For example, 

Spoiler

Having one of your two leads be possessed by the Big Bad of the season for more than one episode seems a bit of a gamble.  And I think they limited total duration because they wouldn't commit completely to that risk.  

Edited October 9, 2018 by SueB

[ahrtee]

45 minutes ago, SueB said:

Show takes a lot of gambles.  In both storylines and execution. Some pan out (Scoobynatural generally critically acclaimed and not universally hated by fandom), others not so much (Michael/Lucifer fight generally disliked/loathed/hatedwiththeheatof1000suns).  I think I've seen more praise than panning for that willingness to gamble but I think walking that line is what gets them the strong reaction.

I don't mind gambles with storyline or execution, especially for one-shots (like Scoobynatural or Baby or Fan fiction).  And I have no problem with issues that come up in the storyline (like Soulless Sam or Demon Dean.)  In fact, I enjoy seeing different sides/facets of the characters, *as long as there's a  reason for it.*  So outside influences, possession, trauma, whatever, can make perfect sense, though if they're serious enough to affect the characters, they should become a part of them in the future as well, not only mentioned when it's a plot point. 

What I do take issue with is changing the basic characters, not organically through growth or situations (and I'm not taking sides here, because it's been done to all characters) but by lessening them or turning them into caricatures.  It's taking the original characteristics--like Sam being the "smart one" who loves research and Dean being the action guy--and ignoring all nuance and growth just to fit whatever plot they're working on now (or to suit other characters.)  So dumbing Dean down, making him unnecessarily bloodthirsty (when not under any outside influence) or making him into hero support only, or making Sam into Superhero so he can do everything but leap tall buildings in a single bound--especially when it's inconsistently applied--is not growth but rewriting the characters into something different, something more in line with comic book heroes than more realistic/"human" ones.  And it seems they've been doing that more and more lately.  (They did it to Bobby, too, and Charlie, and even (in a negative way) to Mary.)

So I don't have a problem with the heroes playing different characters, or even the characters growing.  But when they're themselves, I want them to stay true to their characters, not suddenly change according to what a writer (or producer, or showrunner) wants them to be this time.  

Edited October 9, 2018 by ahrtee

[ILoveReading]

46 minutes ago, SueB said:

Show takes a lot of gambles.

I don't find it does that anymore.  It's always done quirky eps.  Some worked some didn't, but one offs aren't really gambles because if they didn't work, oh well.  It was a one time thing.

The show pretends to take gambles these days.

Spoiler

If it was taking a gamble the Michael storyline wouldn't be dropped after 2 episodes.  A gamble would have been the writers actually separating the brothers for longer an episode.  A gamble would have actually been letting Jensen play Michael and have the story unfold in real time.  The way it appears to be written now.  It's not a gamble.  It seems more like its a way to get rid of Dean so Dabb can push his other agendas.  It was anything but he wouldn't have made the breathing room comment.

[SueB]

Recent gambles (IMO):
- Making Mary a questionable mother
- Killing off all their villians (Crowley, Lucifer, Asmodeus) so all they're left with is AUMichael wearing a Dean-suit
- Bringing Jack onboard for a major role -- that had serious Cousin Oliver potential and I think Jack has been well received
- Wayward Sister time -- and that didn't pan out as the series didn't get picked up.  I personally was happy with the story but it was a gamble.
- Bringing both God and God's sister into the story 

Maybe you think those are nothin-burgers but I see those as more than quirky one-offs and ones that could have really lost viewers.  And maybe did -- but replacement viewers showed up to take their place.

[Lastcall]

16 minutes ago, SueB said:

Maybe you think those are nothin-burgers but I see those as more than quirky one-offs and ones that could have really lost viewers.  And maybe did -- but replacement viewers showed up to take their place.

Don’t know if that’s something to crow about. We don’t know when Dabb was handed the reigns in season 11 but going by the official 12 season start he lost over a million viewers and .04 off the demos which he never got back. Now the 12-13 viewers and ratings are almost identical so that might be the magic number for replacement viewers but the last time the show took a major hit was when they spent all summer promoting “the year of the Deanmon” only for the Dean fans to find out by year they meant 3 episodes. This could be a repeat of that. Friday numbers will tell the tale. It should be interesting considering how vocal the Dean fans have been lately. We may not have an impact at all. Maybe the Sam and Mary show will be a spectacular success.

[ILoveReading]

41 minutes ago, SueB said:

Making Mary a questionable mother

The show doesn't seem to think Mary is a questionable mother.  Dean was the one that ended up apologizing for daring to criticize St. Mary and trying to control her. 

 

41 minutes ago, SueB said:

Killing off all their villians (Crowley, Lucifer, Asmodeus) so all they're left with is AUMichael wearing a Dean-suit

Then they keep trying to bring them back.  Don't tell me that Asmodeus wasn't a replacement for Crowley.  From the sounds of it Dabb wanted Crowley to come back, just not as a regular.  They killed him because Mark said no. Not because it was a risk.

Spoiler

We know that Nick is back, and I wouldn't rule out Lucifer.  Plus there  is another Cowley wanna be Kip.  And the ridiculousness of his asking Sam if he can rule hell. That is so laughable, there is no way I can take it seriously.  Stupidity is not a gamble.    Also, the show doesn't kill anyone off these days.  They bring them all back.   They couldn't even go one episode without bringing Mark P back.   Michael is wearing Dean for an two eps.  And the brothers are separated for one.  Like I said, not much of a gamble.

Death has become such a joke on this show.  I don't see it as a gamble when they kill someone off because I know they're coming back.

41 minutes ago, SueB said:

Bringing Jack onboard for a major role -- that had serious Cousin Oliver potential and I think Jack has been well received

Then they turned him into a cinnamon roll that even Pillsbury would envy.  They ignored Jack's dark side and the Lucifer side.  They even elevated Kelly to sainthood status.  A gamble would have been showing that dark side.  Not just paying lip service.  Jack spent the the entire season looking like someone kicked his puppy and being sad because he couldn't help people.  They dropped the more interesting side of Jack to play it safe.

 

41 minutes ago, SueB said:

Wayward Sister time -- and that didn't pan out as the series didn't get picked up.  I personally was happy with the story but it was a gamble.

I'm not sure if this was a gamble so much as network mandated.  It wasnt' really a gamble if it was. 

 

41 minutes ago, SueB said:

Bringing both God and God's sister into the story 

This story also really went no where.  Amara spent the whole season looking for God and and when he shows up she suddenly wards herself.  LOL.  They brought them in but had no clue how to handle a story that big.  In the end it was resolved with some family counseling. \

So like I said, they pretended to gamble and take risks. 

Demon Dean is another example.  Turn your main character into a demon could have been an interesting storyline.  But it was dropped for the status quo.

Spoiler

It appears Michael is going the same route.

Imo, a gamble is something that drastically shakes up the status quo.  Not of those example really did.

Examples of risks-

Sam drinking demon blood

Dean liking being a torturer

Introducing angels

Dean tricking Sam into being possessed

All things that shook up the status quo in ways that they couldnt drop.  They jumped without a saftey net.   Dabb doesn't jump unless he's wrapped in bubble wrap, helmets, and mats and nets. 

