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

[gonzosgirrl]

8 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

Mark Pellegrino also has giggling fangirls at conventions teehe-ing when they asked who topped in the cage.  

Seriously? Do they suppose Sam fell in love with Lucifer in the cage? Or that he was horny and had no other options? Or that Lucifer (Lucifer!!!) abused Sam? Do they even know what they are asking here? Because holy shit.

Also, I said it in the episode thread but it bears repeating. I think Sam did the only thing he could. IMO if he'd gone for the Archangel blade, if it even would've worked, Lucifer or Michael would've killed him before he could get to it. Thinking Michael would kill Lucifer the moment the rift closed was a sound call with only seconds to decide before the rift closed. I'm the first to call Sam out when he fucks up but I don't think he did. In fact I think it took guts, considering he has to know Jack is going to hate him for a while. 

Edited May 13, 2018 by gonzosgirrl

[DeeDee79]

25 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

In fact I think it took guts, considering he has to know Jack is going to hate him for a while. 

Judging by the fact that he was the only one that looked upset at the end I'm sure that TFW will all be on Jack's shit list. For about 10 minutes into the next episode anyway. That being said I agree with you. Time was running short and as others have said I'm sure that he thought that Michael would finish him off since he had no problem doing so the 1st time. 

[AwesomO4000]

5 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Also, I said it in the episode thread but it bears repeating. I think Sam did the only thing he could. IMO if he'd gone for the Archangel blade, if it even would've worked, Lucifer or Michael would've killed him before he could get to it. Thinking Michael would kill Lucifer the moment the rift closed was a sound call with only seconds to decide before the rift closed. I'm the first to call Sam out when he fucks up but I don't think he did. In fact I think it took guts, considering he has to know Jack is going to hate him for a while. 

I agree. The question will be will the show see it this way.

Historically Sam has had a bad result before even when he does make a right decision. Not killing a YED possessed John and not killing Jake being examples. Both of those things had awful consequences despite being technically the right thing to do. So even though Sam didn't technically mess up doesn't mean it's potentially not going to look like he did by the time the plot unfolds if the result still goes terribly wrong. I guess for me it'll depend on what the narrative and/or other characters say. For example, I was kind of annoyed that the narrative allowed John to blame Sam a couple of times for the resulting car crash, Dean potentially dying, and by extension him (John) ultimately making a deal with the YED because Sam didn't shoot him, when John not getting possessed in the first place would've also prevented all of that from happening, but nobody brought that up. If the narrative here doesn't have other characters harping on Sam's decision and how awful it turned out that will at least be something.

[Res]

6 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I agree. The question will be will the show see it this way.

Historically Sam has had a bad result before even when he does make a right decision. Not killing a YED possessed John and not killing Jake being examples. Both of those things had awful consequences despite being technically the right thing to do. So even though Sam didn't technically mess up doesn't mean it's potentially not going to look like he did by the time the plot unfolds if the result still goes terribly wrong. I guess for me it'll depend on what the narrative and/or other characters say. For example, I was kind of annoyed that the narrative allowed John to blame Sam a couple of times for the resulting car crash, Dean potentially dying, and by extension him (John) ultimately making a deal with the YED because Sam didn't shoot him, when John not getting possessed in the first place would've also prevented all of that from happening, but nobody brought that up. If the narrative here doesn't have other characters harping on Sam's decision and how awful it turned out that will at least be something.

I know I tend to disagree with your POV so it should surprise you that I disagree with your examples here. I do not believe that the narrative was calling Sam out over not shooting YED!John. In fact, if anything it was showing how big an A$$ Drill Sargent!John was as he reprimanded his soldier, Sam, for not following his supposedly simple orders. Just like he did Young Dean in "Something Wicked". This was further exasperated by showing how John ended up making a deal with Azazel with YED which lead to Dean doing the same thing for Sam later because of John's example in dealing with demons and John's intensive programming of Save/protect Sam at ALL costs. 

So there might be other examples of the show blaming Sam for making the right choice but these 2 examples IMO are all on John for his fanatical Drill Sargent upbringing of 2 very young boys.

[SueB]

26 minutes ago, Res said:

I know I tend to disagree with your POV so it should surprise you that I disagree with your examples here. I do not believe that the narrative was calling Sam out over not shooting YED!John. In fact, if anything it was showing how big an A$$ Drill Sargent!John was as he reprimanded his soldier, Sam, for not following his supposedly simple orders. Just like he did Young Dean in "Something Wicked". This was further exasperated by showing how John ended up making a deal with Azazel with YED which lead to Dean doing the same thing for Sam later because of John's example in dealing with demons and John's intensive programming of Save/protect Sam at ALL costs. 

