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

[gonzosgirrl]

4 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

Last year after Sam joined the BMOL and promised to "work" on Dean and then it turns out he did that by working BMOL hunts without Dean`s knowledge for a couple of weeks, the episode ended with Dean folding and joining too, I remember reading a lot of "well, finally, character growth, Dean wasn`t a little bitch about it".

If Dean had done that to Sam, he would have been an epic overbearing bully. Sam doing it was just the character "taking charge" apparently. And Dean needed to fall in line to be considered an okay character. 

So I don`t agree that this only flows in one direction. 

SO much this. All the lying and manipulating from both Sam and Mary, and guess who did the compromising and apologizing? Hint: Not Sam or Mary.

[AwesomO4000]

5 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Of course Sam was right about Jack. Was there ever any doubt that he would be?

Yes? I know I had doubts. I still do. Jack hasn't met Lucifer yet after all.

6 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

And now it seems Dean must learn his lesson about going through the rift sans Sam and/or Cas.

I still think it's going to be the opposite. I think Dean will do just fine. I actually expect Sam to mess up somehow and not be there to save Dean... I expect that role will go to Ketch much like Benny did in season 8. I just hope Ketch dies so we don't have some "Sam hates Ketch, but it turns out Ketch really has turned around and Sam should give him a chance, why is Sam being so mean to Ketch, can't he see Ketch saved Dean?" plot arc crap.

I really hope I'm wrong about that.

5 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Even as hyperbole (which I'm sure is how you mean it), I think that's stretching it.

Yes, it was hyperbole.

Dean's insistence that Mary couldn't possibly be alive - to me - did have a bit of that in it, though. Sam had his own towards Dean for not considering that Jack could be dangerous... As I said, I see both brothers as having acted less than perfectly - i.e. human - here. I never implied any differently.

19 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

So, I'm not sure why Dean would have had to show Sam compassion.

I didn't say he had to. I was just pointing out that he didn't... like Sam didn't with his shit. I was saying that both likely had their own emotional reasons for doing what they did. It seemed to me that it was being implied that somehow Sam was awful / neglectful / whatever for not showing proper compassion for Dean. My point was that I get why Sam didn't. He was putting all of his eggs in the "save Mary" basket, because for me that's how Sam thought he could make things better, and he wasn't being entirely compassionate because that conflicted with his goal which was how he's chosen to cope, not because he was out to be purposely insensitive to Dean.

Dean likewise was dealing in his own way and not purposely being insensitive to Sam... that was my point that I may not have gotten across as I'd hoped. Damn hyperbole... I'll have to leave that out next time.

6 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

The reason why Sam annoyed me more during early Season 13 is because I felt Dean was in general more amenable to such a compromise but Sam was not. Dean had to mentor Jack as well or else.

Similar to Sam in season 9 was expected to agree that Dean lying about Gadreel was all for his own good - and then learned that very special lesson at the end of the season. As you said, the writers will do this sort of thing for the "over-the-top drama shenanigans." And both brothers at times fall prey to it.

Quote

So in Season 12 Dean was wrong for trying and then in Season 13 it is like he got a big boon that just fell into his lap. I found that completely unfair and hypocritical. 

Kind of like Sam was the worst brother ever for not trying to find Dean in purgatory,*** but when he does try to save Dean he starts an apocalypse? As I said above, this is something that happens to both characters.

*** This could easily have been painted as Sam making an attempt, but deciding against it due to not wanting to take the chance of opening purgatory, because of the bad that had happened in the past from doing things like that, but where would the drama be in that? Nope, it just had to be painted as Sam shrugged his shoulders and said "oh well." Because drama.

1 minute ago, Aeryn13 said:

Last year after Sam joined the BMOL and promised to "work" on Dean and then it turns out he did that by working BMOL hunts without Dean`s knowledge for a couple of weeks, the episode ended with Dean folding and joining too, I remember reading a lot of "well, finally, character growth, Dean wasn`t a little bitch about it".

If Dean had done that to Sam, he would have been an epic overbearing bully. Sam doing it was just the character "taking charge" apparently. And Dean needed to fall in line to be considered an okay character. 

So I don`t agree that this only flows in one direction. 

I didn't. I saw the whole arc as Sam character assassination, and pretty much said as such, agreeing with you that Sam's joining the BMoL in "The Raid" made absolutely no sense.

I don't remember reading that here on this thread either, so I can't comment to the sentiment. This is the only place I post. And I don't think our opinions here can be compared to those in other places we have no knowledge of. Just my opinion on that.

[catrox14]

34 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

he thing is, Sam and Dean were in the same circle in this situation. Dean is closer to Cas, but not by all that much at this point in the show, IMO, and Sam was in any case closer to Eileen, who had died days earlier. Mary is an equal loss for both. So, I don't really think the issue of support entirely applies. Both of them have different reactions to a shared tragedy. 

Sorry but this is simply not the case, IMO. Sam and Cas will never be, and have never been as close as Dean and Cas. You can try to say it is, but 10 years says differently. They don't hang out. They haven't spent time in battle together like Dean and Cas. They haven't spent a year sacrificing for the other one in a different dimension.

They haven't bonded in the same way at all. I do think they bond over their mutual love for Dean quite often.

34 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

hat would have been really strange, I think. Why should it have been all about Dean? Like, the obvious reason to open the Rift is to try to save Mary. It would be genuinely bizarre for Sam to frame the decision to try to save his own mother as being primarily about Dean's grief. 

Because it's Dean.  I'll flip this around and ask you why he wouldn't have done it for Dean? To assuage Dean's pain if he could? I'm not being snarky.

Edited April 12, 2018 by catrox14
because part of my first comment went missing and I had to add it back.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

 I actually expect Sam to mess up somehow and not be there to save Dean... I expect that role will go to Ketch

Won`t make a difference for me. At this point, we could go 20 episodes without Deansel-in-distress and I would still feel completely sick of it. I don`t want Ketch saving him either. I wanted DEAN to show that he could handle himself.

In light of superfighter Mary loving the AU-world, it rankles even more.  

Edited April 12, 2018 by Aeryn13

[bearcatfan]

It seems to me that people on both sides have a tendency to watch the show looking for evidence to confirm their particular bias. Much of this is done on a subconscious level, I'm sure. I'm also fairly certain that most will deny doing so, ergo, the subconscious part.  

[companionenvy]

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

Sorry but this is simply not the case, IMO. Sam and Cas will never be, and have never been as close as Dean and Cas. You can try to say it is, but 10 years says differently. They don't hang out. They haven't spent time in battle together like Dean and Cas. They haven't spent a year sacrificing for the other one in a different dimension.

They haven't bonded in the same way at all. I do think they bond over their mutual love for Dean quite often.

