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

[devlin]

19 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I legit thought the exact same thing.  Of course, and this is just opinion, it worked in that episode because IMO, Jensen played it with just the right amount of panic, and frustration with the tree, giving it just the lightest touch and it was heartbreaking yet slightly comical without being comedy. I felt like Jared played it just too straight and too much angst.

Which I personally think is why this show is turning into a melodramatic soap that is dripping with sap. They are relying on too many of these scenes using actors who only play what is written in the script and fail to give the writing any complexity. This is just my opinion but Jared’s forced sad eyed furrowed brow makes me roll my eyes. This is going back but one of my favourite moments is when dean is talking to sam’s body way back in season 2 in a time of his greatest grief his face twitches into a sardonic smile for just a fraction of a second 

[juppschmitz]

7 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

the episode that shall not be named.

 

[devlin]

Watching the first four episodes of season 13 and I had forgotten how clueless sam is regarding dean. He has got no idea how dean is actually feeling and tries to psychoanalyse him and put him into a box that suits sam’s own agenda 

[Res]

9 hours ago, devlin said:

Watching the first four episodes of season 13 and I had forgotten how clueless sam is regarding dean. He has got no idea how dean is actually feeling and tries to psychoanalyse him and put him into a box that suits sam’s own agenda 

+ Infinity loves!

[devlin]

i don’t understand the writers obsession with killing people only to bring them back. Why was sam so obsessed that jack be brought back to life? He barely knows the kid. If jack was hit and killed by a car would he insist that he brought back? Where does he draw the line? 

[Katy M]

2 minutes ago, devlin said:

i don’t understand the writers obsession with killing people only to bring them back. Why was sam so obsessed that jack be brought back to life? He barely knows the kid. If jack was hit and killed by a car would he insist that he brought back? Where does he draw the line? 

And what makes it worse is that every time someone dies and they don't try to bring them back, they kind of look like jerks.  Like, take Charlie for instance. Instead of driving the body to Cas to see if he could bring her back (no reason he shouldn't have been able to Gadreel did it the season before), they just immediately burned her body.  With the exception of Cas(and of course each other), Bobby is the character they've been closest to since they started bringing people back and they immediately burned his body.   Same with Kevin.  these are all people they were as close, or closer to, than Jack, but they did nothing to try to bring them back from the dead.  But, with Jack, they went to the trouble of finding a former angel killer, summoning an Egyptian god and sending Cas to Heaven.  I really wish they had somehow made the threat to Heaven known before they had started the whole process because then it would have been more reasonable.  At least as reasonable as anything on this show gets when it comes to resurrections.

[DeeDee79]

5 minutes ago, Katy M said:

Same with Kevin. 

I'm still disgusted with how the writers shit all over Kevin for a second time. He deserved another chance just as much ( or more ) as Charlie.

[AwesomO4000]

Brought over from the "Bitter Spoilers" thread. Mild spoilers tagged.

11 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

Apparently a fan asked what their favourite scenes of the Season were respectively. Jared said one

Spoiler

they are gonna shoot in a few days  - so obviously in episode 13. Sorry, such declarations from him usually make me shudder. Jensen said a "fairly epic bar scene" that is upcoming, too. Hm, depends on how that goes. I like badass!Dean so if it`s that, great. But doesn`t speak to the Season really that he thinks a bar fight is the fave. 

 

10 hours ago, devlin said:

As Jensen tends to celebrate his cast mates, I am thinking dean

Spoiler

is not even involved in the epic bar fight

 

I see stuff like this a lot, but I don't really understand it. If I am remembering correctly, Jensen has often cited the purgatory arc as one of his favorites and that was a terrible time period for Sam's character... I would say one of if not the worst arcs in the series history, and that time period wasn't much better for Castiel's character, either, so Jensen's liking that time in the show would be because of his own arc - which is perfectly understandable but, to me, not a reflection of wanting good arcs for other cast mates or wanting them to shine.*** If the "guilty cheerleader" thing is true, then it would seem to me that Jensen was somewhat annoyed by the shift in season 8 over to Sam's character, not celebrating it. I believe that Jensen also cites the mark of Cain arc as one of his favorites... and again perfectly understandable, but also again not a good time for Sam's character - I would say the second worst of the series. Sam does little but bitch and pout, gets pretty much victim blamed, and takes a backseat role - well really almost no role - in the finale except that he gets to play cheerleader for a minor character who was previously one of the bad guys.^^^

As for Jared, for a long time I remember him citing "Death's Door" as his favorite episode, and that's a Bobby episode, so I don't get the criticism that Jared only likes episodes and arcs that focus on his character.

Now I'll admit that I don't watch a lot of interviews from the actors, but based on these things, I just don't see either talking the other's arcs up very much or objecting on the other's behalf if the other gets a bad arc while he gets a good one. It seems to me that Jensen favors meaty arcs for Dean and Jared likes interesting arcs for Sam, just like almost anyone would for their character.

*** I don't think most actors would have been able to shine in that drivel that was the Amelia flashbacks... even if the actress had had chemistry with Jared - which she didn't even though plenty of actresses have in the past or would in the future (such as Sarah, Madison, Rowena, even Genevieve as Ruby. Even Meg #1: despite her being evil. Her and Sam's scene in "Shadow" had all sorts of chemistry, in my opinion. I felt kinda dirty and wrong for finding that scene in the warehouse where Meg had Sam tied up kinda hot, but still did nonetheless, because: chemistry.)

^^^ If anyone could have complained about having to be a "guilty cheerleader" I would say the final episodes of season 9 would fit the bill for Sam / Jared in my opinion as he was literally having to spout things like Gadreel not meaning any harm and being "misunderstood" and that he was a "real friend" just trying to help. Sam had to cheerlead for the being who rode around in his body and wiped his memories and used his body to kill Kevin. In my opinion, that's messed up.

[Myrelle]

IMO, JA/Dean has been saddled with the "guilty cheerleader" role since pretty much Day One of this show and he's usually relegated back to it eventually also, no matter the showrunner; whereas  Sam started out as "Our Hero"(according to Kripke in the commentary of the Pilot episode way back in S1-and yes, not "one of our heroes" or "one of our two heroes"-"Our Hero", singular) and(IMO) he has usually been elevated back to that status, eventually, and again, by every showrunner that this show has ever had.

I think the two italicised words above highlight the biggest difference in the writing for/of the two main characters on this show since pretty much the beginning of the series.

AND to make matters worse, they've all often attempted to take any or everything that JA's acting has imbued into his character(and often with very little support via any actual writing or dialogues from the writers that would add to what he managed to imbue his character with-such as leadership abilities) and hand it over to JP/Sam on a silver platter, while again ignoring "Sam's big brother", for the most part-which is how I think most of the showrunners and writers on this show have predominantly seen Dean/JA-again, since pretty much Day One of this show.

The only time that they've seemed to make any kind of a real effort at writing anything more or deeper for JA, as regards storylines that might look like they might possibly be followed through on, is when it's contract time, IMO-and with Dabb and co., I further think that they only pretended that they were going to make a real effort at that-having learned much from their predecessors in that regard.

So Sam being the guilty cheerleader for a season or two doesn't even come close to "balancing" things out on this show(something one of Dabb's cohorts named as a writing point and endeavor, back in S12B, IIRC) in that regard, for the two supposed main characters on this show.

And who is the guilty cheerleader now?(and yet again, for the umpteenth time), even though the S13 finale once again held so much promise for something more for Dean/JA.

They better come through with something more for both the character and the actor in the second half of this season, or this Dean fan will be calling it quits also.