So there might be other examples of the show blaming Sam for making the right choice but these 2 examples IMO are all on John for his fanatical Drill Sargent upbringing of 2 very young boys.

Well... in another surprise... I agree with @Res on this.  John was clearly in the wrong for trying to get Sam to kill his own father -- John was obsessed.  It was explained in the previous episode why he was obssessed but Sam made the right call.  And John calling out Sam later in 2.1 is just John being an ass and putting the death of YED over his sons. 

Yes, John knew YED was a danger to Sammy, but he didn't share that data with Sam.  Based on the data he had, Sam absolutely made the right choice.  And honestly, if that were Dean vice Sam, no way he would have shot John.  EVEN IF HE KNEW, no way would Dean have shot John.  I think Sam would be the same as well.

In short, killing a parent to prevent possible outcomes is just no bueno. 

Otherwise it's an "ends justify the means" decision.  And although the boys have crossed that line from time to time, it's generally shown to be "bad".  Doing "bad" for a potential "good" is not part of the show ethos IMO.

[catrox14]

3 hours ago, SueB said:

Doing "bad" for a potential "good" is not part of the show ethos IMO.

I'm not sure this is true at all.

John sold his soul (bad) and the Colt to save Dean's life (good)

Dean sold his soul(bad) to save Sam's life (good).

Dean let Gadreel possess Sam(bad) to save Sam's life (good).

Sam drank demon blood(bad) because it gave him more strength to hold Lucifer(good?).

Dean and Cain bore the Mark which had negative consequences but also was keeping the world safe from the Darkness (good).

And I'm sure there are more examples. 

Plenty of bad things for the potential good seems like it's part of the bread and butter of the show, even back to Kripke's days, along with saving people, hunting things.

[AwesomO4000]

3 hours ago, Res said:

I know I tend to disagree with your POV so it should surprise you that I disagree with your examples here.

Heh, for me it would have been more of a surprise if you didn't disagree with my examples. But I actually don't disagree with anything you said bout John or what the show was showing at that time. It's things that happened later that made it seem somewhat suspect when I look back on it. I'll expand on this in a moment.

3 hours ago, SueB said:

Well... in another surprise... I agree with @Res on this.  John was clearly in the wrong for trying to get Sam to kill his own father -- John was obsessed.  It was explained in the previous episode why he was obssessed but Sam made the right call.  And John calling out Sam later in 2.1 is just John being an ass and putting the death of YED over his sons. 

Yes, John knew YED was a danger to Sammy, but he didn't share that data with Sam.  Based on the data he had, Sam absolutely made the right choice.  And honestly, if that were Dean vice Sam, no way he would have shot John.  EVEN IF HE KNEW, no way would Dean have shot John.  I think Sam would be the same as well.

In short, killing a parent to prevent possible outcomes is just no bueno. 

We both - and @Res - agree on this part, but considering what happened, you might be surprised at how many fans at the time were saying things like "if only Sam had done what John told him, none of this would have happened." And when a similar thing happened with Jake... "Sam should've stepped up and done the hard thing and killed Jake, so poor Dean wouldn't have had to make the deal to bring him back." A lot of the talk was focused on how much Dean had to sacrifice for Sam and how that was Sam's fault for getting himself killed.

I didn't agree with that, but based on the consequences that the narrative showed, it maybe made it easier for that doubt to creep in with some fans. I don't think it helped that as things progressed some odd things happened. One was that normally stubborn ass Sam came around to John's way of thinking. One of the lessons Sam "learned" in season 2, 3, and 4 was that John did the best that he could to protect them. No, not really in my opinion - or at least only so much as it didn't interfere with John's obsession. A lot was conveniently sacrificed to fuel that obsession, so for me John hadn't done the best that he could to protect Sam and Dean. In my opinion, Sam had been right to question how John treated them, but somehow the conclusion the narrative had Sam come to was that he'd been wrong to clash with John so often and maybe he should have tried harder to be a better son somehow (i.e. that it had been mainly his (Sam's) fault that things went wrong and now Sam felt guilty about that.) Sam even came to believe in a way that his leaving home and going to college had been something he maybe shouldn't have done or that by his doing so, he had somehow not been accepting his responsibilities ("After School Special"). For me this was a confusing message. Later on we found out  that Sam was on demon blood, but he'd started coming to his conclusions back in season 2, so the main part I think that the blood influenced was Sam deciding that "Adam" should be indoctrinated into the same thing and Sam saying that he'd consider Dean calling him like John a compliment, but that didn't seem to change Sam's general conclusions concerning John, so maybe the blood addiction wasn't really factoring so much into things in terms of Sam's conclusions about John.