I don't think they are as close, and said as much, but I stand by my sense that the gap has gotten a lot smaller over the years. First of all, I'd say that all three of them can be said to have spent time in battle at this point. Only Dean and Cas spent time literally fighting side by side in hand-to-hand combat in purgatory, but TFW has been involved in any number of major fights together, so it isn't like Dean is Cas's brother-in-arms (a dynamic that also included Benny), and Sam's the casual friend he gets coffee with every few months. In addition, Sam and Cas spent some time together, and probably quite a bit of it, when Dean was a demon, and then again in conspiring to remove the mark. I'm not going to try to say that's equivalent of Purgatory or anything, but I can't imagine it didn't make them closer; the fact that their mutual love for Dean is what brought them together doesn't make that any less true. Conversely, for several seasons now, to my great disappointment, Cas and Dean's relationship really hasn't gotten a ton of attention. Dean is always, understandably, more affected when Cas is in danger/apparently dead, but when push comes to shove, the dynamic for some time has been that Cas splits his time between doing his own thing and sometimes dropping in for missions with both Winchesters, and relating to both of them on fairly equal terms. So all I'm saying is that it isn't at this point a categorically different kind of relationship. Losing Cas would be a massive loss for both of them, even if it still hit Dean with more intensity.

I do think that if only Cas had died, Dean's grief would take priority, but given that Mary had apparently died too and Eileen's ashes had barely cooled from the pyre, the relevant point for me is that Sam and Dean should have been fairly evenly matched, tragedy-wise. 

 

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

Because it's Dean.  I'll flip this around and ask you why he wouldn't have done it for Dean? To assuage Dean's pain if he could? I'm not being snarky.

I'm not trying to be snarky either but... because there's a much, much stronger reason that already exists prior to Dean's grief entering into the equation? Like, if Dean had a girlfriend who fell through a portal to another world, then it would make sense for Sam to try to get her back for Dean, because his own relationship with her or desire to have her return wouldn't in itself be enough to warrant such a drastic step, so it would only be his love for Dean that would justify it. But Mary is the mother of both of them. It would be really, really weird if Sam's thought process went "I wasn't really too bothered about my mom being trapped in an apocalyptic hellscape, but now that I see how sad Dean is, I guess I'm going to go and get her back." 

[catrox14]

2 hours ago, companionenvy said:

nt "I wasn't really too bothered about my mom being trapped in an apocalyptic hellscape, but now that I see how sad Dean is, I guess I'm going to go and get her back." 

TBH, I don't think Sam was nearly as bothered as Dean given his rather almost casual "It was her choice" during their big blowout in 13.3, when he was excoriating Dean for not being on the Jack train.

[Reganne]

4 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

TBH, I don't think Sam was nearly as bothered as Dean given his rather almost casual "It was her choice" during their big blowout in 13.3, when he was excoriating Dean for not being on the Jack train.

That was more Sam saying that what happened to their mom was bc of a choice she made. That it wasn't Jack's fault which is true.  Just bc Sam chooses not to blame Jack for their mother being stuck in an AU, that doesn't mean he's not bothered about it.

[AwesomO4000]

Quote

TBH, I don't think Sam was nearly as bothered as Dean given his rather almost casual "It was her choice" during their big blowout in 13.3, when he was excoriating Dean for not being on the Jack train.

So did Sam care and want to use Jack to get Mary back or not care all that much and think it was "her choice?"

I tend to fall on the he cared a lot side and that was why it was his goal to get her back, and...

13 minutes ago, Reganne said:

That was more Sam saying that what happened to their mom was bc of a choice she made. That it wasn't Jack's fault which is true.  Just bc Sam chooses not to blame Jack for their mother being stuck in an AU, that doesn't mean he's not bothered about it.

Yes, I agree. It doesn't have to be one or the other. It can be both. Sam can think that Mary is in the AU due to choices she made, but that doesn't have to mean he doesn't sympathize with her choices or not want to get her back or feel her loss.

Edited April 12, 2018 by AwesomO4000
Damn top of the page, so I added the relevant quote.

[catrox14]

1 minute ago, AwesomO4000 said:

So did Sam care and want to use Jack to get Mary back or not care all that much and think it was "her choice?"

I tend to fall on the he cared a lot side and that was why it was his goal to get her back, and...

You tell me.  It's the writers that are all over the place. I'm not writing the show. I'm interpreting what I watch. There is little consistency. None of it made any sense. And it continues to make no sense in the latter half with Sam now in super duper depressed mode and giving up on finding Mary.

My point was that I think if Sam had been hell bent to get Mary, just for her sake, and to have her back, he would not have been so nonchalant about her choice during that argument.

I'm saying that if show had made it that Sam had been wanting to get to Mary on behalf of Dean, to stop Dean from going down this really dark and suicidal path, I would have seen that in a much better light. Just my preference. In any case, it doesn't change that Sam was using Jack and acknowledged that he was doing that when Jack pointed it out.

[catrox14]

ETA:  TBH, I still don't get Sam's motivations most of the time, so I probably do miss things about him. That's not me bashing Sam, it's me thinking the writing is just so inconsistent that I can't get a good bead on Sam

[Reganne]

6 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

ETA:  TBH, I still don't get Sam's motivations most of the time, so I probably do miss things about him. That's not me bashing Sam, it's me thinking the writing is just so inconsistent that I can't get a good bead on Sam

In this situation I don't really see the inconsistencies personally.  You can care deeply about someone.  Worry about them and want to help them, but at the same time realize it's not someone else's fault.  Thinking a choice of that particular persons got them into the situation doesn't take away from the worry and concern.  I'm not saying the writing is at all times perfect, I just don't see it here.

[AwesomO4000]

35 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

You tell me.  It's the writers that are all over the place. I'm not writing the show. I'm interpreting what I watch. There is little consistency. None of it made any sense. And it continues to make no sense in the latter half with Sam now in super duper depressed mode and giving up on finding Mary.

I agree with @Reganne on the first part.

Sam's depression on the other hand - that I agree with you on. It seemed to come out of nowhere (and contradict Sam's usual outlook). That annoys me, mostly because just like Sam joining the BMoL last season, they seemed to introduce something that didn't make sense in terms of Sam's usual stance / personality right in the midseason point just to make some kind of plot point happen or introduce tension or whatever it is they were doing. But I've been seeing that happen with Sam since Carver took over - in my opinion, Carver did it A. Lot. - so I've kind of resigned myself to that happening and just hope that whatever it is, it doesn't make Sam look too badly.

A I've said before, I miss Gamble in this regard. At least when Sam did things during her reign as showrunner, they generally made sense and didn't leave me saying "wait, what? Why is Sam doing / saying / acting like that? That makes no sense."

In general I had no problem with Sam's general motivation until season 8. After that, the only seasons I didn't have many questions with concerning Sam's motivation were seasons 10 and 11.

[catrox14]

12 minutes ago, Reganne said:

In this situation I don't really see the inconsistencies personally.  You can care deeply about someone.  Worry about them and want to help them, but at the same time realize it's not someone else's fault.  Thinking a choice of that particular persons got them into the situation doesn't take away from the worry and concern.  I'm not saying the writing is at all times perfect, I just don't see it here.