Enough is enough of that shit. Every Dean fan that I know that's still watching is  STILL pissed as shit over what's happened in the first half of this season-and I further believe and think that JA is, too-or at least I hope he is, because he absolutely should be-IMO, of course.

Edited December 11, 2018 by Myrelle

[catrox14]

On 12/9/2018 at 2:56 AM, devlin said:

Watching the first four episodes of season 13 and I had forgotten how clueless sam is regarding dean. He has got no idea how dean is actually feeling and tries to psychoanalyse him and put him into a box that suits sam’s own agenda 

I agree. Unfortunately, the writers don't see it as Sam not understanding Dean but that Dean doesn't understand himself which I don't think is true at all. Dean was correct to not trust the son of Satan. TPTB had the option of making Dean's position and way of grieving as valid as Sam's and making Dean's emotions even anger as valid as Sam's opposite position but they did not do that. They chose each episode of s13 to show that Dean is a bad person for thinking with his Hunter mind and showing his emotions over the loss of Cas, Mary et al. Dean is damned if he shows his emotions and damned if he doesn't.

IMO, all the writers save Steve Yockey, failed to give Dean his due because it had to be Sam being right about Jack's goodness. It was always set up for Sam to be

The whole point of Jack IMO should have been about Cas figuring out how to be a father but in reality it was laways about giving Sam a child. I mean why not have the waitress that Sam hooked up with in s11 come back with Sam's kid and go that route rather than this whole thing?

IMO the show wants to be 19 different shows in one and that's what doesn't work because it's all so inorganic.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I see stuff like this a lot, but I don't really understand it. If I am remembering correctly, Jensen has often cited the purgatory arc as one of his favorites and that was a terrible time period for Sam's character...

Since they were talking about a favourite scene and Jensen

Spoiler

only mentioned some bar action scene (where I don`t even know if Dean gets to be badass vs. Jensen had some fun shooting it),

I didn`t take it in the vein of storyarcs. THAT I found to be the worst in the interview pre-Season 9 where Jared said he got a "wet dream of a storyline" and Jensen sat silent next to him during the entire interview.  

But this latest question only pertains to scenes. Why I`m still shuddering is that for Jensen,

Spoiler

well, the above. If Dean is not badass in an action scene, there is really no appeal for me. And it`s not heartening that nothing was more exciting for him so far then an upcoming bar brawl. Jensen is usually excited about mytharcs he likes so the Michael-story seems to continue to go on as meh for him.

And Jared saying he thinks a soon-to-be-shot scene is gonna be his favourite of the Season, well, I`m wondering if it`s gonna be some mega-super-pimping scene like in the Season Premiere where he yells at some demons and they skedaddle in the face of great leader!Sam. Just even more over the top.

I found that completely obnoxious in the Season Premiere. However it is a Dabb staple. 

From the second I heard about the 

Spoiler

concept for the 300th episode with "how others see the brothers", I shuddered because going by Dabb, I can already see Sam seen as the brave, smart, strong, empathetic hero and Dean as the uncouth, weak loser. So I doubly shudder now. 

Also, the episode itself might be super-Sam-centric with Dean in his "dumb sidekick" role. 

Maybe Jared means something different, like a scene with a guest star or whatnot but I can`t help but bracing myself. 

[AwesomO4000]

2 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

I didn`t take it in the vein of storyarcs. THAT I found to be the worst in the interview pre-Season 9 where Jared said he got a "wet dream of a storyline" and Jensen sat silent next to him during the entire interview. 

And yet look how that turned out. The writers might've told or implied to Jared that he was going to get a good storyline with the Gadreel arc, but in actuality, the season became mostly about Dean and his arc. Even the Sam storyline was ultimately about Dean and also Gadreel, because most of the things that storyline set up were summarily dropped for Dean's mark of Cain arc (where Sam's storyline became part of the motivation for Dean taking on the mark) and Gadreel's redemption. Sam spent the season being victimized by Gadreel, being a damsel in distress, and being painted as ungrateful for being angry about being betrayed and lied to.

Any supposed "truths" the writers gave Sam were turned to lies, and then via a retcon, Gadreel wasn't the villain, Sam's possession wasn't supposedly that bad, and Sam was partially blamed for Kevin's death because Sam supposedly didn't realize that Gadreel didn't have only good intentions. In one conversation, Gadreel was not only described as "misunderstood," but any questionable things Gadreel did while being misunderstood and finding his way to being a redeemed "hero" were also Sam's fault, because Sam was wrong and somehow should have known better.

Sounds to me like the "wet dream of a storyline" got turned into more of a nightmare. If Sam liked playing Gadreel things might've been good for him... until it turned out that Gadreel would be redeemed via another actor, while his character (Sam) was summarily trashed.

My opinion on all of that.

4 hours ago, catrox14 said:

IMO, all the writers save Steve Yockey, failed to give Dean his due because it had to be Sam being right about Jack's goodness.

I felt similarly about Benny in season 8. Sam was set up to be wrong even though he had a legitimate point and every episode set him up to show how awful and wrong he was to poor Benny. I actually found the set up there worse, myself.

In my opinion, this is what the writers do when they have new pet characters, even at the expense of some of the main characters.

At least with Jack, the writers are showing that it is Dean's approval he most wants and Dean's opinions he most values and admires. In general, characters who start out associated with or who are given a connection to Sam usually instead end up choosing Dean as their favorite or at least also have just as close a bond with Dean. The writers do this a lot of the time. Crowley, Kevin, Jodi, and now Jack. Sam generally gets to keep some of the evil characters though - like Ruby, Meg (though arguably she ended up more associated with Castiel) and Rowena. Yay?

6 hours ago, Myrelle said:

IMO, JA/Dean has been saddled with the "guilty cheerleader" role since pretty much Day One of this show and he's usually relegated back to it eventually also, no matter the showrunner; whereas  Sam started out as "Our Hero"(according to Kripke in the commentary of the Pilot episode way back in S1-and yes, not "one of our heroes" or "one of our two heroes"-"Our Hero", singular) and(IMO) he has usually been elevated back to that status, eventually, and again, by every showrunner that this show has ever had.

I disagree.

The way the Pilot was structured we started off with the point of view of Sam, so for that episode, yes, he was "Our hero." That didn't last, and neither did the POV.

And in my opinion, Sam was never the "hero" during Carver's stint as showrunner. And, no, the trials don't count in my opinion, because Sam failed to finish the trials, and chose his and Dean's life over closing the gates. The writers could have framed that as maybe a good idea, because closing the gates could have had bad consequences, but they instead left it as a failure on Sam's part and saved the bad consequences for season 10 - which they also made Sam's fault.

And while Kripke ultimately made Sam a hero - really the only consequential time the show did in my opinion*** - he first made him the bad guy... as would every other showrunner afterwards in some way or another (although Soulless Sam wasn't really Sam's fault). They do this with Castiel as well. In my opinion however, they don't do this with Dean. Dean gets to be the hero without ever having to be the bad guy. And even if Dean looks like he's going to be being set up as the "bad guy" he's given extenuating, sympathetic circumstances or everything is changed so that he's right and not really the bad guy after all.

Dean is the only main character who has diverted - either alone or with help - 3 apocalypses (at least) without being saddled with starting one. Both Sam and Castiel have at least 2 apocalypses to their names with maybe only one diverting of one each... one and half in the case of Castiel.

Since Chuck made it clear that Dean is the one who he depends on to be the hero and watch over the universe - with Sam as an afterthought also mention - in my opinion, I don't really see Dean as the "cheerleader." Nor do I think the show sees him as one. I think the show continually tells us that Dean is the one who everyone turns to for advice and as their rock, and if he isn't there to be that rock for everyone, things fall apart.