IMO, a major risk would have been

Quote

Spoiler

actually having AU Bobby and Charlie side against Team Free will and wanting them dead.  But it seems the show wants to cheat and give them the exact same relationship with the guys.

 

Edited October 9, 2018 by ILoveReading

[gonzosgirrl]

17 minutes ago, Lastcall said:

Don’t know if that’s something to crow about. We don’t know when Dabb was handed the reigns in season 11 but going by the official 12 season start he lost over a million viewers and .04 off the demos which he never got back. Now the 12-13 viewers and ratings are almost identical so that might be the magic number for replacement viewers but the last time the show took a major hit was when they spent all summer promoting “the year of the Deanmon” only for the Dean fans to find out by year they meant 3 episodes. This could be a repeat of that. Friday numbers will tell the tale. It should be interesting considering how vocal the Dean fans have been lately. We may not have an impact at all. Maybe the Sam and Mary show will be a spectacular success.

People will tune in to the premiere to see Michael. And mark my words, if the numbers are good for that and the follow up,  Leader Sam and his beard will get the credit. If it tanks, it'll be how people didn't want Michael Dean, or Jensen somehow didn't bring it. Bet on it.

[AwesomO4000]

4 hours ago, SueB said:

It was just that their morals were so completley corrupt.  And that wasn't evident by Mary's accounts.  What we (the audience) saw was much more sinister than what Mary or Sam saw.

I somewhat agree, except for Sam himself saw plenty of sinister in that he was actually tortured by these people, so for me, that should have made him even more wary... and considering the fact that everything in that episode ("The Raid") went haywire and a bunch of people died sort of put into question the supposed awesome intelligence the Brits had been talking about. For me, it's hard to believe that a supposedly competent network of people can get down to supposedly only a few vampires left, but somehow they don't keep tabs on those vampires who are not only able to get an inside informant into their organization, but come undeterred to their headquarters and kill a bunch of them. What kind of strategy is that? There are only about a dozen vampires left in their stronghold and they know approximately where they are - obviously since Ketch went right to it with Dean - but they're not going to watch them or anything to make sure they don't go anywhere or escape or anything. And their super-duper stronghold isn't really reinforced or anything, so the vampires that they weren't watching just came marching right in.

Sam may not have known exactly how evil the BMoL were - though the torture should've been a clue - but the utter incompetence that didn't match up to all the stuff the BMoL were bragging about should have been - to me - a huge neon sign if Sam wasn't hit with the plotonium and had bothered to think about it for two seconds. Sam was wary in the middle part of the episode - especially when he found out about the Colt mission, which was another botched operation where obviously the intelligence was weak and allowed someone to get killed - so what part of Sam having to save the BMoL's bacon - with the Colt no less... that Sam gave them the information on how to make the bullets - convinced him that this group even knew what they were doing?

I just don't buy that a smart Sam would be so easily snowed myself... And it wasn't even necessary if the goal was for Sam to join and be betrayed. Sam could have joined to keep an eye on Mary, but nope, the writers had to make some point about Sam being a blind "follower" (which I don't even agree with to begin with) so they could show how wrong he was.*** And they didn't seem to care about how stupid it made Sam look. They even had the other hunters not be convinced to join, just to make Sam look even worse and/or look more stupid. The entire thing annoyed me.

It seems that whenever someone's characterization has to be compromised for plot purposes, Sam generally gets the short end of the stick.

*** Since apparently since season 8, that seems to be a thing... or at least that's what it seems like to me.

[SueB]

1 hour ago, Lastcall said:

Don’t know if that’s something to crow about. We don’t know when Dabb was handed the reigns in season 11 but going by the official 12 season start he lost over a million viewers and .04 off the demos which he never got back. Now the 12-13 viewers and ratings are almost identical so that might be the magic number for replacement viewers but the last time the show took a major hit was when they spent all summer promoting “the year of the Deanmon” only for the Dean fans to find out by year they meant 3 episodes. This could be a repeat of that. Friday numbers will tell the tale. It should be interesting considering how vocal the Dean fans have been lately. We may not have an impact at all. Maybe the Sam and Mary show will be a spectacular success.

It's enough to have gotten a S14.

1 hour ago, ILoveReading said:

All things that shook up the status quo in ways that they couldnt drop.  They jumped without a saftey net.   Dabb doesn't jump unless he's wrapped in bubble wrap, helmets, and mats and nets. 

By the definition of "status quo shake ups they can't drop":

Bringing Mary back was a game changer - technically Carver but Dabb was driving the train at that point.

I contend killing Crowley was a game changer - we don't have evidence of what Dabb planned but Crowley had become a reluctant ally/

I think the AU was a game changer -- can't go back from what happened there and bringing back dopplegangers (including AUMichael).

Jack is a game changer -- they've turned him into family.

Killing Lucifer -- that's a series level villain gone.

[Res]

2 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

People will tune in to the premiere to see Michael. And mark my words, if the numbers are good for that and the follow up,  Leader Sam and his beard will get the credit. If it tanks, it'll be how people didn't want Michael Dean, or Jensen somehow didn't bring it. Bet on it.

Which is why I'm not watching at all, especially to give Sam's beard viewership, and, yes, I know, I'm automatically replaced by a tweeny from Netflix. *eyeroll* What a statement about valuing your viewership. In any case, I can't stand watching how they treat Dean and Jensen anymore. Apparently, it's never going to get better because we are all so easily replaced by Netweens and we question way, way too much. 

I will however join the #DabbSucks Campaign and add a few others to it without using the SPN hashtag, including #SorryNOTSorry. This show and Dean has meant so much to me and helped me through so much over the past 10+ years of live viewing . . . to have someone dismiss the show and it's loyal viewers like this . . . to treat us like we are equal to any Netween that randomly binges the show is just so . . . to quote Dean, "There aren't words."

#DabbBeyondSucks

Edited October 9, 2018 by Res

[Lastcall]

1 hour ago, SueB said:

It's enough to have gotten a S14.

That wasn’t your argument. You said the losses were being replaced. Some are but the replacements are less than what the show is losing. If all you are worrying about is the show being renewed then you are fine. Unless this is a bigger train wreck then any of us could imagine we are virtually garunteed a season 15 (he probably signed a 2 year deal) and possibly a season 16 or 17 if walking dead keeps hemorrhaging and they bring back JDM. It’s all going to come down to Jensen and at the very least we know he is upset with the season 13 finale. We also know the long hours are starting to get to everyone. The season is down to 20 and they have cut 2019 convention dates. He has said in some of the episode count interviews that the only thing he wants is more time and that if they hade a 13 episode count he could do another 30 years (joking). Anything after 15 is up to Jensen, I think if they keep sidelining Dean and making he a prop for Dabb’s pet characters and failed spin off’s then Jensen will finally pull the trigger.

[Myrelle]

I think that the big draw for the premiere is still Michael!Dean and I think that the PTBs know this. 

[tessathereaper]

13 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

http://therestorer.tumblr.com/post/178851894316/business-insider-supernatural-will-be-missing

Ha Ha.  Suck it Dabb.

I bet this ruined  his morning.