 

It didn't make sense to me because he was all "Jack help me save my mom" and then once Jack shut him down, it just kind of stopped. He started thinking maybe he was wrong and Dean was like no, you can't lose faith, yet he didn't seem to pursue any other way to save her. SSam didn't mention saving Mary or anything again after that. Not that I can recall, but maybe I'm forgetting until Jack them the vision of Mary. 

Then that flipped to Dean losing his mind and going all in for like...5 freaking minutes. Then it became "Mary Who?" between Dean's freak out, their trip to the Bad Place and Cas ripping the spell out of Donatello's head.

So yeah for me the writing of their motivations to save Mary wax and wane and flip so much I don't know what to think about any of it. LOL. To me that is inconsistent writing.

[DeeDee79]

3 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

So yeah for me the writing of their motivations to save Mary wax and wane and flip so much I don't know what to think about any of it. LOL. To me that is inconsistent writing.

Very accurate statement IMO.

[Res]

On 4/12/2018 at 6:46 PM, Reganne said:

In this situation I don't really see the inconsistencies personally.  You can care deeply about someone.  Worry about them and want to help them, but at the same time realize it's not someone else's fault.  Thinking a choice of that particular persons got them into the situation doesn't take away from the worry and concern.  I'm not saying the writing is at all times perfect, I just don't see it here.

If you are referring to Sam caring deeply about Mary here, personally, I honestly do not see how that possibly applies. Mary is barely a person to him. In fact, in the Pilot, he even stated if it wasn't for pictures he wouldn't even know she existed. Up until S12, Sam had sprodaic interactions with past Mary, ghost Mary and "Heaven"/Zach's Mary but NEVER the real thing. Apparently that went for the viewers as well. In S12, he actually met Mary and tried to help her adjust for a couple of episodes before she told him that she didn't want to be around him, missing her actual Dean and Sam toddlers up in Heaven. Then once again, limited interaction until suddenly she's back on their sides for a day maybe before being pulled into the rift.

So, I really don't understand how you can care "deeply" about someone you barely know and who doesn't really want to know you. 

IMHO, Dean is going after someone he does care deeply about because he got the 4 years with her that Sam didn't and, regardless of how badly they trash Mary's character, he will always love her for those early years. Sam, OTOH, is going after someone or some image that he "wants" to care deeply about IF she gives him half a chance. 

And, Sam is right. It was her choice. I just wish they'd leave her there.

[companionenvy]

16 hours ago, Res said:

If you are referring to Sam caring deeply about Mary here, personally, I honestly do not see how that possibly applies. Mary is barely a person to him. In fact, in the Pilot, he even stated if it wasn't for pictures he wouldn't even know she existed.

I don't think that's psychologically realistic.  People who have lost a parent at a young age -- or who were given up for adoption and never knew their birth parents -- often have strong emotions about their parents. In the case of children raised by the surviving parent, like Sam, they have grown up hearing stories about their parent and how wonderful she was. In the case of adoptees, they may find meeting members of their birth family a deeply moving experience. Obviously, that isn't true of everyone, but I'm not going to question that Sam, after meeting Mary, genuinely does care about her deeply, even if part of it is for him (as, frankly, it is for Dean, even with the four years he had with her as a child) based more on projection than reality.

[Aeryn13]

I think character motivations are often sacrificed to the issues of pacing and their structure between arc and filler episodes. 

Dean started out the Season depressed which at least had a reason in-story, then he got a dose of endorphines once they got a win - Cas back - so that, too made sense. Freaking out on Kaya randomely in an episode came out of nowhere and being Mr.Chill Pill about the situation right after made it feel even more disjointed. Then once they have the ingredients, he needs to the spell right.the.fuck.now. It really doesn`t flow well together as a character journey over episodes. At least him being angry and disappointed that things always go wrong for them at the end of last episode made some sense again.

Then we have Sam being Mr.I-have-hope at the beginning of the Season, only to in one episode suddenly reveal his newly formed depression. And okay, hope and optimism eroding would have been a believable story but there was no set-up for that, zip, zilch.

Each writer writes the character however the hell they want. Lots of them unfortunately only agree on carricature version of "Dean is the dumb muscle" and "Sam is the empathetic yet uptight brains". So THOSE things are often consistent episode to episode. Thanks for nothing, writers.  

[7kstar]

3 hours ago, companionenvy said:

I don't think that's psychologically realistic.  People who have lost a parent at a young age -- or who were given up for adoption and never knew their birth parents -- often have strong emotions about their parents. In the case of children raised by the surviving parent, like Sam, they have grown up hearing stories about their parent and how wonderful she was. In the case of adoptees, they may find meeting members of their birth family a deeply moving experience. Obviously, that isn't true of everyone, but I'm not going to question that Sam, after meeting Mary, genuinely does care about her deeply, even if part of it is for him (as, frankly, it is for Dean, even with the four years he had with her as a child) based more on projection than reality.

Teaching, I've seen children that their parent abandoned them and they want to be with them.  My sister is adopted and she made up stories about her birth mother and had a longing to meet her.  She even lied saying she had when it wasn't even true.  It was a made up story.

Sam meet Mary and cares about her.  How strong that relationship really is depends on your point of view.  I know people that have very strong relationships with their parents.  But I rarely ever called them.  Maybe once every two to three months, if that.  I usually saw them once or twice a year.  Yet now that my dad's health is going down, I'm preparing myself for the time when he dies.  It's coming but how many more years I will get is limited.  Some could say our relationship isn't close, and some ways it isn't because he isn't involved with the day to day.  But will it effect me when he dies, I know it will.  How someone feels isn't measured with how much time someone spends with someone.  It is how much a connection they have.

So Sam may see that Mary was a good hunter, and was lost when she got dumped into a time period she no longer knew.  It had the potential of being a great story.

2 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

I think character motivations are often sacrificed to the issues of pacing and their structure between arc and filler episodes. 

I think this is why so many great ideas fall flat.  NO ONE is overseeing the arcs, looking at the directions they are creating.  Every writer seems to be on focusing on their story and Zero BIG PICTURE.  Therefore, Jensen and Jared become the only ones to figure out how to keep it flowing from one story to the next, and sometimes they really need someone else to see that arch. 

I don't know how much of the beginning was happy accidents, but the boys are definitely more concern about having a good time, and NO I'm not saying they don't care, but the pranks and joking around is having a toll on the depth of the story.  They can't be the ones to control where the story goes, it isn't their place.  They should be focusing on Dean or Sam.  It is the writer's job to focus on the big picture.  Which is failing due to not tweaking the little things.  This isn't saying Supernatural sucks, but more why it leaves us more unsatisfied that excited.  I enjoyed several eps this season and even liked Ketch in the last one, but do I wish they would put more into it, of course.  But for now I try to just enjoy the moments I like and ignore the rest.  I don't have time for more as real life is creating enough issues, if that makes any sense.