In my opinion, that's not a "cheerleader" but a foundation. Much different.

*** I thought Sam was heroic in "The Man Who Knew Too Much" but it really didn't amount to anything in the end.

7 hours ago, Myrelle said:

So Sam being the guilty cheerleader for a season or two

For me it was more that Sam was cheerleader for Gadreel that was the problem. And Sam has been cheerleader other times as well - season 3, the beginning of season 4, the second half of season 6, season 7 (Despite Dean supposedly being Sam's "stone number one" Sam did most of the cheerleading for a depressed Dean that season and supported him in his revenge endeavor), and season 11, sometimes, and also season 10 to an extent, although the show couldn't even let Sam be an effective cheerleader even though Sam was trying... so Carver even had Sam fail at that in most of season 10 and some of season 11.

Dean was cheerleader for seasons 1 and 2, the end of 5, the second half of season 8, and some of season 12... for me I'd say they were about even.

[devlin]

All I can say is god bless Jensen for giving it his all even when the writers treat him and his character like crap. He is a better person than me. He makes dean still the most interesting and engaging character I have had the pleasure of watching despite the dabb and the writers best efforts.

[ILoveReading]

13 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I felt similarly about Benny in season 8. Sam was set up to be wrong even though he had a legitimate point and every episode set him up to show how awful and wrong he was to poor Benny. I actually found the set up there worse, myself.

IMO, Sam was never meant to be wrong about Benny because he ended up getting his own way and Dean ended up looking jerk for cutting Benny off for no other reason than Sam had a temper tantrum.

13 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

the season became mostly about Dean and his arc

I don't think this was meant to happen, during the first half  I just think the writers constantly underestimate Jensen. IIRC, this was a contract year so I think that was what the back half was about.

Edited December 11, 2018 by ILoveReading

[AwesomO4000]

1 minute ago, ILoveReading said:

I don't think this was meant to happen.   I just think the writers constantly underestimate Jensen.

I might agree some on this if not for the Gadreel redemption and Sam's actions in the season finale. In my opinion, the writers had to have known they were going to have Sam try to save Dean after he was killed, so in my opinion, there was no way they were going to let Sam's "I wouldn't [save you]" stand. Dean was always going to be right about that, and his sacrifice - by dying and being turned into a demon - proved that Sam was also wrong about everything else. Dean did sacrifice himself and ended up with the consequences.

And I don't think that was ever planned to go another way, so Sam was going to be wrong from that point on... or at the least, very soon after that. It's possible they were going to let Sam keep his integrity (... oh who am I kidding? This was Carver: no they weren't.) And even the Kevin ghost story was set up so that what Dean did wouldn't have that bad of an impact. It all lead up to Dean being in the right in the end.

The Castiel / Sam conversation in "King of the Damned," retconning Gadreel and giving Sam some of the blame for Kevin might have just added insult to injury after the fact, but I think Sam's fate as wrong and looking badly while Dean helped save the day and made the sacrifice was sealed from early on... by near midseason at the latest. I think the story was always going to shift over to Dean, and in order for that to happen and for Gadreel to be redeemed, Sam's story and the emotional impact had to be dropped and retconned.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I might agree some on this if not for the Gadreel redemption and Sam's actions in the season finale. In my opinion, the writers had to have known they were going to have Sam try to save Dean after he was killed, so in my opinion, there was no way they were going to let Sam's "I wouldn't [save you]" stand. Dean was always going to be right about that, and his sacrifice - by dying and being turned into a demon - proved that Sam was also wrong about everything else. Dean did sacrifice himself and ended up with the consequences.

I don`t think the ending of Season 9 really undoes the Purge speech. Whenever the writers wanted to do "oh the irony" and undo previous dialogue, they are super-anvillicious and very, very clear about it. 

There is tell that is even overriding show. Like Bobby calling Sam out on leadership, that quickly being nixed as Bobby being wrong in the very next scene via Mary who acts as writer mouthpiece in that scene and than at the end Bobby crawling back in awe of leader!Sam. THAT is how you renege on negative statements about a character.

In the Season 9 Finale there was kinda, maybe, sorta a reneging on "I wouldn`t save you like this" - since Crowley appeared right away with his own plan, Sam`s hands were kept very clean because the episode didn`t outright say he would have done something to Dean akin like a possession against his will. 

And the other "truths" were never recanted and nothing in the Season 9 Finale did so either. The Purge speech was about how Dean was selfish and not a hero. The dramatic pay-off for that would have been something that shows he WAS a hero. And the Season 9 Finale made him an ineffectual chess piece with delusions of grandeur before turned into a demon. The Purge speech stands to this day. The writers of that episode most certainly intended it to be the "truth about Dean Winchester". 

Edited December 11, 2018 by Aeryn13

[ILoveReading]

Jared also said at a recent con he doesn't regret anything of the things Sam has said to Dean because they're is usally a grain of truth in them.  It seems he supports what Sam said in The Purge.

[devlin]

44 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

Jared also said at a recent con he doesn't regret anything of the things Sam has said to Dean because they're is usally a grain of truth in them.  It seems he supports what Sam said in The Purge.

The purge speech remains one of the most cruel things sam has ever said to dean. He was not under the influence of anything and he was not angry, sam actually thinks his brother is a horrible bad person. The fact it was never addressed and it was left to stand  leads me to believe that this is how the writers want us to see dean. I can’t think of another show which trash talks one of its lead characters this much. I honestly can’t understand where jared is coming from, I actually thought he understood and liked the character of dean but I guess not

[Aeryn13]

Quote

 I can’t think of another show which trash talks one of its lead characters this much.

Arrow might come closest - and whenever its lead character is on the Flash show, it`s open pitchforks Season. But even there it`s not as bad as on SPN.

[AwesomO4000]

3 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

In the Season 9 Finale there was kinda, maybe, sorta a reneging on "I wouldn`t save you like this" - since Crowley appeared right away with his own plan, Sam`s hands were kept very clean because the episode didn`t outright say he would have done something to Dean akin like a possession against his will. 

I guess it's interpretation, because I didn't think the writers were that subtle myself. In addition to having Sam say explicitly "I lied" about that (the not bringing Dean back), Carver had Crowley specifically say to dead Dean that Sam was summoning him to "make a deal. Bring you back." I thought that was pretty definitive myself.

And even though it could be argued that a deal wasn't having someone possess Dean, I would argue that a deal would have been even worse based on the now known consequences... And in case there was a question on that, the couple of previous episodes retconned Sam's possession against his will into not being that bad after all whereas we know the devastating effects of a deal and the guilt that Dean would have had to live with. And then season 10 took this concept further and showed us - and told us - that Sam would do something similar to what Dean had done... and even worse.

So I disagree that the writers were going for keeping Sam's hands clean in that they gave plenty of show and tell in this episode and then acted on that at the beginning of the next season.

3 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

And the other "truths" were never recanted and nothing in the Season 9 Finale did so either. The Purge speech was about how Dean was selfish and not a hero. The dramatic pay-off for that would have been something that shows he WAS a hero. And the Season 9 Finale made him an ineffectual chess piece with delusions of grandeur before turned into a demon.