Poor Dabb was probably crying in his Wheaties.  "But WHYYYYYYYYYYY don't they love Sam that way, but WHYYYYYYYYYY don't they  love my Wayward Sisters that way, but WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYAAAAAAAAHHHHH::incoherent babbling mess on the floor::"

[SueB]

2 hours ago, Lastcall said:

That wasn’t your argument. You said the losses were being replaced. Some are but the replacements are less than what the show is losing. If all you are worrying about is the show being renewed then you are fine. Unless this is a bigger train wreck then any of us could imagine we are virtually garunteed a season 15 (he probably signed a 2 year deal) and possibly a season 16 or 17 if walking dead keeps hemorrhaging and they bring back JDM. It’s all going to come down to Jensen and at the very least we know he is upset with the season 13 finale. We also know the long hours are starting to get to everyone. The season is down to 20 and they have cut 2019 convention dates. He has said in some of the episode count interviews that the only thing he wants is more time and that if they hade a 13 episode count he could do another 30 years (joking). Anything after 15 is up to Jensen, I think if they keep sidelining Dean and making he a prop for Dabb’s pet characters and failed spin off’s then Jensen will finally pull the trigger.

I meant losses are being replaced sufficiently to renew the show.  That's all I'm concerned about.

Don't really care if people walk away from the show due to story X or Y, so long as there are enough people watching to keep it renewed, I'm good.  I'm saying that people have left all the time but we are getting sufficient replacement viewers to keep the show renewed.  That's it.  

[Katy M]

14 minutes ago, SueB said:

I meant losses are being replaced sufficiently to renew the show.  That's all I'm concerned about.

Don't really care if people walk away from the show due to story X or Y, so long as there are enough people watching to keep it renewed, I'm good.  I'm saying that people have left all the time but we are getting sufficient replacement viewers to keep the show renewed.  That's it.  

Sometimes, I feel like you and I are the only two people who still like the show.

[mertensia]

3 hours ago, Katy M said:

Sometimes, I feel like you and I are the only two people who still like the show.

No, I do and I know of a few others who do as well but they choose not to post here anymore.

[Lastcall]

4 hours ago, SueB said:

I meant losses are being replaced sufficiently to renew the show.  That's all I'm concerned about.

Don't really care if people walk away from the show due to story X or Y, so long as there are enough people watching to keep it renewed, I'm good.  I'm saying that people have left all the time but we are getting sufficient replacement viewers to keep the show renewed.  That's it.  

     I don’t think the show is in any danger of being cancelled. Everyone should be signed for 15 and all the show really has to do is stay ahead of the other CW shows. After that it all comes down to keeping Jensen and Jared happy. It is apparent that something is happening behind the scenes and it is affecting the show negatively. I think both actors are transitioning away from the show but want it to continue in some form be it movies or limited series. From the off the cuff convention interviews it seems like Jensen’s magic number is 13, Jared’s is 6 to 8 (or Gilmore type Netflix movies) and Warner Bros is 20. Whatever is going on there are obvious signs of wear, most noticeably the reduced number of episodes and convention appearances.

      The biggest threat to the show right now is Dabb and co doing to Dean/Jensen what they did to Crowley/Mark Sheppard. There is an article on SyFy Wire where Sheppard lays out exactly what happened and why he left. The current writers had no idea what to do with him and actively tried to get rid of him for two years. He confirmed what a lot of fans were saying in season 12. They had no idea what to do with Crowley so they used him as a prop for their favorite pet character/actor Lucifer/Pellegrino. They turned the smartest character in the room into the dumbest within two seasons. Now a lot of fans are seeing the same thing happen to Dean in service of Sam and Dabb’s new toys. Even that is fine as long as Jensen is happy but he has been noticeably more critical of the show at least in regards to the puppet fight.

[Myrelle]

7 hours ago, Lastcall said:

From the off the cuff convention interviews it seems like Jensen’s magic number is 13, Jared’s is 6 to 8 (or Gilmore type Netflix movies) and Warner Bros is 20. Whatever is going on there are obvious signs of wear, most noticeably the reduced number of episodes and convention appearances.

I wish they'd just let it end it instead of allowing what's happening to continue happening with Dabb and Singer at the helm.

That Mark Sheppard story sounds right going by everything that happened on-screen with Crowley, too. It's scary to think that they could do something like that to one of their most popular characters in favor of another character who they thought was as popular (or more popular) than him, especially with it being extremely debatable as to whether that's even true; although maybe they didn't even care about the popularity thing. Maybe they just liked Pellegrino and his Lucifer better than Mark's Crowley. That seems more likely going by all the gushing they did over MP and Lucifer at Comic Con this summer.

For my part, I'd much rather they'd have kept MS' Crowley than Pellegrino's Lucifer, so the trade was a poor one to me. Very poor.

[gonzosgirrl]

Spoiler

Ackles: I was told by [executive producer] Andrew Dabb that what Dean experiences as Michael will come back to haunt him. I’m not quite sure how yet.

Quoting myself here for the BvJ portion of my response.  (Link to the article with MAJOR spoilers - beware)

Spoiler

Sigh. So they can spend 1/2 of S6 and 1/2 of S7 not to mention multitudes of episodes since on Sam's Hell trauma and angel-possession aftermath, but as of now (episode 8 plus whatever Jensen has read, there has been nothing for Dean. Oh, Jensen, when will you learn not to put stock in 'told by Andrew Dabb'? Let me guess - they were going to do it, but then they had to make room for the 300th episode and then it just didn't quite fit after that.

Edited October 10, 2018 by gonzosgirrl

[Pondlass1]

15 hours ago, Lastcall said:

Anything after 15 is up to Jensen

Definitely.  And he could walk... and there goes the show.  Jensen is beyond loyal but he is becoming outspoken in terms of his disenchantment.  Last spring he was so enthused about Michael.  I can imagine his disappointment now that they're 8 (?) episodes in.  Michael goes nowhere, just like DD, purgatory, Amara, etc.

And that epic Michael vs Lucifer fight to end all fights!! Those guys were trussed up for three days for pete's sake!!  Dabb must've seen from the first dailies that it wasn't going to read on screen.

I hope his management is putting out feelers for new projects.

[ILoveReading]

16 hours ago, SueB said:

By the definition of "status quo shake ups they can't drop":

Bringing Mary back was a game changer - technically Carver but Dabb was driving the train at that point.

I contend killing Crowley was a game changer - we don't have evidence of what Dabb planned but Crowley had become a reluctant ally/

I think the AU was a game changer -- can't go back from what happened there and bringing back dopplegangers (including AUMichael).

Jack is a game changer -- they've turned him into family.

Killing Lucifer -- that's a series level villain gone.

It also depends on what they too with it too.  IMO a lot of this stuff was dropped. 

They stopped trying to reintegrate Mary after ep 3.  Then just went back to the tried and true.  It's all Dean's fault.

They killed and brought Crowley back multiple times.  Mark Sheppard even agrees they were trying to get rid of him and dumbed him down.  Apparently Dabb wanted him to come back for guest appearances.  So they really didn't kill him off with the intention of staying dead.  Mark put the fork in that plan not Dabb. 

What exactly did they use the AU for?  They used it to cheat and bring back Bobby and Charlie.  It was under majority underused. 