[SueB]

On 4/14/2018 at 1:02 PM, companionenvy said:

I don't think that's psychologically realistic.  People who have lost a parent at a young age -- or who were given up for adoption and never knew their birth parents -- often have strong emotions about their parents. In the case of children raised by the surviving parent, like Sam, they have grown up hearing stories about their parent and how wonderful she was. In the case of adoptees, they may find meeting members of their birth family a deeply moving experience. Obviously, that isn't true of everyone, but I'm not going to question that Sam, after meeting Mary, genuinely does care about her deeply, even if part of it is for him (as, frankly, it is for Dean, even with the four years he had with her as a child) based more on projection than reality.

There are entire books written on this topic.  Mary was the central motivation for his father and the basis of how he was raised.  Sam may not have known Mary but he had a complex relationship with her before they even met.  And we have that in canon for when he met her in "The Song Remains The Same".  He couldn't stop staring at her.  

So, I think Sam having a strong desire to connect to Mary is pretty much spot on.  He'd actually be really unusual or really out of touch with who he is as a person if he DIDN'T have a strong emotional reaction to Mary.  

[SueB]

Quote

Nah Carver isn't going to write an episode of a show he is no longer on--especially uncredited.  At best, he may have given some advice...but that is still highly doubtful at best.  IMO Dabb is much better than you think and he's done a lot of good work beyond bloodlines.  Actually think last couple of years have been much good stuff under his watch.

@Jakes I agree with you.  Sera Gamble was "relieved" after two seasons and replace by Carver.  Carver left after the start of his fourth year to develop his failed pilot.  Dabb has just completed his second full season and there has been no showrunner change.  If they needed Carver to "rescue" Dabb, they'd just bring him back on.  They are not that sentimental.   They explicitly placed Singer on Dabb to bring the experience.  The partnership seems to be working well. 

Regarding his writing and past episodes:

First, "Bloodlines" is not a good yardstick.  Not because it was a crappy hour of TV but because it had too many cooks in the soup to say this was all Dabb's fault.  The problem with "Bloodlines" was that it was an entirely different show, not really a SPN spin-off.  The characters and actors came straight out of CW central casting.  Dabb has never made any commentary or interviews that I have had access to that suggests this is the kind of cast he prefers.  If it was, we'd have seen that pop up more on Supernatural.  I will say we've seen some younger demographics characters during both Carver and Dabb's time, but there's usually a reason.  For example, the two dimwits "CW" women cast for "Various and Sundry Villains" were clearly a funhouse mirror for Sam and Dean.  Different gender, on the bad guy side, and poorly trained.  But they kept saying their version of "family" speeches ('I totally believe in us.') and only having each other similarities that made the mirror evident.  So, I don't see any "Bloodlines" bleed (ha! see what I did there!) into Supernatural.

Second, I think it's clear Dabb has a distinct vision.  He plays a season long game.  Sometime overly complicated, but when you view the season in retrospect, the clues are glaring.  Folks may not like his vision but there are common themes throughout.  First, Dabb loves the mythology.  Second, he's big into artifacts & relics use.  Third, he seems to simultaneously ensure more Sam-centric moments and yet not get in the way of some pretty epic Dean-centric moments -- I feel like in the last two years he's tried to shift the balance to what he thinks is more equal. I am not trying to pick a fight, just saying I see some shifting and I see justification for it. Four, he's kinda obsessed with Nazi stuff.  If we don't get at least one more episode that involves the Thule, the Juddah Initiative, or some MoL event during WWII, I'll be surprised.  Five, he definitely loves the MoL stuff IMO.

Personally, I enjoy most of Dabb's episodes.  And some are definitely on my frequent rewatch list.  I also think he's done an AMAZING job at reining in Buck-Lemming.  Their episodes the last two seasons still have some of their signature "style" but they are far more coherent and interesting.  I think he's worked them well.  

Finally, J2 have also explicitly stated they like where Dabb is taking the show.  Which means they've heard his vision. They feel no need to step into the Producer role as Dabb & Singer have this down.   

[Pondlass1]

I'm not convinced Dabb has a vision.  If he does - it's very muddled and changes with the wind.  

However, despite it all.... I'm enjoying this season more than 12.  And I don't know why?

[gonzosgirrl]

Dabb can be an okay writer, with occasional bursts of genius. He is a terrible showrunner, IMO, especially when it comes to canon, continuity and reining in his writers. I'm guessing SuckLemming answer to no one at this point, and the other two newbs have drunk the koolaid when it comes to only writing to the almost-caricature beats of Dean, and to a lesser extent, Sam. He (Dabb) has some kind of obession with Lucifer, or more precisely Mark P as Lucifer - the character is long past its stale date and is stinking up the place, yet still, he perseveres. IMO Dabb cares far more about his peripherals than he does the Winchesters or Castiel, and also IMO, he took over this show with an eye toward the end and wrote accordingly (thus all the Wayward Whatevers) to (possibly) ensure himself a job. The ratings may be sustaining themselves, but at what cost? IMO, he's ruining the legacy of the show by undermining the past. Who can watch Gabriel's one shining moment now without cringing? Or see and hear Dean's memories of his mother, or the actual woman they showed us in the past without some major side-eye? Sure, 'death' on Supernatural has been a bit of an 'inside joke' for a long time, when it comes to Dean and Sam, and I'm okay with that. But how do we invest emotionally in any death on the show when it's clear there are no stakes, no sacrifice they won't undo or heartfelt loss they won't erase. I'm no longer laughing with them, I'm laughing at them. I maintain my opinion that Dabb-as-showrunner is the worst thing that ever happened to this show and I hate with the heat of the sun the idea that he will, in all likelihood, have the final take on the show. I dread that more than I can say.

[catrox14]

57 minutes ago, SueB said:

urth year to develop his failed pilot.  Dabb has just completed his second full season and there has been no showrunner change.  If they needed Carver to "rescue" Dabb, they'd just bring him back on.  They are not that sentimental.   They explicitly placed Singer on Dabb to bring the experience.  The partnership seems to be working well. 

Which show is he working on now?

Well it depends on  how you are classifying works well. They wasted on a lot of time in bulking up Wayward Sisters and yes say wasted because I think that harmed the story telling the boys and Cas  for this year. That's just my opinion others will disagree.

The thing is that Dabb has been with the show  the whole time since he joined in s4. he didnt leave and come back. So he wouldn't need Singer other than budget. That said, I think Buck Lemming have  more influence than ever so maybe  Dabb shouldn't get all th blame for what I dislike currently. opinions vary obviously.

[Pondlass1]

7 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Dabb cares far more about his peripherals than he does the Winchesters or Castiel,

Totally agree with this ^

It's pretty amazing that after 13 years we still want the Winchesters as the focus.  And Dabb can't get that through his thick skull. 