Again I disagree. Dean wasn't "ineffectual" in that he did exactly as was planned. He kept Metatron busy while Castiel and Gadreel went to heaven to thwart Metatron. Without Dean distracting Metatron, there would have been no save, and in my opinion, this was set up as a sacrifice on Dean's part by showing that Dean was willing to sacrifice by being that distraction (rather than going with Crowley.) And as an extra there was a "tell," also...  In the same speech to dead Dean where Crowley assures us that Sam was summoning him to do something questionable to get Dean back, the writers also have him talk about how Dean sacrificed himself. Crowley compares Dean's death to how Cain tried to kill himself to keep the mark from making him a killer... not delusions of grandeur, but sacrifice: "But...there is one story about Cain that I might have forgotten to tell you. Apparently, he, too, was willing to accept death, rather than becoming the killer the Mark wanted him to be. So he took his own life with the Blade. He died..."

In my opinion, the writers showed us that Sam was going to do something wrong to get Dean back, and they set up what Dean did as a sacrifice where he was willing to die - thereby showing that both Sam's accusations in the "The Purge" speech weren't true - and then Carver had Crowley also "tell" us both those things, too, at the end of the episode 1) that Sam would do something nefarious to get Dean back and 2) That Dean was willing to accept death as a sacrifice... in this case not only to help heroically stop Metatron but also to heroically try to keep himself from succumbing to the mark of Cain. In my opinion the "tell" was right there. Just because Carver used Crowley to deliver that tell, to me, doesn't negate that it was there.

For me that was a pretty straightforward recanting of "The Purge" speech with both show and tell. Your miles may vary.

2 hours ago, devlin said:

He was not under the influence of anything and he was not angry,

I disagree. Sam was very angry. What pissed Sam off was Dean insinuating that Sam should be grateful that Dean had helped Gadreel possess him and lied to him. I know that pissed me off, so I'm pretty sure it pissed Sam off, too. It was after that that Sam got angry and came back with his hateful insults.

But again, I think that speech was mostly to set Sam up as wrong and Dean as the maligned, misunderstood party in this who would prove Sam wrong in the end, and almost everything that happened after that went in that direction, from ghost Kevin saving his mom to Gadreel being an important part of saving the world to Sam admitting he would do the same thing, before Dean did help to save the world, sacrificing himself to do so while Sam watched and felt guilty.

3 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

Jared also said at a recent con he doesn't regret anything of the things Sam has said to Dean because they're is usally a grain of truth in them. 

For me a "grain of truth" is a lot different than the whole shaker of salt.

Edited December 12, 2018 by AwesomO4000

[gonzosgirrl]

3 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

I don`t think the ending of Season 9 really undoes the Purge speech. Whenever the writers wanted to do "oh the irony" and undo previous dialogue, they are super-anvillicious and very, very clear about it.

Exactly. Dean wears the hair shirt for pretty much every bad thing he ever did or said*. Sam's vicious and hateful speech got exactly two words of dialogue - with questionable meaning at that - and was never addressed again. No one will ever convince me that it was not the writers' intention that we believe that speech to be a truthbomb, nor that they meant us to see Sam as wrong in any way.

 

*Just look at the ridiculous amount of 'regret' and 'remorse' over his treatment of the nougat baby (the son of Satan) for a couple of episodes. No less than three other characters so far this season have referred to it. Dean, however, got 'I lied'.

Edited December 12, 2018 by gonzosgirrl

[AwesomO4000]

2 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

No one will ever convince me that it was not the writers intention that we believe that speech to be a truthbomb, nor that that meant us to see Sam as wrong in any way.

I understand, because no one will really convince me that we weren't meant to see Sam as wrong - at the very least by the end.

If Gadreel had remained evil, Sam hadn't tried to bring Dean back, Kevin's death hadn't ended up as fortuitous, Sam's possession had remained as horrible, and Dean hadn't been shown as sacrificing to save the world then I would wholeheartedly agree with you.

But not one of those things happened, so I can understand where you're coming from, but I can't agree.

[gonzosgirrl]

17 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

If Gadreel had remained evil, Sam hadn't tried to bring Dean back, Kevin's death hadn't ended up as fortuitous, Sam's possession had remained as horrible, and Dean hadn't been shown as sacrificing to save the world then I would wholeheartedly agree with you.

But none of those things change what Sam said about Dean, to Dean. Whether or not Dean's actions were justified to us by those things (they weren't, to me, but I understand you see it this way), it doesn't change the fact that this is how Sam saw Dean. And nothing Sam has ever said or done leads me to believe he didn't mean it and doesn't feel that way. At best, "I lied" referred to his not saving Dean's life, not that Dean wasn't both selfish and cowardly, only willing to sacrifice if he wasn't the one being hurt, not to mention too insecure to live 'alone'. Those things were never canonically refuted.

[devlin]

2 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

 

I disagree. Sam was very angry. What pissed Sam off was Dean insinuating that Sam should be grateful that Dean had helped Gadreel possess him and lied to him. I know that pissed me off, so I'm pretty sure it pissed Sam off, too. It was after that that Sam got angry and came back with his hateful insults.

 

Sorry I phrased that wrongly. I meant he wasn’t angry in the heat of the moment. It came across to me as a very well thought out calculated speech designed to do the most damage. IIRC he didn’t attack dean about his actions but rather he dragged dean’s entire character through the mud by flat out saying he has done more bad than good in his life. I don’t know about you but if I had dedicated my life to putting others before me and my family had the nerve to tell me that I was basically  a bad person I would be devestated

[AwesomO4000]

8 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

And nothing Sam has ever said or done leads me to believe he didn't mean it and doesn't feel that way. At best, "I lied" referred to his not saving Dean's life, not that Dean wasn't both selfish and cowardly, only willing to sacrifice if he wasn't the one being hurt, not to mention too insecure to live 'alone'. Those things were never canonically refuted.

Which is why I say that Carver trashed Sam's character for some reason in season 8 and 9. He has Sam say those things, and then showed them to be wrong without allowing Sam to apologize. And I don't see any real reason for that except to make Sam look badly in comparison to Dean. This is only for the Carver years, because this is where I saw this trend in Sam's characterization. I had no problem with how Sam was written during the Gamble years and thought that the brother's relationship was written the best overall under her term as showrunner.

Even though I personally thought that what Sam said in "The Purge" was mainly out of anger, and that Sam's actions later somewhat mitigated what he said, I can see why others don't. And that Carver let that stand... and even had Sam say those things in the first place was - in my opinion - trashing Sam's character very similar to what he did in season 8. I thought both of those instances were out of character. Sam had generally been really forgiving in the past and he'd never been resentful of Dean's propensity to save him before. Sam had no bitter feelings from Dean making the deal for example.*** Just like Sam's not looking for Dean and abandoning Kevin in season 8 seemed to come flying out of nowhere, when Sam hadn't done that before - or if people want to count Sam breaking off from his family to go to college that, then at least since season 2. So 5+ seasons of character development tossed out the window for whatever ridiculous storyline that was. I still see no point to the Amelia arc, and have no idea what Carver was trying to say with it.

But I digress... back to my point... At that turning point in season 9 - and I believe that "The Purge" was that turning point - things went from Sam having emotional trauma from Gadreel and at least some point made out of Dean's lying, to Dean being justified in lying (in my opinion) when Dean's lying is conveniently forgotten (it's not mentioned at all in that "The Purge" speech even though for me the lying was the bad part. I'm on record as having no problem with the initial possession and thought that Dean did the right thing there), Gadreel is redeemed, and the entire nature of Gadreel's possession is changed from what it was to him being "misunderstood." At that point, Sam was thrown under the bus, in my opinion, and would always look like the crappy brother while poor, abused Dean was only doing what needed to be done to save Sam and look Gadreel wasn't so bad anyway, and he helped save the world. Which in my opinion, that right there pretty much justifies what Dean did. If the writers supposedly thought that it was so wrong, then why have Dean's actions lead to good results? They certainly have no problem with Sam's actions leading to bad ones, so why else make the results so different except to prove a point of some kind?