Jack- was a pure snowflake.  Nothing game changing about it.  Everyone one this show becomes family.  It's becoming as pointless as death.

Killing Lucifer.   I'll believe it when I see it.

I don't consider killing off a villian taking a risk.  Villans are supposed to be defeated the by the good guys. 

It's like I said.  They pretend to want to take a risk and then they go right back to the status quo every time. 

[Myrelle]

I'm going to put this here, just to be safe.

I found the actors answers to all of the questions in the TV Guide magazine article very illuminating where it concerns the actor personalities and how much that could have and might have(IMO) affected what's been going on BTS of this show since pretty much Day One, but more so since S5.

Just some examples:

Everyone tried out for Sam at the beginning because he was the pivotal character-then.

And both actors, in addition to JP's manager's, responses to Kripke wanting more of a book-ish type, such as Duchovny, for the Sam role. 

Edited October 10, 2018 by Myrelle

[Lastcall]

3 hours ago, Pondlass1 said:

Definitely.  And he could walk... and there goes the show.  Jensen is beyond loyal but he is becoming outspoken in terms of his disenchantment.  Last spring he was so enthused about Michael.  I can imagine his disappointment now that they're 8 (?) episodes in.  Michael goes nowhere, just like DD, purgatory, Amara, etc.

I’ve obviously been thinking about this way too much lately but it occurred to me that this always happens around contract signing time. They have been doing 2 year contracts since they decided to go beyond Kripke’s 5 year plan. Jensen was unhappy with the way season 7 was going and the season ended with the WB firing the showrunner and Dean getting the Purgatory arc. Jensen was really excited then Singer ruined it. Season 9, Dean turned into a demon and they spent the summer promoting the year of the deanmon. Singer ruined it and the year became 3 episodes. Season 11, Dean saved creation, a new show runner became official and Jensen seemed excited to have Mary reintroduced. Now at the end of 13, he got the Lucifer kill and the Michael arc and again Jensen was excited. Any time Jensen is asked about regrets he brings up purgatory, Deanmon and now the puppet fight. Makes me wonder what they are going to try at the end of 15 to get him to sign again.

Edited October 10, 2018 by Lastcall

[gonzosgirrl]

7 minutes ago, Lastcall said:

I’ve obviously been thinking about this way too much lately but it occurred to me that this always happens around contract signing time. They have been doing 2 year contracts since they decided to go beyond Kripke’s 5 year plan. Jensen was unhappy with the way season 7 was going and the season ended with the WB firing the showrunner and Dean getting the Purgatory arc. Jensen was really excited then Singer ruined it. Season 9, Dean turned into a demon and they spent the summer promoting the year of the deanmon. Singer ruined it and the year became 3 episodes. Season 11, Dean saved creation, a new show runner became official and Jensen seemed excited to have Mary reintroduced. Now at the end of 13, he got the Lucifer kill and the Michael arc and again Jensen was excited. Any time Jensen is asked about regrets he brings up purgatory, Deanmon and now the puppet fight. Makes me wonder what they are going to try at the end of 15 to get him to sign again.

I honestly believe he was excited by the Michael role and believed it was going to be something other than what it is. IMO, his enthusiasm has waned right along with ours (meaning the Jensen fans). Seriously, if he falls for Singer/Dabb promises ever again, then I just don't know.

1 hour ago, Myrelle said:

I'm going to put this here, just to be safe.

I found the actors answers to all of the questions in the TV Guide magazine article very illuminating where it concerns the actor personalities and how much that could have and might have(IMO) affected what's been going on BTS of this show since pretty much Day One, but more so since S5.

Just some examples:

Everyone tried out for Sam at the beginning because he was the pivotal character-then.

And both actors, in addition to JP's manager's, responses to Kripke wanting more of a book-ish type, such as Duchovny, for the Sam role. 

I had the same thoughts. Jensen 'joking' about him(self) being too dumb for the Sam role. Jared's (and his manager's) assertions that he most definitely was not too dumb for it. Seems that patterns were established right from the jump.

It's also pretty clear that the Dean role was never supposed to be what it grew into when they realized what they had in Jensen.

[Lastcall]

3 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

It's also pretty clear that the Dean role was never supposed to be what it grew into when they realized what they had in Jensen.

That’s where Kripke deserves a boat load of credit.  He saw Jensen as a compliment to the show and not a detriment. He adapted and elevated Dean from sidekick to equal right from the jump. He didn’t get angry or blame the character for stealing the spotlight, he took advantage of it and I think he did a pretty good job balancing Sam and Dean on his watch.

[Res]

3 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

I honestly believe he was excited by the Michael role and believed it was going to be something other than what it is. IMO, his enthusiasm has waned right along with ours (meaning the Jensen fans). Seriously, if he falls for Singer/Dabb promises ever again, then I just don't know.

IF he does, well, he has a young family to provide for and this is stable, even if it is becoming VERY degrading to his character, talent and craft, IMHO. IF his fans fall for it again, well, they are just wanting to be slapped again since it will be the 5th time they've done it. They've never really had any respect for Dean as an individual beyond Sam and what he brought to the table for/with regards to Sam, obviously, IMHO, which is why I have absolutely no respect for any of them now.

1 minute ago, Lastcall said:

That’s where Kripke deserves a boat load of credit.  He saw Jensen as a compliment to the show and not a detriment. He adapted and elevated Dean from sidekick to equal right from the jump. He didn’t get angry or blame the character for stealing the spotlight, he took advantage of it and I think he did a pretty good job balancing Sam and Dean on his watch.

Actually I firmly believe that Kim Manners is the one that convinced Kripke and Singer of this which is why it all fell away after Manners death at the beginning of S4.

[FlickChick]

13 minutes ago, Res said:

Actually I firmly believe that Kim Manners is the one that convinced Kripke and Singer of this which is why it all fell away after Manners death at the beginning of S4.

This! So Much! His loss to this show was devastating because he brought balance to the show/tell and was on site to oversee production. I also believe that his ideas/thoughts/talents were valued by Kripke. RIP Kim, I wonder what the show would be today with your guiding hand. :(

[Lastcall]

1 hour ago, FlickChick said:

This! So Much! His loss to this show was devastating because he brought balance to the show/tell and was on site to oversee production. I also believe that his ideas/thoughts/talents were valued by Kripke. RIP Kim, I wonder what the show would be today with your guiding hand. :(

I agree with what a huge loss his passing was. Supernatural with Manners as show runner would have been epic.

I look at the Kripke era through rose colored glasses but I do remember noticing some of the fans starting to fracture into Dean vs Sam camps in the last couple of seasons. I just think Kripke was the best at maintaining a balance. Personally I think Kripke favored Sam as I feel he originally built the show around him. Gamble definitely favored Sam while Carver was the only show runner that ever seemed to favor Dean. The thing is Kripke, Gamble and Carver would at least throw a bone to the fans that favored the other characters. Dabb doesn’t possess that ability. It’s Sam’s world and if you don’t like it, Dean goes into time out. 

[AwesomO4000]

34 minutes ago, Lastcall said:

The thing is Kripke, Gamble and Carver would at least throw a bone to the fans that favored the other characters.