And, yes, while the thought of a possible Dean/Michael storyline is exciting - the thought of Dabb at the helm and possibly the Gruesome Twosome writing the episode is depressing.  But we still have Jensen.  The sole reason I tune in live every week. :)

[belbar]

45 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Dabb can be an okay writer, with occasional bursts of genius. He is a terrible showrunner, IMO, especially when it comes to canon, continuity and reining in his writers. I'm guessing SuckLemming answer to no one at this point, and the other two newbs have drunk the koolaid when it comes to only writing to the almost-caricature beats of Dean, and to a lesser extent, Sam. He (Dabb) has some kind of obession with Lucifer, or more precisely Mark P as Lucifer - the character is long past its stale date and is stinking up the place, yet still, he perseveres. IMO Dabb cares far more about his peripherals than he does the Winchesters or Castiel, and also IMO, he took over this show with an eye toward the end and wrote accordingly (thus all the Wayward Whatevers) to (possibly) ensure himself a job. The ratings may be sustaining themselves, but at what cost? IMO, he's ruining the legacy of the show by undermining the past. Who can watch Gabriel's one shining moment now without cringing? Or see and hear Dean's memories of his mother, or the actual woman they showed us in the past without some major side-eye? Sure, 'death' on Supernatural has been a bit of an 'inside joke' for a long time, when it comes to Dean and Sam, and I'm okay with that. But how do we invest emotionally in any death on the show when it's clear there are no stakes, no sacrifice they won't undo or heartfelt loss they won't erase. I'm no longer laughing with them, I'm laughing at them. I maintain my opinion that Dabb-as-showrunner is the worst thing that ever happened to this show and I hate with the heat of the sun the idea that he will, in all likelihood, have the final take on the show. I dread that more than I can say.

 All this so much. Thanks.

[Aeryn13]

At this point I think the all over the place, disjointed messes of the "storylines" over the Season are Dabb. This Season alone is scatterbrained like noone`s business. On the other hand the carricature characterization for Dean, Sam and Cas, that is Singer. As is stuff like smug Super!Mary.Together they form a deadly duo of suck. Additionally, Singer is the guy for the producing and budgetary side.

Bucklemming only want to do mytharc episodes because they think they are awesome at it, with exhilerating twists. They don`t know they are producing lol-canon. They also think it`s beneath them to even check in on what happens beyond their own episodes. Nepotism egotism IMO.

The other writers each have different areas where they struggle and the qualities of their episodes varies a lot. It would IMO be better if they had a more cohesive creative overseer who whipped the Season into shape. Neither Dabb nor Singer are the man for the job. 

[Myrelle]

39 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

At this point I think the all over the place, disjointed messes of the "storylines" over the Season are Dabb. This Season alone is scatterbrained like noone`s business. On the other hand the carricature characterization for Dean, Sam and Cas, that is Singer. As is stuff like smug Super!Mary.Together they form a deadly duo of suck. Additionally, Singer is the guy for the producing and budgetary side.

Bucklemming only want to do mytharc episodes because they think they are awesome at it, with exhilerating twists. They don`t know they are producing lol-canon. They also think it`s beneath them to even check in on what happens beyond their own episodes. Nepotism egotism IMO.

The other writers each have different areas where they struggle and the qualities of their episodes varies a lot. It would IMO be better if they had a more cohesive creative overseer who whipped the Season into shape. Neither Dabb nor Singer are the man for the job. 

1000 X this entire post, but especially the bolded part.

IMO, characterization(strictly within the writing) has never suffered more under any other showrunner.

And again IMO, there has always been plot holes and/or continuity errors and/or retcons of canon within the storytelling under pretty much every showrunner, including Kripke, himself, but characterizations have never taken such a beating as they're taking now from Dabb/Singer.
 

Spoiler

 

And I still think that's one of the biggest reasons that Jensen is so excited about playing a character who is NotDean for a while.

 

Edited April 16, 2018 by Myrelle

[Aeryn13]

Well, the writers have flanderized flanderization at this point. 

[ILoveReading]

We're 19 episode in and I still have no idea what this season is about. Even though s6 suffered from too many storylines and many were under developed, I can still define that season as save Sam's soul and stop Eve.

I have no idea what Im watching.  Is it supposed to be save Jack?  Jack such a vanilla character Im not sure he ever needed to be saved.  Stop Michael- he's barely been seen and really hasn't been developed as a character.  So as a viewer Im not sure why I'm supposed to care about him.    Asmodeus- poor man's Crowley who really served no purpose.  Bringing Gabe back for fanservice and completely ruin his redemption arc. Bringing back everyone makes death even more of a joke.   It might be save mom.  

Spoiler

But that loses appeal now that we know Mary doesn't want to be saved.   So basically anything they do is for nothing or just going to end up making things worse. 

As it stands now, Sam and Dean really aren't tied to any storyline and have been completely expendable so far.   They're characterization have been stripped away to make them the cliches they were supposed to be, but never were in the pilot.

Its like each writer has a story line they want to tell and now one cares if it contradicts someone else s.  I've said before Dabb might be in charge but there is no leadership.

I agree with @gonzosgirrl Dabb is the worst thing that happened to this show.

Edited April 16, 2018 by ILoveReading

[catrox14]

2 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

I agree with @gonzosgirrl Dabb is the worst thing that happened to this show.

I've been thinking about this a bit more.  I know I've been ragging on Dabb but Singer is there and I think he has more creative power now than before. His wife and her writing partner have the big mytharc "game changer" eps and maybe Dabb is just the fall guy. 

I wonder if Dabb and Singer might be at cross purposes with the season, especially the AW which was Buck Lemming's idea and all the Super!Mary. Maybe that's Eugenie's idea of a "strong female character" back in the 70s or something. I get this vibe that they write on tropes and not character. 

[belbar]

51 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

59 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

I agree with @gonzosgirrl Dabb is the worst thing that happened to this show.

I've been thinking about this a bit more.  I know I've been ragging on Dabb but Singer is there and I think he has more creative power now than before. His wife and her writing partner have the big mytharc "game changer" eps and maybe Dabb is just the fall guy.

I've been wondering about Singer too. I know that he's supposed to be the budget guy, but he's been there since day one and has admitedly been the one who didn't consider a good idea to go into Dean's hell trauma, and the one who decided to cut short the Deamon Dean story. He's made a lot of decissions that are not budget related at all. I know that Jensen respects him a lot.But I'm not so sure about his role and influence in the show. I don't think that it's so clear cut.  It doesn't change my opinion about Dabb though.

[gonzosgirrl]

Eh, if Dabb is willing to take (share) the title and the 'glory', he has to take (share) the blame, too. Since he is a writer and has been with the show for 2/3+ of its run, then I hold him responsible for knowing and enforcing canon and characterization in his staff of writers. I hold him responsible for treating the stars of the show as the stars of the story. If he *is* just a fall guy/puppet for Singer, then I have even less respect for him, and believe me, I didn't think that was possible.

Edited April 16, 2018 by gonzosgirrl

[catrox14]

17 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Eh, if Dabb is willing to take (share) the title and the 'glory', he has to take (share) the blame, too. Since he is a writer and has been with the show for 2/3+ of its run, then I hold him responsible for knowing and enforcing canon and characterization in his staff of writers. I hold him responsible for treating the stars of the show as the stars of the story. If he *is* just a fall guy/puppet for Singer, then I have even less respect for him, and believe me, I didn't think that was possible.