Because when Sam lies to Dean in season 10, the narrative makes sure to point it out at every opportunity, lets Dean - of course while "under the influence," so as not to trash his character - entirely crucify Sam (for something which in my opinion was less Sam's fault than it was made out to be), and Sam's actions start an apocalypse rather than leading to an angel who was redeemed and helped save the world. And if that dichotomy wasn't enough, Carver has Dean once again save Sam through potentially reckless  means - killing Death - but that's okay, because Dean did it, so not only does nothing bad happens, but something good will happen later. And to further that opinion, they have God himself absolve Dean of any missteps and blame Sam solely for everything.

And this is why I find it so hard to believe that throwing Sam under the bus wasn't the writer's intention - or at the very least that they just didn't care how Sam looked. Even if Sam was supposedly spouting the author's point of view, as soon as that point of view changed - and this is for both season 8 and 9 - it could have been really easy for the writers to allow Sam to also soften his position, too. By not doing so, in my opinion, they are keeping the "angst" at the expense of Sam's character. But Sam is really the only character they do this to, in my opinion. Dean's missteps and motivations are generally softened or justified by the narrative and usually also by other characters. What happened with Kevin versus what happened with Charlie is in my opinion a perfect example of this.

This is why it's hard for me to believe that the writers are supposedly trying to show Dean as in the wrong when they are generally softening all of his mistakes while highlighting the mistakes of other characters like Sam and Castiel. In my opinion, anyway, because the examples are just too numerous and the contrast is just too consistent, sometimes within the same episode.

*** (At least in canon. I thought some of season 4 was buried anger from that, but I thought that it was understandable and I also saw guilt.)

[gonzosgirrl]

29 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

 

But I digress... back to my point... At that turning point in season 9 - and I believe that "The Purge" was that turning point - things went from Sam having emotional trauma from Gadreel and at least some point made out of Dean's lying, to Dean being justified in lying (in my opinion) when Dean's lying is conveniently forgotten (it's not mentioned at all in that "The Purge" speech even though for me the lying was the bad part. 

Maybe Sam didn't mention the lying in his speech, but it was also far from the end of his long, drawn out punishment of Dean. And then there was an entire episode of not so thinly veiled commentary on the Wrongness of Lying, and how treacherous his behavior really was, aka thinMan. 

[AwesomO4000]

4 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Maybe Sam didn't mention the lying in his speech, but it was also far from the end of his long, drawn out punishment of Dean.

Which for me was out of character in the first place. For me, that was not a positive for Sam, but a negative. Once things turned around, all that did for me was make Sam look badly, especially once things got twisted around in "King of the Damned."

4 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

And then there was an entire episode of not so thinly veiled commentary on the Wrongness of Lying, and how treacherous his behavior really was, aka thinMan. 

I'll admit that I haven't watched this episode since it aired, but I vaguely remember when watching it that I could interpret it as the other way around. And considering that it came after "Captives" with a "see how Kevin being dead wasn't a bad thing" message, it kind of was already diluted by that point anyway... as was the fact that Dean lying was dropped after that and that there weren't any bad consequences. Dean's lying in "King of the Damned," for example, is justified in that Sam would have just gotten in the way. Then the consequences of Gadreel turned out somewhat good in that Gadreeel helped in saving the world. For me, this pretty much negated any message of "lying is bad," because except for Sam being a jerk (which didn't reflect badly on Dean, but on Sam), the narrative seemed to be siding with Dean by justifying his lying through positive consequences. This is unlike in season 10 where the "lying is bad" message was not only much clearer and repetitive, but there were actually really bad consequences to back it up. It's the dichotomy that annoys me.

For me, if Dean lying was supposedly so bad, and we were supposed to see it that way, the writers wouldn't have given positive consequences for Dean doing it and they wouldn't have had Sam lie, too. By having Sam say "I lied" in the finale, and then actually having him back that statement up, they gave Sam absolutely no moral ground to stand on. It was in essence saying "see, Sam would do it, too, so what Dean did wasn't really that bad, and now we'll have some positive consequences to back that up to show you how Sam raking Dean over the coals was so unnecessary and see what a jerk and a hypocrite he was." That was exactly the message I got from all of that.

If Dean lying was supposedly so bad, then don't have Sam also lie and try to bring Dean back and hang a neon sign on that by having Crowley of all people point that out as the "moral" voice for the show. Or maybe don't punish Sam so severely for lying while trying to save Dean next season. As I said, if any one of the things on my list above had been done, just one small thing to show that Dean lying actually had consequences beyond Sam's snit fit and a dead Kevin who actually had good consequences from dying, I might see things differently, but the narrative, via actions (for me the real barometer since various writers' words / attitudes can vary), almost entirely seemed to beak as "Dean lying = justified" and "Sam lying = really, really bad consequences."

As I said, it's the mixed messages that were annoying, and Carver's years, in my opinion, were full of them.

[gonzosgirrl]

29 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I'll admit that I haven't watched this episode since it aired, but I vaguely remember when watching it that I could interpret it as the other way around.

I just don't see any way that thinMan could be interpreted other than an object lesson for Dean and a flashing neon sign for the viewers.  It had nothing to do with Kevin or anything besides Dean Ed needing Sam Harry too much and the consequences of his actions in trying keep them together. Harry Sam was depicted as being mature and more than a little superior to Dean Ed, the needy, desperate guy who couldn't let go.

[AwesomO4000]

3 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

I just don't see any way that thinMan could be interpreted other than an object lesson for Dean and a flashing neon sign for the viewers.  It had nothing to do with Kevin or anything besides Dean Ed needing Sam Harry too much and the consequences of his actions in trying keep them together. Harry Sam was depicted as being mature and more than a little superior to Dean Ed, the needy, desperate guy who couldn't let go.

I will take your word for it as I don't intend a rewatch. (I didn't really like season 9 except for the Metatron parts.)

And I know it had nothing to do with Kevin. That was the episode before this one that changed the dynamic of Kevin's death and put a positive spin on it.

But it also seems to me that this was a strange line to be treading with this episode when Sam has theoretically done very similar things starting way back in season 1 and this same "object lesson" would apply to those situations and actually would apply to Sam's actions in season 10. Sam's relief that Dean was back to being Dean despite the threat of the mark returning (in "About A Boy") hints to exactly the same needy and desperate themes... which is why I find it hard to look at this episode as only a comment on Dean when the writers have Sam do exactly the same thing - repeatedly - and then give him big consequences for it.

So even if this episode was supposed to be an object lesson for Dean, it didn't last, in my opinion, and it was never followed up on. The only lesson that was followed up on, in my opinion, was when the situation applied to Sam in season 10. That's when we got repercussions to actually back the object lesson up.

So as I interpreted what happened, somewhere along the line between "The Purge" and "King of the Damned,"  someone somewhere decided things weren't going to go the way the set up appeared to hint that they would go, and we got an entirely different - in my opinion - dynamic in the end from what it started out as. One that consequently made Sam look like the bad guy in the scenario for being angry about something that got changed to not being such a big deal and in the end maybe even somewhat beneficial since it gave them another "ally" to fight Metatron.*** Even if that's not what they intended to show from the start, that's what ended up happening in the end, and no one did anything to stop it. Instead they doubled down with the implication that Sam had maybe suspected that he was possessed (which: what?!?) and seemed to pin some of the blame for Kevin's death on him.

*** And that's not even getting into how the Gadreel situation could have ended up so much worse than it did considering he had access to Sam's knowledge and all of the references and potential weapons in the bunker and what could have happened had Gadreel really taken advantage of those resources. But the story didn't go there, because I don't think they wanted such grave consequences for Dean's actions... only angsty ones.