I kind of disagree with you here. As far as I was concerned, Carver threw no bones at all Sam fans' way - at least not this Sam fan. He made his own character Benny a "better brother" than Sam and went out of his way to make Sam look like a jerk in season 8. He gave Sam no plausible reason for not looking for Dean or abandoning Kevin. He gave Sam an awful soap opera romance arc, then he gave Sam the trials with no intention of having Sam finish them or even being more than a coughing damsel in distress during them with Benny having to save him during the most important trial. Season 9 had potential, but once again Carver's own original character was allowed to over-shadow Sam. Sam's arc was shoved into the background while Gadreel was given a meatier arc and larger role in saving the world while Sam was made to "see the light" and accept his tormentor as a "misunderstood" "friend," while learning how wrong he was to be angry at his mistreatment. In season 10, Sam was allowed to finally save Dean, but only with the caveat that he be seen / questioned as maybe being worse than a monster and that his actions caused another apocalypse. He was chastised and said to be wrong by every character for trying to save Dean, including later God himself. If there's a significant bone there somewhere, this fan missed it. I somewhat liked season 10, but I think that was most likely in spite of Carver rather than because of him. I really liked season 11, but I'm almost positive that that was because of Dabb rather than Carver.

For me, Carver almost ruined Sam's character so his own characters could shine, and I was so glad when he was gone.

6 hours ago, Lastcall said:

Jensen was unhappy with the way season 7 was going and the season ended with the WB firing the showrunner and Dean getting the Purgatory arc.

Too bad, because I loved season 7 and would love to have seen what Gamble did with the purgatory arc. And since I hated what Carver did with the show, I feel kind of cheated.

Edited October 11, 2018 by AwesomO4000

[Myrelle]

6 hours ago, FlickChick said:

This! So Much! His loss to this show was devastating because he brought balance to the show/tell and was on site to oversee production. I also believe that his ideas/thoughts/talents were valued by Kripke. RIP Kim, I wonder what the show would be today with your guiding hand. :(

Yeah, looking back, IMO, it was KM's loss, more than anything else, that affected the show so adversely. He was a visionary in his field and they were so lucky to have had him and I don't think the show has ever recovered from his loss. And while I believe Kripke respected Jensen's talent, it didn't prevent him from screwing both the actor and his character over after The End aired. Everything concerning the showrunning and the writing changed for the worse after that episode, IMO. And it happened so quickly.

As showrunners go, I think that Gamble and Dabb are cut from the same cloth. It wouldn't surprise me if they've been e-mailing each other since Dabb took over especially considering what Dabb has been trying to do for the last few seasons with this whole Leader Sam thing. And Dabb likely learned from her that the better way to make that happen is to just not write for Dean at all, instead of simply "domesticating" him and giving Sam the badass "new Dean" role while attempting to relegate JA's Dean back to the strictly supportive of JP/Sam role that Kripke originally meant for the character to hold-before he saw JA take on the role, that is. I think Kripke still tried to put Dean in that role, at times, but I DO think that he realized pretty early on that it was going to be very hard to keep JP/Sam as the sole pivotal character with JA in the picture, too.

Dabb is by far my least favorite of all the showrunners, with Gamble a close second, as far as that goes(and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if Dabb also told JP that he was going to make him into the "new Dean", but he probably told JP to keep his mouth shut about it this time).

I honestly feel as if Kripke simply lucked out by having Kim Manners for most of his tenure.

Carver had a rocky start. S8 was definitely a miss. The only good thing that came out of that season to me was Benny and Purgatory and they were both so short-lived. And the second half of his S8 was every bit as bad as Dabb's 12B to me. And while I think that we were supposed to see Dean as being in the "wrong" in S9A, Jensen so undermined the writing in that first half, that having gotten to know the character so well through his previous portrayals, and given his performance in those first episodes, it was very easy for no few of us to understand the complexity of Dean's motivations at that point, and to even feel empathy for him, under the circumstances(I've always genuinely felt that, more than any other seasons, Jensen should have been nominated for an emmy in seasons 3 and 9). I recently re-watched Holy Terror and the scene when he told Sam that he'd let Gadreel possess him was a thing of such beauty, and I don't think I really realized how great it was until I just saw it again. So many words, so many emotions, and all of it having to be delivered so quickly and in such a desperate manner. I was newly amazed at him, even after having watched him for all these years. So while it was happening in real time, I wasn't thrilled, but in hindsight,  Carver's S9A lead into the episode First Born, which I've always felt was one of the best flying without a net type of gambles that this show has ever taken. S9, on the whole, renewed the love I'd lost for this show from S5-8, and S10, while far from perfect, still held my interest pretty well, right up until the finale-which, sadly was a bust, but you could feel it coming. Still, I have to give Carver credit where credit is due, and I'm not sure that I'd still be watching this show, but for his S9and 10.

As for feeling cheated, I think if you only feel like you've been cheated by 1 of the 4 showrunners on this show, you're pretty darn lucky because I feel like, on the whole, I've been cheated big-time by 3 of them.

[AwesomO4000]

23 minutes ago, Myrelle said:

Instead of simply "domesticating" him and giving Sam the badass "new Dean" role while attempting to relegate JA's Dean back to the strictly supportive of JP/Sam role that Kripke originally meant for the character to hold-before he saw JA take on the role, that is.

I didn't see this as the goal. For me, the Dean and Lisa and Ben arc had a point in the story... unlike the Sam/Amelia arc which seemed to me to have none. I didn't like the way it was ended, but I could see what it was trying to say. That Dean could try to have a "normal" domestic life and even to an extent achieve it, but in the end, his childhood and upbringing were eventually going to creep into that and make "normal" something out of reach. He couldn't leave behind his knowledge of the dangers out there in the world, and that was always going to color the way he saw his life and his responsibility for a family. And I thought that the arc did communicate that well.

And if by "badass 'new Dean'" role you mean Soulless Sam, I for one saw no resemblance. Soulless Sam was a sociopath. Soulless Sam had no empathy - which Dean has in spades. Soulless Sam's "humor" was often cruel - which Dean's is not. Soulless Sam was untenable and as such lasted less than half a season. And Dean not only saved Sam, but he killed The Phoenix, he killed Eve, and he had plenty of active roles in many other episodes of the week, including an active role in the final conflict. It wasn't like season 9 where Sam had pretty much no active hunting role the entire season - saves by Gadreel don't count - and in most cases was the damsel in distress, and Sam spent the big showdown in the finale being unconscious. Sam may not have been "domesticated," but he was for the most part taken out of the action for most of the season so that Gadreel could save the day and have his big redemption arc. Worse, in order to up the angst, Sam's usually forgiving nature was ignored and his arguments made weak in order to make him seem unreasonable. I don't think Gamble did anything remotely similar to Dean. Wiping Lisa's and Ben's memories wasn't a high point for the character, but it wasn't anywhere near as awful as the "The Purge" speech or "Citizen Fang" were to Sam's character. In my opinion anyway.