 

Oh I agree. I'm not saying it absolves him of everything. I just wondered about it. They are both accountable for sure.

Edited April 16, 2018 by catrox14

[belbar]

4 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Eh, if Dabb is willing to take (share) the title and the 'glory', he has to take (share) the blame, too. Since he is a writer and has been with the show for 2/3+ of its run, then I hold him responsible for knowing and enforcing canon and characterization in his staff of writers. I hold him responsible for treating the stars of the show as the stars of the story. If he *is* just a fall guy/face for Singer, then I have even less respect for him, and believe me, I didn't think that was possible.

ITA, however my point is that Dabb has been treated (apparently) as child who needs to be supervised, with Singer (who had almost retired) back at the hemlet alongside Dabb. How far his influence goes, is what I don't know. In fact we'll never know what happens bts, but if you're the showrunner and you know that the big bosses only approved your promotion if backed up by someone else, you sure will listen to his "suggestions" and you'll enforce his canon and  his characterization.  Share the blame and credit at your own liking, who know how it goes.

As per respect for Dabb, don't worry you're not alone.

[FlickChick]

Isn't all of this just really sad? All of us here (and thousands elsewhere) have invested hundreds (or more ;)) hours with this show and all of its characters and story-lines. And now - these past two seasons especially - we're more unhappy with the show than ever before. Of course none of us expect it to be as fresh as it was in earlier years, but the fact that many of us can't even see our stars as the center of the story at all this season in a miss-mash of so-called arcs, is really sad. I blame both Dabb and Singer and their direction or lack thereof of the writing staff. It seems as though each writer is operating in a vacuum. And the Duo is a disgrace to the art. Unfortunately, for me, this is the reason the show should end sooner rather than later. It's beyond going out on top; let's not see it go out from the bottom of the barrel. JMO  

[SueB]

6 minutes ago, FlickChick said:

Isn't all of this just really sad? All of us here (and thousands elsewhere) have invested hundreds (or more ;)) hours with this show and all of its characters and story-lines. And now - these past two seasons especially - we're more unhappy with the show than ever before. Of course none of us expect it to be as fresh as it was in earlier years, but the fact that many of us can't even see our stars as the center of the story at all this season in a miss-mash of so-called arcs, is really sad. I blame both Dabb and Singer and their direction or lack thereof of the writing staff. It seems as though each writer is operating in a vacuum. And the Duo is a disgrace to the art. Unfortunately, for me, this is the reason the show should end sooner rather than later. It's beyond going out on top; let's not see it go out from the bottom of the barrel. JMO  

Not me.  I wouldn’t stay as involved if I was unhappy.  

[catrox14]

11 minutes ago, SueB said:

Not me.  I wouldn’t stay as involved if I was unhappy.  

So you're not a completionist? Lucky you! I'm sticking with it because I love Dean but depending on how things go...we'll see how much longer my patience lasts.  I am grateful to have a forum in which I can vent about the stuff I do and don't like. So there's that!

[FlickChick]

32 minutes ago, SueB said:

Not me.  I wouldn’t stay as involved if I was unhappy.  

I'm unhappy with the way the stories are being told. Jensen's Dean is the reason I watch - at this point, practically the only reason. I'm going to stick with the show to see how the Winchesters' story ends. And I'm not as involved as I once was. 

[SueB]

4 hours ago, catrox14 said:

So you're not a completionist? Lucky you! I'm sticking with it because I love Dean but depending on how things go...we'll see how much longer my patience lasts.  I am grateful to have a forum in which I can vent about the stuff I do and don't like. So there's that!

Actually, I am.  But I only expend so much energy for "completion".  There's a vast difference between recording it on the DVR, watching it sometime during the week and rarely posting about it (my experience with Smallville in the last season) and how I engage with Supernatural (posting daily, "must see live" TV, watching con clips, GOING to a convention, etc...).  As another example, at one point I was a very dedicated Merlin fan when I realized where the show was heading at the start of it's last season (Merlin spoilers hidden)

Spoiler

that they really were going to never tell Arthur until the very bitter end, and that with Mordred as a full-time cast member, Arthur would die at the end of the series (which is exactly what happened)

I found I caught up two or three episodes at a time.  And rarely posted. I was just waiting for it to complete it's run.  It still had some excellent episodes, but I knew I was fundamentally disappointed in a couple of points and I couldn't get enthusiastic.  So, I saw all the episodes (of both Smallville and Merlin) but scaled back my engagement based on them taking a direction I didn't care for.  

RIght now, I'm just not remotely dissappointed in Supernatural.  Are there some aspects of some episodes which I roll my eyes?  Sure.  But I'm excited every week to see what they're going to do next. And with the two leads we have?  I guess I suspect this is one show that won't "peter out".  I think it'll be strong til the end.

[Myrelle]

5 hours ago, FlickChick said:

Isn't all of this just really sad? All of us here (and thousands elsewhere) have invested hundreds (or more ;)) hours with this show and all of its characters and story-lines. And now - these past two seasons especially - we're more unhappy with the show than ever before. Of course none of us expect it to be as fresh as it was in earlier years, but the fact that many of us can't even see our stars as the center of the story at all this season in a miss-mash of so-called arcs, is really sad. I blame both Dabb and Singer and their direction or lack thereof of the writing staff. It seems as though each writer is operating in a vacuum. And the Duo is a disgrace to the art. Unfortunately, for me, this is the reason the show should end sooner rather than later. It's beyond going out on top; let's not see it go out from the bottom of the barrel. JMO  

This is my fear.

And it's never seemed more real for me after S12.

I think 13 has been somewhat of an improvement and a reprieve for the show, but ValiumDean of S12 is still a Dabb/Singer induced nightmare that I don't think I will ever get over.

And I still haven't bought S12 of this show yet and I AM a completist, too, where it concerns my DVD collections. I'm counting on the ending of 13 making me want to buy 12 which is what happened for me after the S9 finale, in regards to 8.

After 11 I decided to stay completely in a holding pattern-which feels very odd to me-but not wrong, if I'm being totally honest here.

Edited April 17, 2018 by Myrelle

[AwesomO4000]

5 hours ago, FlickChick said:

Isn't all of this just really sad? All of us here (and thousands elsewhere) have invested hundreds (or more ;)) hours with this show and all of its characters and story-lines. And now - these past two seasons especially - we're more unhappy with the show than ever before.

This doesn't apply to me either. I may not be quite as enthusiastic as I have been in some past seasons these past two seasons, but I don't actively hate some of the episodes or stop watching for several episode at a time like I did in season 8 and 9. For me, the first 2/3 of season 8 and the second half of season 9 made me way more unhappy with the show than season 12 and 13 have. But season 11 was a wonderful surprise for me, so I have hope that that can happen again and season 13's improvement for me is encouraging . In contrast, in season 8, I quit for a while and almost didn't come back...

5 hours ago, catrox14 said:

So you're not a completionist?