Edited December 12, 2018 by AwesomO4000

[devlin]

Ok, so the reason Michael left dean in order to weaken him was to disappoint and crush him. Is this coz dean would be able to see that when he was gone his family was finally able to breathe. So he could realise they were better off without him, so there was no point in dean fighting Michael to get back to his family. Sam was able to become this great leader and do some serious manscaping, cas and jack formed a good relationship and Mary couldn’t care less about him and found herself a new boyfriend 

[catrox14]

I haven't figured out what crushed Dean. They failed that storytelling in both the show and the tell.

Dean accepted Sam as leader, Cas and Dean weren't fighting. The only thing I can figure is that Mary ignored Dean's calls (on screen at least) and he couldn't save Jack and was unwilling to participate on Jack's soul Shaving thing but he relented in that as well.

So fuck if I know what "broke" Dean. Probably more bad editing that cut that out.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I haven't figured out what crushed Dean. They failed that storytelling in both the show and the tell.

Dean accepted Sam as leader, Cas and Dean weren't fighting. The only thing I can figure is that Mary ignored Dean's calls (on screen at least) and he couldn't save Jack and was unwilling to participate on Jack's soul Shaving thing but he relented in that as well.

So fuck if I know what "broke" Dean. Probably more bad editing that cut that out.

It kinda worked for me because I think Michael meant that the repossession would crush Dean and anything prior to that was the build-up of Dean feeling better and more free after coming out of the initial possession. It`s literally the old "let the prisoner think they`ve escaped, let them see the woods where they could disappear to just 20 yards away and only then snatch them back. It is that precise moment that crushes them. After that, after they`ve been dragged back to their cell, they won`t immediately try to escape again and be all "rah rah, make the next plan". 

Michael accomplished THAT stage by possessing Dean again. Noone knew he could, that he left the door open. Well, the characters clearly didn`t, didn`t even speculate that this would happen. 

Now Dean has been dragged back to the cell and at the moment he is quiet and somber. What Michael`s mistake is in believing that this is gonna be a permanent stage. Now in my above prisoner analogy, you do break some people longterm like that, they`ll never try again, they`ll never even make waves again, they`ll be obedient from now on. But others take a bit to regroup and then try anew. They will fight again. Michael just hasn`t learned yet that Dean is in the latter category.

Or maybe he thinks that just a few precious hours/days of Dean not making waves is worth it. And look what he could accomplish in that time. If he killed Sam, Cas and Jack during that time, it would drive Dean further into the darkness. Would he never fight again then? No. But that alone might buy Michael years of peace and quiet.  

[ILoveReading]

23 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

So fuck if I know what "broke" Dean. Probably more bad editing that cut that out.

IMO, what truly broke Dean is finding out Sam went behind his back and chose the British Men of Letters.  The way Jensen played that scene, something shifted in Dean.   It's like he truly realized he'll always be the one supporting them and no one will ever truly has have his back.

I know its sucky writing but Dean hasn't been the same character since that ep.

[catrox14]

1 hour ago, ILoveReading said:

IMO, what truly broke Dean is finding out Sam went behind his back and chose the British Men of Letters.  The way Jensen played that scene, something shifted in Dean.   It's like he truly realized he'll always be the one supporting them and no one will ever truly has have his back.

I know its sucky writing but Dean hasn't been the same character since that ep.

This is a good point.

[gonzosgirrl]

2 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

IMO, what truly broke Dean is finding out Sam went behind his back and chose the British Men of Letters.  The way Jensen played that scene, something shifted in Dean.   It's like he truly realized he'll always be the one supporting them and no one will ever truly has have his back.

I know its sucky writing but Dean hasn't been the same character since that ep.

I'd go as far as to say it was when he found out Sam didn't look for him in Purgatory, followed by The Purge speech. That was the one-two punch, but I honestly think the knock-out moment happened when Sam walked away after promising Kevin he would reconcile with Dean. I think that was the shift. The look of disappointment on his face as he turns around, talking to Sam, only to see his retreating back... and then the hurt resignation when he goes back to his room and puts on the headphones.

[AwesomO4000]

10 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

I'd go as far as to say it was when he found out Sam didn't look for him in Purgatory, followed by The Purge speech. That was the one-two punch, but I honestly think the knock-out moment happened when Sam walked away after promising Kevin he would reconcile with Dean. I think that was the shift. The look of disappointment on his face as he turns around, talking to Sam, only to see his retreating back... and then the hurt resignation when he goes back to his room and puts on the headphones.

(There's a Too Long: Didn't Read summary below for those who don't want to read all of this.)

I would hope that Dean wouldn't give up that easily myself. It took Sam much, much longer than that to dig himself out after Ruby, and when Dean told him that he didn't trust him, Sam didn't just give up hope, even though Dean was giving him nothing really to hang his hopes on.

For me, the problem with the writers throwing in that awful "The Purge" speech was that it distracted from the fact that Dean was not the wounded party there... Sam was. Even just before Sam's speech, Dean wasn't apologizing. He wasn't acknowledging how much he had hurt Sam. Back to this in a minute... The episode before Dean had been complaining that Sam should just get over it. So Sam basically said okay, he would "get over it" if they kept it a working relationship only for a while. This was harsh for Dean yes, but in my opinion (I realize that others' opinions on this will vary) not that much worse than Dean telling Sam that things would never be the same between them and then suggesting that they should just go their separate ways and never see each other again. When Dean turned around on that, Sam was grateful and said that he would do whatever he had to do to show Dean that he could be trusted again... and in my opinion Sam did that, and worked hard at it, and it still took him a long time to gain Dean's trust back.

What does Dean do in "The Purge?" Instead of being remorseful and/or saying that he'd try to make it up to Sam, Dean tells Sam that he didn't regret what he did and that he'd do it again. Instead of saying that he at least regretted that it hurt Sam, Dean suggested that Sam should be grateful for what Dean did to him because he "saved his ass" again. I didn't blame Sam for getting angry. What Sam said was awful... and in my opinion out of character, but sadly I think that was the point.

Despite all of what Sam said and how I can see how some think that Sam's position is what the writers wanted us to agree with, I'm not so sure. I think the writers were starting to go Dean's direction that Sam should've just been grateful even then, because it was at that point that the narrative shifted over to Dean's point of view. The camera didn't follow Sam out of the room at the end of "The Purge." It lingered on Dean's face seemingly sympathizing with him, because mean Sam wouldn't forgive him. Similar with "Captives." Not only did that episode entirely soften Kevin's death and actually make it fortuitous that Kevin had been dead, but it had Kevin be the writers' mouthpiece and repeat Deans "get over it" message. When Sam doesn't and walks away, we once again get Dean's point of view only in the aftermath, not Sam's at all, showing that we, the audience, are supposed to be sympathizing with Dean. And we see Dean's sad, devastated face in the aftermath. Did Sam have second thoughts about walking away? Was he struggling with it at all? Who knows, because we never see Sam in his room during the aftermath. The audience doesn't get to connect with how Sam is feeling, only Dean.

Yup, Sam walking away wasn't kind to Dean at that point, but all of these things - over the top speeches and lingering on Dean's face shots - were distracting from the fact that Sam had a right to be angry. His brother lied to his face repeatedly when he had been struggling with one of his fundamental fears and the truth could have helped him to not be afraid and reassure him that he wasn't losing his mind.