58 minutes ago, Myrelle said:

And while I think that we were supposed to see Dean as being in the "wrong" in S9A, Jensen so undermined the writing in that first half, that having gotten to know the character so well through his previous portrayals, and given his performance in those first episodes, it was very easy for no few of us to understand the complexity of Dean's motivations at that point, and to even feel empathy for him, under the circumstances

I had few problems with season 9A, and while I didn't think that we were supposed to see Dean as "wrong," I had no problem with Dean's motivations and found them understandable and empathetic. I am one who thought that Dean was right to have an angel possess Sam, and while I was less happy with him for the lying to Sam's face and not really seemingly understanding how much trauma he caused Sam, I understood it. My problem came with the "victimizing" of Dean in the second half of the season. I was less happy when it was made obvious - to me anyway - that Sam was going to be turned into the bad guy. The unforgiving brother who blamed Dean for his own choices rather than being allowed to be angry about the actual transgression against him - the lying and aiding Gadreel in his possession - so that Dean could look more sympathetic. And then of course Gadreel was softened leading up to his redemption, making it seem like Sam had no real reason to be angry anyway, because Gadreel was just a misunderstood guy who wanted to redeem himself.

In other words, even though Sam had all this stuff done to him by other characters, his trauma was ignored and he was the one who was made to look unsympathetic (and I don't think it was an accident.) And that was Sam's only role in the season, because he had no active role in the story either. Everything was done to him, and he wasn't a part in any of the action. Gadreel was even given a more sympathetic and redemptive narrative in the end, and he'd actually gone around killing a bunch of innocent people, including Kevin. Hell, even I was sympathetic to Gadreel by the time season 9 was ending. That's some pretty heavy duty narrative manipulation in my opinion, and I think they threw Sam under the bus to accomplish it.

I think the season could have been great for me if Carver had bothered to give all of the characters a sympathetic point of view rather than making one (Sam) look badly to make the others (Dean and especially Gadreel) look better. Unfortunately since that wasn't a random accident in my opinion - Carver did the same thing in season 8 with Benny - that was a deal-breaker for me disliking season 9. Once okay***, but twice, I'm going to see a pattern and an "on purpose" rather than an accident.

*** (though it was pretty bad - bad enough to make me stop watching the show for a while in season 8.)

1 hour ago, Myrelle said:

S10, while far from perfect, still held my interest pretty well, right up until the finale-which, sadly was a bust, but you could feel it coming.

I actually liked season 10, because at least Sam was starting to seem like Sam again... but of course Carver couldn't help himself and had to have Sam do the lying thing and start an apocalypse. As I said, it was what seemed like the "on purposes" that made me glad when he left.

[Myrelle]

3 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

And if by "badass 'new Dean'" role you mean Soulless Sam, I for one saw no resemblance. Soulless Sam was a sociopath. Soulless Sam had no empathy - which Dean has in spades. Soulless Sam's "humor" was often cruel - which Dean's is not. Soulless Sam was untenable and as such lasted less than half a season. And Dean not only saved Sam, but he killed The Phoenix, he killed Eve, and he had plenty of active roles in many other episodes of the week, including an active role in the final conflict. It wasn't like season 9 where Sam had pretty much no active hunting role the entire season - saves by Gadreel don't count - and in most cases was the damsel in distress, and Sam spent the big showdown in the finale being unconscious. Sam may not have been "domesticated," but he was for the most part taken out of the action for most of the season so that Gadreel could save the day and have his big redemption arc. Worse, in order to up the angst, Sam's usually forgiving nature was ignored and his arguments made weak in order to make him seem unreasonable. I don't think Gamble did anything remotely similar to Dean. Wiping Lisa's and Ben's memories wasn't a high point for the character, but it wasn't anywhere near as awful as the "The Purge" speech or "Citizen Fang" were to Sam's character. In my opinion anyway.

Well, IMO, Dabb "balanced" things up in spades for you(and more) in most of these thoughts when he took over as showrunner(and having Sam give Dean the "bumper stick" speech was especially galling to me, but all part of his new Leader Sam, I suppose).

And as for the bolded part-perhaps not Gamble per say, but see S5, starting with Fallen Idols if you need to see that this was done to Dean also and we've gone round and round on those other two episodes so I'll just leave it at agree to disagree that it was the writer's intent to make Sam look bad in both of those episodes.

3 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I actually liked season 10, because at least Sam was starting to seem like Sam again... but of course Carver couldn't help himself and had to have Sam do the lying thing and start an apocalypse. As I said, it was what seemed like the "on purposes" that made me glad when he left.

And tbh, this thread is not meant for arguing, so I'll just say yet again that I could come up with a counterpoint(and often times more than one) to support my belief that Dean has been done wrong by the showrunners, but those kind of "on purposes" you mentioned for making you glad that Carver left are the same kind that made me glad when Gamble left and are making me wish  with all that's in me that Dabb would leave(and take Singer and the whole writers room with him, too).

And I don't think the Sam fandom has ever or will ever experience the kind of sting that happened to JA/Dean and the Dean fandom in S5, post The End-although, for you, it sounds like that might have come close to happening in S9m but for me that was after it had happened again in S8 to no few of us in the Dean fandom-so while I know well how you might have felt concerning your favorite, it was only what I had been experiencing under both Kripke and Gamble already, so for and to me, that was sort of Carver's brand of "balancing" things out-although he never spoke of it in that way, unlike Dabb's bunch whose brand of "balancing" simply tipped the scales more in Sam's favor yet again and by yet again employing the infamous zero-sum writing that we've been seeing much of since S5, IMO,

Spoiler

and that's put us right where we are now with Sam being given Dean's supposed leadership role while Dean is "away" and with no word yet on what Dean will be doing in that regard after his two episode stint as Michael comes to an end, but with ample reason to guess and believe that it will be the supportive follower of the much better than Dean ever was LeaderSam-who I'm sure he will be made to tell that to, in addition to apologizing to for the Gadreel possession, while Sam skates away yet again with never a mention made of any remorse over the Purge speech or what he did to Benny from Sam.

[gonzosgirrl]

6 hours ago, Myrelle said:

As showrunners go, I think that Gamble and Dabb are cut from the same cloth. It wouldn't surprise me if they've been e-mailing each other since Dabb took over especially considering what Dabb has been trying to do for the last few seasons with this whole Leader Sam thing.

She has been quite vocally supportive and praising of him on Twitter.

Quote

Dabb is by far my least favorite of all the showrunners, with Gamble a close second, as far as that goes(and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if Dabb also told JP that he was going to make him into the "new Dean", but he probably told JP to keep his mouth shut about it this time).

This. So much. I don't think it is coincidence that Jensen did the early promo of this season alone.

Quote

As for feeling cheated, I think if you only feel like you've been cheated by 1 of the 4 showrunners on this show, you're pretty darn lucky because I feel like, on the whole, I've been cheated big-time by 3 of them.

Sigh.

[ILoveReading]

IMO, Kripke had tremendous respect for Jensen and his talent, but I don't think he ever stopped seeing the show in terms of Sam being the pivot character.  I think Kim Manners and Jensen were really the only ones that saw the potential of the Dean as a character in this own right.  I also think Kim was the main reason why the show itsself was such a success in the early years   The further this show goes on from his death the more convinced I become of it.

Another reason I think this is that Kripkes other two shows, Revolution and Timeless were good shows but both struggled.   Althought I noticed how hard Kripke tried to turn Wyatt into Dean. 