Heh... I try. Every once in a while, though, not even I can handle it any more and give up. An example of two shows I used to love, but never watched the end of (or don't intend to finish), because they pissed me off too much: The Gilmore Girls and The Walking Dead. That last one is still a fresh wound, but they pretty much did their best to wreck my favorite character in TWD, using his (stupid) death as an excuse to justify a character I completely loathe remaining alive by changing my favorite character's personality / outlook to do it, and I just couldn't anymore. Almost 8 seasons of character growth - we literally watched that kid grow up onscreen - thrown out the window to justify an awful character's*** existence... I haven't watched the show since.

*** Perhaps ironically that character is played by Jeffrey Dean Morgan. But Negan makes John look like father of the year and the most complex character ever.

[catrox14]

2 hours ago, SueB said:

RIght now, I'm just not remotely dissappointed in Supernatural.

That's great that you're not disappointed. I'm not totally disappointed and I don't hate the show. Much of my criticism is because I really love the show and just want it to be better  given it has been better. Or at least better IMO, others obviously disagree. Which is what makes the world go round, I suppose.

[BoxManLocke]

You know, I hated Jeremy "Drama Queen" Carver's guts more than once during his run as showrunner (and I still think he was a very bad one) but it's clear he at least knew what the show should always be about. He had his ideas and carried them throughout each season without deviating. Hell if anything he was a bit too focused. Still, I distinctly remember what each season of his was about, and which brother it was about. He had some great and creative episodes along the way and I always said the show shouldn't end as long as we got those every once in a while.

 

Now after 13 years it's really the first time I'm feeling a real lack of creativity. Dabb has no passion, or at least I really don't feel he has any, and the talentless hacks BuckLeming have too much power. The focus is not on Sam/Dean/Cass anymore. It's about which casting stunt will be made this week, which character will be resurrected, which writer-favorite supporting character will take the spotlight so that J² get some days off. The story is made as an afterthought, to accomodate these parameters, and that's why it's practically nonexistent this season. I honestly can't tell what the fuck this season is supposed to be about.

Nonexistent/unfocused story means the writers can't build anything that pays off organically, so they'll sometimes independently try to squeeze in a tense or emotional moment but they come out of nowhere so instantly fall apart.

Not only are Sam/Dean mere pawns in the mytharc, they wouldn't even give them character arcs. That hurts standalone episodes because they're the ones that should focus on the brothers emotional state of mind.

 

The way the show is set up right now, the writers have their priorities completely fucked up and creativity is so stifled, I don't think we're getting great episodes again unless Dabb is willing to massively shake things up in the finale or there's a massive writer exodus that includes Dabb and/or BuckLeming.

And since great episodes is the reason I'm watching the show, well... I don't know how much longer I'm willing to hold on.

 

I don't think I'll give season 14 a chance if Lucifer is a part of it. That'll be a clear sign that nothing has changed.

Edited April 17, 2018 by BoxManLocke

[FlickChick]

16 hours ago, BoxManLocke said:

You know, I hated Jeremy "Drama Queen" Carver's guts more than once during his run as showrunner (and I still think he was a very bad one) but it's clear he at least knew what the show should always be about. He had his ideas and carried them throughout each season without deviating. Hell if anything he was a bit too focused. Still, I distinctly remember what each season of his was about, and which brother it was about. He had some great and creative episodes along the way and I always said the show shouldn't end as long as we got those every once in a while.

 

Now after 13 years it's really the first time I'm feeling a real lack of creativity. Dabb has no passion, or at least I really don't feel he has any, and the talentless hacks BuckLeming have too much power. The focus is not on Sam/Dean/Cass anymore. It's about which casting stunt will be made this week, which character will be resurrected, which writer-favorite supporting character will take the spotlight so that J² get some days off. The story is made as an afterthought, to accomodate these parameters, and that's why it's practically nonexistent this season. I honestly can't tell what the fuck this season is supposed to be about.

Nonexistent/unfocused story means the writers can't build anything that pays off organically, so they'll sometimes independently try to squeeze in a tense or emotional moment but they come out of nowhere so instantly fall apart.

Not only are Sam/Dean mere pawns in the mytharc, they wouldn't even give them character arcs. That hurts standalone episodes because they're the ones that should focus on the brothers emotional state of mind.

 

The way the show is set up right now, the writers have their priorities completely fucked up and creativity is so stifled, I don't think we're getting great episodes again unless Dabb is willing to massively shake things up in the finale or there's a massive writer exodus that includes Dabb and/or BuckLeming.

And since great episodes is the reason I'm watching the show, well... I don't know how much longer I'm willing to hold on.

 

I don't think I'll give season 14 a chance if Lucifer is a part of it. That'll be a clear sign that nothing has changed.

This X1000. With one exception - I don't think I'll ever give up until I see how the Winchesters' story ends. I will just watch more passively, I guess. Unfortunately, I don't think we're going to see the end of Dabb or BuckLeming - I think they're here to the end. :(

[gonzosgirrl]

As long as Jensen/Dean is part of the show, I'll be there and watching. I only wish TPTB didn't know this.

[belbar]

18 minutes ago, FlickChick said:

Now after 13 years it's really the first time I'm feeling a real lack of creativity. Dabb has no passion, or at least I really don't feel he has any, and the talentless hacks BuckLeming have too much power. The focus is not on Sam/Dean/Cass anymore. It's about which casting stunt will be made this week, which character will be resurrected, which writer-favorite supporting character will take the spotlight so that J² get some days off. The story is made as an afterthought, to accomodate these parameters, and that's why it's practically nonexistent this season. I honestly can't tell what the fuck this season is supposed to be about.

Nonexistent/unfocused story means the writers can't build anything that pays off organically, so they'll sometimes independently try to squeeze in a tense or emotional moment but they come out of nowhere so instantly fall apart.

Not only are Sam/Dean mere pawns in the mytharc, they wouldn't even give them character arcs. That hurts standalone episodes because they're the ones that should focus on the brothers emotional state of mind.

 

 

8 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

As long as Jensen/Dean is part of the show, I'll be there and watching. I only wish TPTB didn't know this.

Totally this.

[Castiels Cat]

On 9/16/2017 at 11:27 AM, DittyDotDot said:

The whole tone of the show shifted--IMO, for the better--around mid-season so I'm pretty confident Dabb was running the show more than Carver at that point. I'm guessing Carver didn't fully disengage until mid-way through the second half, but it seems pretty clear Dabb was being groomed for the job from the beginning of the season judging by how he was very involved at Comic Con and such.

However, I also think that's probably why the back half of the season is somewhat disjointed and probably why the last three episodes needed so much collaboration. To me it shows Dabb's inexperience more than anything. And, it seems to me it was left up to Dabb to figure out how to tie up Carver's plan while also setting up his own plan; sometimes those plans just didn't play nice with each other. So, yeah, S12 is Dabb's first real season, for me. It's the first one designed by him from start to finish.

Actually, I gave them all pretty long leashes since they all had limitations to work with. Kripke had unmapped territory to work with, which is both a blessing and a hindrance. He had to build his team and the audience from scratch and then hang on to them for five years, but also wasn't limited to anything storywise.