It was manipulative when the writers did it in "Fallen Idols" by creating that out of character Dean behavior and scenario to more quickly force a compromised working relationship, and it was manipulative here in "The Purge" and "Captives" by having Sam give that out of character speech to create sympathy for Dean and by having Kevin be the writers' mouthpiece and repeat the "get over it message" and then showing mean, old Sam turning his back on Dean. And that we had seen hints of the "get over it" message before - with Dean in terms of Sam not looking for him in season 8 - is why I think that this was a "thing" with the writers during the Carver reign. It was even less subtle here, though.

It was that exact scene you showed up there that let me know that Sam was now going to be the bad guy for the rest of the season. It didn't matter that Sam had good reason to be angry... those reasons would be swept under the rug, never to be addressed again, and it would be all about when was Sam ever going to forgive poor, mistreated Dean.

While I often see it addressed that Sam has never apologized for his speech in "The Purge," it's often overlooked that Dean has still never apologized for lying to Sam about Gadreel all of those months, and he never will. Writers objective - in my opinion - accomplished. Now when that became the objective is perhaps debatable (for me it was that "The Purge" speech and the aftermath and cemented with "Captives") and some of the writers maybe didn't seem to be on board with it,*** but in my opinion it definitely shifted, culminating with the subtle but very telling (in my opinion) "King of the Damned" conversation.

Bottom line and Too Long: Didn't Read Summary: In my opinion, blaming Dean's "breaking" on Sam is unfair. No one made Dean lie to Sam all that time. He chose to do that, and he can blame circumstances and justify it all he wants and not apologize for how it hurt Sam, but Sam isn't obligated to not see that as a betrayal or forgive Dean immediately just because Dean wants him to. It didn't work that way for Dean in season 5,^^^ so it shouldn't work that way for Sam in season 9. And the writers can try to manipulate me all they want with mouthpiece Kevin and lingering shots on Dean's sad face, but I'm not going to blame Sam for being angry, and I don't think Sam should have had to be grateful for what was done to him which to me seemed like what Dean (and the writers) wanted Sam to do... agree that what Dean did was "the right thing to do" and was for Sam's benefit.

I disliked that aspect of Carver's term as showrunner so much... the audience manipulation and manufactured angst was off the charts, imo.

*** Jenny Kline's "thinman" seemed to be a throwback to Dean's lying was bad, but the message there was drowned out by the overwhelming "get over it" message in the episodes before it and after it.

^^^ Despite what Dean said in "Fallen Idols" in terms of compromising for their working relationship, Dean had not forgiven Sam, and he had subtle and not so subtle ways to let that be known to Sam. We didn't see Sam pouting and sad when Dean made a very unsubtle dig on the eve of maybe their last day on earth. Sam accepted the criticism with a wry "Thank you again for your continued support," (hinting that this was likely a recurring dig rather than a one time thing), and clinked glasses with Dean in toast. That to me is how it should have gone rather than the over-angsty stuff we got in season 9.

Edited December 15, 2018 by AwesomO4000

[gonzosgirrl]

@AwesomO4000 as always, I respect your well thought out arguments but we will always disagree in our perceptions of this time, especially over what we were meant to take away from it. 

[devlin]

23 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

IMO, what truly broke Dean is finding out Sam went behind his back and chose the British Men of Letters.  The way Jensen played that scene, something shifted in Dean.   It's like he truly realized he'll always be the one supporting them and no one will ever truly has have his back.

I know its sucky writing but Dean hasn't been the same character since that ep.

And this scene was not long after dean told sam to pick a side. I think it’s the straw that broke the camel’s back. Adding to when sam chose ruby over him, which has still got to be running through dean’s head, i think this moment showed dean that when it comes down to it sam, of sound mind, will choose anybody over dean. Which goes back yellow eyes declaration way back in season 1, “they don’t need you”

[AwesomO4000]

9 hours ago, devlin said:

I think it’s the straw that broke the camel’s back.

I'm still trying to figure out why Sam deciding to work with the BMoL - as stupid and, in my opinion, out of character as it was - was some huge betrayal of Dean. Sam was working with the BMoL because he wanted to hunt. This is what Dean has always wanted, the two of them hunting together... which is what they were doing just with intel from the BMoL. So is the betrayal that Sam is not listening to only Dean when it comes to hunting? If the problem was Sam not telling Dean... that should just be a shrug by now. I think if these guys ever just straight out told the truth in situations like that then the world would end.

Sam has Dean's back when he needs it, and he's shown that he'll risk everything to try to save Dean multiple times now. Just because Sam's entire life doesn't revolve around Dean and Sam actually made a decision of his own, in my opinion, isn't some betrayal of Dean. Dean deciding to listen to Crowley and take on the mark of Cain wasn't seen as some big betrayal of Sam and Dean didn't tell Sam about that either. Sam complained about Crowley for a moment and he was over it and instead later tried to be supportive of Dean and help him with the mark of Cain. But somehow Sam deciding to work with the BMoL is some huge betrayal.

I just don't get it.

And I know I'm going to get blasted for saying it... but Sam originally choosing to work with Ruby when Dean was gone was his decision to make. Dean made the decision to make the deal without considering what Sam would want. In fact he knew Sam wouldn't want it. He made it anyway, leaving Sam behind an emotional wreck and with a mess to clean up. So Sam making a decision Dean wouldn't want? In my opinion, they were fairly even. Dean wasn't there and as far as Sam knew, he was never coming back. Sam did what he had to do to survive and clean up the mess that was still there. By the time Dean returned, it was too late. Sam was changed and he couldn't go back to what he was before.

Sam didn't owe it to Dean to be what he was before either in my opinion. He didn't ask Dean to bring him back, and when Dean came back from hell, Sam didn't know at first that Dean remembered hell. He had no reason to believe that Dean was messed up and needed Sam. As far as Sam knew, Dean had angels on his side. Sam had to learn to survive and cope without Dean. Things weren't going to be the same after that.

Sam chose wrongly - no question - but in my opinion, so did Dean. Dean may have suffered more than he deserved to for that wrong choice, but to expect Sam not to have changed due to what happened was unrealistic. The damage to both of them was done the moment Dean got dragged to hell... actually it started in "Mystery Spot." In my opinion, Sam was never the same after what Gabriel did to him, and that experience primed Sam for Ruby's manipulation.

[DeeDee79]

5 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I'm still trying to figure out why Sam deciding to work with the BMoL - as stupid and, in my opinion, out of character as it was - was some huge betrayal of Dean. Sam was working with the BMoL because he wanted to hunt. This is what Dean has always wanted, the two of them hunting together... which is what they were doing just with intel from the BMoL. So is the betrayal that Sam is not listening to only Dean when it comes to hunting? If the problem was Sam not telling Dean... that should just be a shrug by now. 

Not trying to be snarky or anything but it's truly amazing how differently we interpret this series based on which brother we empathize with more. IMO what made Sam's decision to work with BMOL so hurtful to Dean was that is was on top of the hurt from Mary throwing in with them and then to have Sam do so as well. Not saying that Sam is responsible for what Mary decided to do but I can understand why Dean would feel doubly betrayed and I don't feel that he was wrong to feel that way. Of course Sam's a big boy and he can do what he wants but for him to say that he would bring Dean around while talking to Mick was out of character and pretty shitty. All in my humble opinion of course.

[AwesomO4000]

51 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Of course Sam's a big boy and he can do what he wants but for him to say that he would bring Dean around while talking to Mick was out of character and pretty shitty.

Of course it was out of character and shitty, and we knew it was out of character and shitty - such seems to be the writers want post season 7. They want teh drama, they go for the "let's make Sam do something shitty to upset Dean! Who cares if it makes little sense for his character to do?" angle. Sigh - but Dean didn't know about Sam's talk with Mick, so he shouldn't feel betrayed about something he doesn't know.