I don't think its a coincidence that just after Kim died we got Fallen Idols and everything going back to revolving around Sam, and Dean literally being relegated to chauffeur. 

Sara was a self admitted Sam girl.  She didn't write for Dean.  I still remember s7 comic con interviews.  3 times Jensen was asked Dean's story and3 times he said he didn't have one.   I've heard different things about what she was left.  Everything from her decision to she was fired.   I don't know what's accurate.  I do know that shortly after s6 started they were so far over budget that Singer had to step in and then Kripke had to come back and write the finale.  I remember being so ticked off at that s6 finale that Jensen really could have stayed home for.  At least 30 minutes were in Sam's head.  (Which is why I disagree Sam doesn't get POV.  he gets plenty).

Renewal came late that year.  Which means Kripke wrote that episode it could have been the series finale.  Which brings me back to my original point.   Kripke saw this show is mostly about Sam. 

At least with Gamble, after Jensen spoke up at least we got badass Dean back who knew how to hurt and and skills.   Even if he didn't have a story at least he was still Dean. 

I'll give Carver credit for atleast attempting to give Dean a story, even if it fizzled out in the end.

Dabb is the absolute worst because he doesn't seem to care about the show or its history.  He does what he wants regardless.  I remember hearding Mark Sheppard say he mentioned the Mesopotamia thing to the writers and they were "who cares, this is what we're doing."   He even called the whole Rowena being Crowley's mom lazy writing.  

The problem with Dabb is that he doesn't see the characters.  He sees their casting call descriptions and he writes them based on those stereotypes.  Dean's the mouthbreathing idiot/funny guy.  Sam is everything else. 

5 hours ago, Myrelle said:

I recently re-watched Holy Terror and the scene when he told Sam that he'd let Gadreel possess him was a thing of such beauty, and I don't think I really realized how great it was until I just saw it again. So many words, so many emotions, and all of it having to be delivered so quickly and in such a desperate manner. I was newly amazed at him, even after having watched him for all these years. So while it was happening in real time, I wasn't thrilled, but in hindsight,  Carver's S9A lead into the episode First Born, which I've always felt was one of the best flying without a net type of gambles that this show has ever taken. S9, on the whole, renewed the love I'd lost for this show from S5-8, and S10, while far from perfect, still held my interest pretty well, right up until the finale-which, sadly was a bust, but you could feel it coming. Still, I have to give Carver credit where credit is due, and I'm not sure that I'd still be watching this show, but for his S9and 10.

S9 really grew on me, after I was able to watch it back without interruptions.  You could really see Dean's isolation and downward spiral right right from the start.  Jensen's acting was on a whole other level that season.  Especially, The Purge.  I could gush about that all day.   I don't think for one minute Caver's intention was for Dean to be seen as right.  I think he just underestimated Jensen's talent.  I always said that Jensen got tired of waiting for a storyline so he wrote one himself, with his body language and finding wasn't' written on the page.  I think it was supposed to be about Gadreel/Sam, but Jensen's acting turned it more into a story about Dean in a way Carver never foresaw. 

I also believe the same for s8.  I don't disagree with what Carver was going for.  To lessen the co-dependency.  I think he just failed in the exection becasue he had Sam give up without trying.  But I do think they were trying to make the audience side with Sam, given all Carver's and Singer's talk about mature Sam was and how Dean was being mean to him.  It's just once again they failed to take in the Jensen factor.   I would think after 14 seasons they might clue in, but they don't seem to have yet. 

Spoiler

This is what's bothering me about s14.  TBH, I expected to be disappointed with the Michael plot line or that it would get dropped before it was ever developed.  What irrates me more is stripping Dean's leadership and giving it Sam and acting like it should have been his along and Dean was never a good leader.  Just bossy and controlling and preventing Sam from reaching his true potential. 

How does Dean fit back into this new tight family unit that supposedly forms in Dean's absence?  Is he just going to be cheerleader and tell Sam has brave and special is he and how he a makes a better leader than Dean ever did, or tell Mary how great it is she found happiness with Bobby, and how what a precious little ball of nougat Jack is and how well he's adapting without powers.   And apolgize to Cas for not letting him form a friendship with Sam.

It sounds like there is absolutely nothing for Dean.  Not even the big brother role since apparently that's Sam's now too with Jack.  I wouldn't' be surprised if we get multiple references to that too.  

I'm kind of dreading the aftermath of Michael just for this reason.  I can see it being used to make Dean weak or make him screw up massively (such as resurrecting Lucifer, because we know the show would never make Sam or Nougat Cinnamon roll do it.) and make Sam have to clean up after desperate, sloppy,needy Dean. 

The only thing I can see Dean doing this season is holding Sam's cape and then apologizing for wrinkling it.

I don't believe for one minute Dabb struggled writing episodes without Dean.  He relished it. 

[Hana Chan]

I think that the show has dropped the ball on both characters repeatedly, but in the end, IMO Sam has gotten the serious short end of the stick. We've had multiple seasons where his motivations/actions were painted as unsympathetic while Dean often did similar things that were viewed in a different manner. Sam's yearning for "normal" at the beginning of the series was constantly painted as selfish since it pulled him away from his family and their mission, but when Dean had the chance for "normal" with Lisa (and then in flaskbacks in About A Boy), it was a horrible tragedy. Sam finds something with Amelia (one of the most poorly conceived storylines they'd ever come up for him) and if he showed any reluctance to return to hunting, he was the worst brother ever and could be replaced by a vampire (which is a real come down since Dean had tried to replace him with an angel previously). When Sam reappeared after going into Lucifer's box, Dean was highly reluctant to leave Lisa and Ben for the brother that he'd thought had died months before and spent multiple episodes bouncing back and forth between the two and eventually losing them was, again, painted as a tragedy for Dean. Dean sells his soul after Sam’s death, and it was portrayed as entirely understandable given his total anguish at losing his brother. When Sam went on his vengeance quest against Lilith, we were not asked to see him in a sympathetic light until midway through the season and by that point the impact of his very toal anguish at losing Dean (and blaming himself for Dean having made that choice) had little real impact. Dean took on the MoC in a rashly considered plan that he sincerely believed was necessary but in the end put the world at risk (and lead to unforeseen consequences), but we were never asked to view his actions in a negative light. Sam took up with Ruby to take on Lilith in a plan that he sincerely believed was necessary to save the world (and lead to major unforeseen consequences) but we were told outright that he was wrong throughout the season and how his character has been viewed by some in the fandom has never really recovered. Both men are victims of circumstances and their upbringings and the shitty hand that life has dealt them, but 9 times out of 10, it's only Dean that we're asked to really sympathize with.

And it doesn't help that Dean has gotten nearly all the big "wins", whether he was at the center of the storyline or not. He's killed Azalzal, Ruby, the Phoenix, the Mother of Monsters, Dick (the chief Leviathan), Zachariah. The one solid "win" that Sam rightly had was locking up Lucifer, but he wasn't even allowed to kill the being that had been responsible for all the torment he'd endured since infancy. That also had to go to Dean in order to facilitate Dean's latest "tragedy" - being alt/Michael's prom dress.