Gamble was saddled with figuring out how to get the show going again after Kripke ended it, but storywise there was still a lot of places to go they hadn't treaded allover yet. And, she also had a well-seasoned crew to work with and help her. She did have to prove her self to the audience though since they were very wary of someone not named Kripke running the show and many didn't even give her a chance. 

IMO, Carver probably had the easiest row to how of all of them, but still managed to blow it. He had a good set-up storywise, he had the well-seasoned crew to work with and he had the audience confidence from the get-go--plus a whole new audience coming in from the show being put up for streaming on Netflix in S7. I actually think his leaving and returning is a positive because he gained valuable experience on how to run a show that both Gamble and Dabb didn't have coming into their tenures. IMO, Carver's only real limitation was the show was aging and there wasn't a lot of new places to go to, but he decided to retread old ground by focusing on Heaven and Hell again anyway, so I'm not sure how much of an obstacle that was for him. 

TBH, I think Dabb has had the toughest row to hoe of any of the showrunners. He not only took over the show after they had went so big it was hard to come back from, but it's so long in the tooth there really isn't much they can do they haven't already done in some form at this point. Plus, he had an almost complete change of staff--not just writers, but some of the production crew and producers moved on too--to try and pull together in his first season while also having very little experience of running a show himself. His only real benefit was the audience is pretty loyal. So, while I don't think he got it all right, I'm willing to give him another season to see if he can work out the kinks and do better.

Carver had an incredibly hard job because both Kripke and Gamble ignored a major part of the heroic arc for Sam.  When a hero goes that dark dark betraying famiky abd causing that much loss of life.  When you forsake family because the sexy demoness tells you that you are big and strong and offers you her blood and body, when your hero is the de facto antichrist... well then you better wrll give them a damn good redemption arc.  Kripke and Gamble did not do this and fgor many fans being told that Sam suffered the worst trauma ever while watching him be a,dick to Dean again and have sleepless sex fueled nights was eyeroll inducing.  

So Carver was basically left with a mess from a character stand point and he chose to try and rehabilitate one of the two main characters who desperately needed it.  Loads of fans and anyone with a literature/film degree gets this. I understand that not every day sees it. I do not want to argue whether Sam needed redemption.

I pwersonally think it was the smartest tbink Carver could have done and the hardest. It was the main focus of seadons 8-11 altbough otber arcs played out too as Sam cycled through similar stages of betraying Dean, teying to fix tbings,with a grand gesture, fear of kosing Dean,,tryng to save Dean at any cost and unleashing an Apoclyptic horror before feeling remorse, making amends,,apologizing to Dean and changing for the better and dedicating his life to hunting.

I agree that the angel stuff was tedious for the most part. I loved Benny, Crowley, Amara, Mix.

And now we are seeing Dean's issues play out, his tragic flaw as it were which is inextricably tied up to his loss of Mary.

[AwesomO4000]

11 hours ago, Castiels Cat said:

...and fgor many fans being told that Sam suffered the worst trauma ever while watching him be a,dick to Dean again and have sleepless sex fueled nights was eyeroll inducing.   

Except that wasn't Sam - or at least not all Sam. What made Sam intrinsically Sam was still in the box with Lucifer when this was happening. And this also doesn't take into account - in my opinion - seasons 6B and season 7. Which in my opinion, Carver either didn't watch or ignored.

11 hours ago, Castiels Cat said:

Loads of fans and anyone with a literature/film degree gets this.

I personally find this a bit insulting, myself.

11 hours ago, Castiels Cat said:

I understand that not every day sees it. I do not want to argue whether Sam needed redemption.

This is fine, but suggesting that maybe I, as a viewer who disagrees with you, just doesn't see it, because I somehow don't understand literature or film to me is a little harsh. I think I have plenty of reasons to not see it other than that. For example: "The Man Who Knew Too Much" (An episode written by Eric Kripke). For me, I can't imagine how much more devoted Sam could get to Dean and fighting with him for the good fight than that. Sam literally took on over 100 years of Lucifer cage memories in order to do it, and he would never get any recognition for it at all - it was just sacrifice... that Sam willingly accepted (and Gamble chose to make that sacrifice a big part of season 7.) So you might not be impressed by that, but just because I was, in my opinion, doesn't mean that I somehow don't understand literature or basic storytelling. Obviously your miles vary, and that's fine, but I don't think my opinion is any less informed than yours just because I see things differently based on the evidence I choose to see as important in the show.

So, I'll leave it at that and agree to disagree.

Edited April 18, 2018 by AwesomO4000
Wanted to give Eric Kripke the credit he was due.

[SueB]

Quote

I really wish they'd give me a reason to care, though. I'm not asking for a groundbreaking season of TV. Just a cohesive story with interesting characters, that's revolving around Sam and Dean and how they're evolving as characters. I want my Supernatural back.

Not spoilery comment in the spoilers thread that I wanted to respond to.  

This is kinda the perfect thread to deal with this conundrum: whose Supernatural is it?  Kripke? Singer? Gambel/Carver/Dabb? J2? After 13 years only J2 and like one dude in the crew have been there since the start.  Singer came on for EP1.2 Wendigo.  No writer has been there since the Pilot. There are fans who have seen every episode since the Pilot, live, who are still in the fandom.  There are a ton who caught up and joined along the way.  

I've been doing a little research on this and will post more later, but for now I'll leave you with the anecdote that gave me an "a-ha!" today.

- I watched "The Things They Carried" on TNT.  Although I remembered it was a Jenny Kline episode, I didn't need to know that to figure it out.  It starts off with really gruesome death MOTW episode with a bug-like squirmy worm-thing baddy.  So Kline.  And watching it immediately after "The Executioner's Song", written by Berens, it was clear Klein's episode was complete within the Supernatural ouvra (body of work) while having a significantly different story and emphasis.  If you can ignore the presence of Travis Aaron Wade (trigger warning!), it's actually a very good MOTW that ties well to the season mytharc.  But this was "Klein's Supernatural".  THIS is what she wanted to bring to the show.  This was an example of how she saw the show.  Not that she doesn't also love the other stuff, but this is the aspect that is her passion.

Which gave me my aha: "Supernatural", while obviously a television horror show in the generic, but is exceptionally difficult to define in the specific because it's an amalgam of  literally dozens of minds.  And if you are okay with that ambiguity, then "my Supernatural" is much more amorphous.  If you really connected with the show when you first picked it up (from Pilot to somewhere in S13) but now have grown dissatisfied, then perhaps it's a reflection of who was in charge or who was dominating the writing at the time you picked up the show.  Maybe those people have moved on.  Or the show has focused less on the elements that drew you and more on some other elements.  

I'm not saying anyone's opinion is wrong or not ... whatever... I'm saying that by it's approach over the last 13 years, Supernatural developed into a show that is rarely going to please nearly everyone.  It's just too variable because of who has been on the creative team and how much they've allowed everyone to play.  

And I think that's Bob Singer's influence.  (More later).