For me the stupid thing is that Sam joining the BMoL made no sense. These people tortured him. The circumstances of "The Raid" showed how inept the BMoL were... and if anyone should have felt betrayed, it should have been Sam when he found out about the Colt and Mary's involvement with it, not to mention that Mary got Sam to go out there under false pretenses to begin with, but apparently nope, Sam just shrugs his shoulders at that betrayal and joins up.

This is why I don't get Dean supposedly feeling such a huge betrayal. Sure I get that Dean might feel upset about it for a bit and like Sam wasn't being the most supportive brother at that point (although Sam had been earlier when he backed up Dean's decision to have Mary leave), but as I said, Sam gave just a token complaint at Dean choosing to listen to Crowley even though Dean knew how Sam felt about Crowley. And even more illustrative, it could be looked at that Sam himself was "betrayed" by Mary (twice) just as much in that same episode that the writers have him join up with the BMoL all enthusiastically because Mary asks. So it's hard for me to see what happened to Dean as such a big betrayal when they have Sam not only shrugging off similar treatment, but enthusiastically embracing it. After having to swallow that, I honestly didn't much considered that we were supposed to be seeing Dean as being that upset or that it would be a lasting thing. Since apparently if Sam joining the BMoL with Mary makes any kind of sense, accepting family doing that kind of stuff to you is just supposed to happen...

Unless we somehow learn after 13 seasons that Sam has been hiding the fact that he's actually a closet masochist... though now that I think about it, except for Sam's uncharacteristic snit in season 9, that might actually explain a lot. ; )

Edited December 16, 2018 by AwesomO4000

[DeeDee79]

4 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

but Dean didn't know about Sam's talk with Mick, so he shouldn't feel betrayed about something he doesn't know.

I was specifically speaking as someone that empathizes with Dean and which is why I stated that I can understand why Dean felt betrayed. Just because Dean didn't know about doesn't negate the fact that it was shitty. Furthermore, while you pointed out that Sam was betrayed by Mary as well ( no one said that he wasn't ) I was speaking specifically about Dean because the discussion was about how Dean could have felt broken by Sam throwing in with BMOL,. My commentary was based on that particular incident. I'm not interested in debating their entire history throughout the course of their ups and downs during the show because it's been done to death IMO. 

[AwesomO4000]

11 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Furthermore, while you pointed out that Sam was betrayed by Mary as well ( no one said that he wasn't ) I was speaking specifically about Dean because the discussion was about how Dean could have felt broken by Sam throwing in with BMOL,. My commentary was based on that particular incident.

I think you are missing my point. There seemed to be a question on how I couldn't see where Dean would be broken by the incident, so I was trying to tell you why.

My mentioning Sam being betrayed by Mary and saying "if anyone should feel betrayed" wasn't to imply that anyone here contested that at all but was to point out that if the show has Sam joining the BMoL under those circumstances and apparently not feeling any lasting effect from that crappy treatment and forgiving Mary enough to be enthusiastic about joining the BMoL with her, then apparently the show thinks that kind of thing is no big deal. So accepting that - which apparently I was supposed to according to the show, since no further explanation was given as to Sam's motivation -  I wouldn't expect them to have Dean being that affected by what Sam did except to be angry and disappointed for a little while.

I thought that was what I was conveying, but apparently I missed the mark.

[DeeDee79]

3 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I thought that was what I was conveying, but apparently I missed the mark.

Understood. Thanks for the explanation.

[AwesomO4000]

4 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Understood. Thanks for the explanation.

You're welcome! : ) Sorry for the mix up.

[devlin]

5 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I'm still trying to figure out why Sam deciding to work with the BMoL - as stupid and, in my opinion, out of character as it was - was some huge betrayal of Dean. Sam was working with the BMoL because he wanted to hunt. This is what Dean has always wanted, the two of them hunting together... which is what they were doing just with intel from the BMoL. So is the betrayal that Sam is not listening to only Dean when it comes to hunting? If the problem was Sam not telling Dean... that should just be a shrug by now. I think if these guys ever just straight out told the truth in situations like that then the world would end.

Sam has Dean's back when he needs it, and he's shown that he'll risk everything to try to save Dean multiple times now. Just because Sam's entire life doesn't revolve around Dean and Sam actually made a decision of his own, in my opinion, isn't some betrayal of Dean. Dean deciding to listen to Crowley and take on the mark of Cain wasn't seen as some big betrayal of Sam and Dean didn't tell Sam about that either. Sam complained about Crowley for a moment and he was over it and instead later tried to be supportive of Dean and help him with the mark of Cain. But somehow Sam deciding to work with the BMoL is some huge betrayal.

I just don't get it.

 

I call it betrayal coz Dean made it clear that he wanted  nothing to do with them  and sam was in full agreement, making it seem like they were both on the same side. Then all of a sudden behind dean’s back he is working under the BMOL and receiving hunts that both he and dean were going on. All the while he was neglecting to inform dean that despite his wishes dean was now also working for them

Edited December 16, 2018 by devlin

[companionenvy]

Sam working with the BMOL was not a betrayal of Dean, IMO. Just because a loved one doesn't approve of your actions doesn't make those actions a betrayal.

Sam not telling Dean that he was working with the BMOL - meaning that, on some level, Dean himself was unwittingly doing so -- was a betrayal, I suppose, but a pretty small potatoes one; to the extent that using the word seems histrionic to me. 

Betrayal would be if the BMOL wanted to kill or imprison Dean, and Sam gave him up to them. Character A doing something that Character B doesn't like and lying about it is a regular Thursday for the Winchesters. 

[catrox14]

The thing for me is that Dean did see it as a betrayal by Mary first, because she was working with the people who tortured Sam and she almost got Cas killed. And then by Sam, who by not revealing to Dean how he was getting the cases, forced Dean to work with them and for them without even knowing it.

. IMO Dean's reactions were of someone who felt betrayed. It's not like it happened in a vacuum wherein Mary's choices didn't affect them both prior to Sam's decision. Dean was already at odds with Mary and IMO Dean was angry and hurt that Sam essentially picked the BMOL because he followed Mary and never told Dean until he had to come clean. All of it was built up after Mary's actions in Stuck in the Middle.

[catrox14]

11 hours ago, ZennyKenny said:

Wait what? As in permadead? Why would you think that?

From the bitter spoilers thread:

I think the show is giving us the Michael! Dean Arc as a farewell gift to Jensen as Dean. I have always thought Regarding Dean, especially with the closing montage and the song choice, was the beginning of the end for Dean.

He's been slowly reduced to comic relief, was stripped of many traits that were given to Sam over 12 and 13 and now I 14 Sam has been declares the official Hunter Chief and Dad to Jack

The only thing left in Dean's story is for him to get closure with John and  for Dean to allow AU Michael to possess him so he could save Sam, Dean, and the world, he's kind of done that, especially with Michael takin him over again and burying him. John closure

Spoiler

could come in the 300th episode since JDM is returning as John.

So, yes I am convinced Dean will die for real this season.

[ahrtee]

5 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

So, yes I am convinced Dean will die for real this season.

Only if Jensen wants out and only signed for one year, not two.  There's no way TPTB would halve their fanbase deliberately.  (Hmmm...unless they had his death as a cliffhanger and so everyone would still tune in next season to see how/when he'll return, and he just...won't?  Would we keep watching in the hopes he'll be back?)  Of course, he could always show up occasionally as a guest star (maybe from his new position as Sheriff of Heaven or something...) :)