I don't think either side of the fandom is going to be happy, but I do find it difficult to swallow the idea that Dean as a character has been treated especially badly given the tremendous imbalance in how the two lead characters have been treated and portrayed. The few bones that get tossed Sam's way (like leading the hunters against the BMOLs) don't make up for the multiple seasons where Sam's character got put through the meat grinder and got no real reward or satisfying resolution in the end.

Edited October 11, 2018 by Hana Chan

[gonzosgirrl]

18 minutes ago, Hana Chan said:

Sam finds something with Amelia (one of the most poorly conceived storylines they'd ever come up for him) and if he showed any reluctance to return to hunting, he was the worst brother ever and could be replaced by a vampire (which is a real come down since Dean had tried to replace him with an angel previously).

He was the worst brother ever because he never tried to find Dean. He was a bad person because he left Kevin to twist in the wind. A reluctance to return to hunting had nothing to do with it. Not for this viewer anyway. The writing was and is what it is. Remove emotion and the bias of preferring one character over the other, and it's still what was written on the page. We were told by the writer and showrunner what their intentions were when they put those words to paper. We can say all we want that what they say doesn't matter - but if that's the motivation they gave the characters and the actors playing them, then I say it does matter. That the fans didn't accept that is another story.

As to the bolded - at least it's better than being replaced by a dog.

Edited October 11, 2018 by gonzosgirrl

[Lastcall]

I do sympathize with Sam fans on the Carver run. The only reason Carver is my favorite is he gave Dean the focus, gave him super powers and portrayed him as the badass monster killing machine I always loved and never thought I would see after seasons 1-7. I did see the trials as throwing a bone, Dabb hasn’t even given Dean that. Whoever the show runner is they should give something to both Sam and Dean regardless who their favorite is. Dabb doesn’t possess that ability. Gamble was very biased but she would allow episodes like live free twi-hard where Dean went medieval on the vampire nest. Kripke had his bias too but I never thought it was as bad as Dabb and Gamble though yes that could have been influenced by Manners.

[Myrelle]

44 minutes ago, Hana Chan said:

I don't think either side of the fandom is going to be happy, but I do find it difficult to swallow the idea that Dean as a character has been treated especially badly given the tremendous imbalance in how the two lead characters have been treated and portrayed. The few bones that get tossed Sam's way (like leading the hunters against the BMOLs) don't make up for the multiple seasons where Sam's character got put through the meat grinder and got no real reward or satisfying resolution in the end.

And again I say exchange the lead characters names in this paragraph and that's how this Dean fan feels about the overall writing of the series; oh, and add in there that Dean has been made to apologize for everything under the sun and so many times that even Dabb made a joke out of it during that ridiculous tween-like Lucifer episode in S11.

At least in S9, Sam was never made to grovel for anything that he'd done or said to Dean in S8 or 9, even while his own fandom felt that he had been more the victim in those seasons; while that was certainly not the case in S5 when Dean was made to apologize over and over again for everything under the sun while he was seen by his own fandom as more of the victim in S4 and 5.

Spoiler

I'm dreading the aftermath of the Michael possession for this reason more than any other. If I never have to see Dean apologize to another character on this show again, it will be too soon. I'm So. Done. with that particular aspect of the, IMO, completely biased and crap writing of the characters that, IMO, has always been supported, albeit to lesser and greater degrees, by every one of the showrunners on this show.

Edited October 11, 2018 by Myrelle

[Hana Chan]

47 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

He was the worst brother ever because he never tried to find Dean. He was a bad person because he left Kevin to twist in the wind.

This is exactly the point that I'm trying to make. We were given no reason as to why Sam did this that made any kind of sense with his character. This is the guy who was willing to burn down heaven and hell in order to try to get his brother back when Dean went to Hell, but we're supposed to buy that Dean vanishes and Sam just shrugs and goes "Whatever?" It became just another thing to point out that Dean is the loving, selfless brother while Sam is supposedly selfish garbage. I've read a ton of fanfic that makes more sense about this than what appeared in the show that was respectful to both brothers.

Both sides of the fandom have every right to feel aggrieved and this is due to shoddy writing. We get a lot of stuff that happens just to create artificial drama or conflict, even when it's totally unnecessary because the basic plotline should give enough of both. There are a ton of times when real conversations would fix a lot of what upset viewers on all sides. Having Sam actually talk to Dean about his reasons for not looking for him while he was in Purgatory in a way that makes sense, or having Dean really appreciate that Sam would rather die than be possessed after what happened with Lucifer. Even to have one of those hard talks where they understand that they just will never see eye to eye on a point but that they both have valid points. 

And damn it... if there's one thing that I'm looking forward to with the DeanMichael storyline (however long it lasts) will be for Sam's POV to finally get some real focus. Because however much Jensen is on screen, it's not going to be Dean we're watching and I'm really hoping that Sam's viewpoint will come off the back burner. But knowing my luck, we'll have Cas, Mary or Jack taking the lead on that end.

[Pondlass1]

13 minutes ago, Hana Chan said:

There are a ton of times when real conversations would fix a lot of what upset viewers on all sides

This ^ is the crux of the problem with the current writing team.  Not that we want a soap opera, but come on... way too much is left unsaid.  

[gonzosgirrl]

It's not just us. The ultimate in BvJ.  (spoilers). LMAO!

https://www.facebook.com/entertainmentweekly/videos/305540706950676/

[Lemuria]

11 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

It's not just us. The ultimate in BvJ.  (spoilers). LMAO!

https://www.facebook.com/entertainmentweekly/videos/305540706950676/

ROTFLMAO!!!  That was hysterical.

[Pondlass1]

Jensen - apparently you don't need a hat to differentiate between Michael and Dean.  Judging by reviews of people who've seen the premier episode your portrayal of Michael is pretty damn brilliant. :)

[ahrtee]

8 minutes ago, Hana Chan said:

And damn it... if there's one thing that I'm looking forward to with the DeanMichael storyline (however long it lasts) will be for Sam's POV to finally get some real focus. Because however much Jensen is on screen, it's not going to be Dean we're watching and I'm really hoping that Sam's viewpoint will come off the back burner.

This is something I really don't understand.  Because Sam has explained over and over since season 1 why he does what he does, from leaving the family in the first place, through Ruby, Purgatory, Lucifer, Gadreel and the BMoL--he's explained and justified and (sometimes) accused every single time.  Just because people don't *like* his explanations or reasoning (or they sound unsympathetic) doesn't mean we don't know what they are.  

Personally, I think both boys are better/stronger/more understandable when they're apart--Sam can be empathetic, Dean can be badass without being overly protective, and they both can be leaders in their own right without taking anything away from the other.  But because TPTB (and the fans) seem to want them together all the time, there are going to be times when they're unsympathetic or downright unlikeable.   But we still know *why* they're doing whatever.  *shrugs*

 

[gonzosgirrl]

11 minutes ago, Lemuria said:

ROTFLMAO!!!  That was hysterical.

It's brilliant. They're joking and kinda really not, they don't mean it, but yeah they kinda do. F**king brilliant.

[catrox14]

29 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

It's not just us. The ultimate in BvJ.  (spoilers). LMAO!

https://www.facebook.com/entertainmentweekly/videos/305540706950676/

LOLOLOLOLOLOL That was fantastic.