I would rather Sam had been able to keep a few more of his original conclusions about John without having to learn how wrong he'd been to question John, but that's not the way the show played it (from what I saw), and I'm not sure what the message is there that they didn't. If all along Sam had been right as a kid / teen that John was an obsessed jerk that put his obsession about the YED in front of his kids' needs, what does it mean that the writers would then have Sam change his mind about that later on?

23 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I'm not sure this is true at all.

John sold his soul (bad) and the Colt to save Dean's life (good)

Dean sold his soul(bad) to save Sam's life (good).

Dean let Gadreel possess Sam(bad) to save Sam's life (good).

Sam drank demon blood(bad) because it gave him more strength to hold Lucifer(good?).

Dean and Cain bore the Mark which had negative consequences but also was keeping the world safe from the Darkness (good).

And I'm sure there are more examples. 

Plenty of bad things for the potential good seems like it's part of the bread and butter of the show, even back to Kripke's days, along with saving people, hunting things.

I agree with you here***, catrox, or at the very least that the show is not always clear that doing "bad" for good reasons is an entirely bad thing. It's been my opinion for a while that this show is kind of complex that way that the consequences for doing "bad" things aren't always a given and are not always consistent.

*** with the small change that I would say that lying about Gadreel was the bad part in that example... I didn'tso much mind Dean helping Gadreel possess Sam. On the other hand, the show did seem to see that part as the "bad" part, so in that way, it is an example exactly as you stated it.

Quote

Sam drank demon blood(bad) because it gave him more strength to hold Lucifer(good?).

For this example, I think that in season 5 in "Swan Song" this does apply in terms of ultimate results. There were some pretty big negative consequences, but they were just arguably outweighed by the good, because the bottom line is that had Sam not drunk the demon blood, Lucifer couldn't have been put back into the cage... so: good. It's interesting that even here though, that the negative consequences - including a six figure death toll - were pretty bad. So in Supernatural-verse, even saving the world is not without a big cost sometimes.

In season 4, however, the blood drinking had some good consequences - like killing Samhain (sp?) and Alastair - but the raising Lucifer consequence is a tough one to overlook, so in the end ultimately bad.

Quote

And I'm sure there are more examples. 

One of the more interesting (unusual?) ones was Dean / Crowley working together in "The Devil You Know." It was almost amusing how naive Dean was about Crowley until he killed the guards because they were in the way. But in the end, Crowley delivered the goods that they needed, so the bad (working with Crowley / the death of the gaurds) resulted in good (getting crucial information for putting Lucifer back in the cage).

[Lemuria]

11 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

and not killing Jake being examples. Both of those things had awful consequences despite being technically the right thing to do.

I don't think that Sam's not killing Jake was wrong--Jake was down and, momentarily, helpless, and Sam's one of the good guys and good guys don't kill like that--but I also don't think it was Sam's act of not killing Jake that caused it all to go pear-shaped.  What Sam did do wrong, IMO, was--despite being a trained hunter--turning his back on an enemy who means to kill  him when that enemy is down but not out AND leaving a knife lying right beside him.  I have thought, for 11 seasons now, that this was an extremely stupid thing to do.

[AwesomO4000]

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

And I'm sure there are more examples. 

And I just remembered a big one... The recent example with the Alternate Universe. In the AU, Mary didn't make a deal with the YED (good), but that meant Sam and Dean weren't born, so the apocalypse happened there on a much more epic scale (bad), so i would guess that arguably Mary making that deal with YED (bad) was ultimately a good thing, because Sam and Dean stopped the apocalypse (good).

17 minutes ago, Lemuria said:

What Sam did do wrong, IMO, was--despite being a trained hunter--turning his back on an enemy who means to kill  him when that enemy is down but not out AND leaving a knife lying right beside him.  I have thought, for 11 seasons now, that this was an extremely stupid thing to do.

I agree that that doesn't look very tactically sound - I give Sam the excuse of brain damaged from the fight - but considering how strong Jake was, even if he didn't have a knife, he likely could've broken Sam's neck anyway just as quickly. The knife was nice and dramatic so that Sam would die more slowly in Dean's arms (and it would be a convenient Sam messed up tool as you mentioned), but pretty much the only way to have stopped Jake for sure, in my opinion, would have been to kill him. He was a dangerous weapon all on his own.

[companionenvy]

Sam's actions may often be justifiable, but he does have a rather unfortunate record. I don't see that as the writers deliberately writing him as wrongheaded, but it does add up to, IMO, a somewhat unbalanced portrayal in which I think the narrative wants us to see Sam as generally competent and a force for good, but disproportionately often puts him in the goat role. This is especially noticeable when Dean sometimes makes similarly reckless decisions without causing similar consequences.  

I should also note that this isn't unique to SPN; I can think of a number of shows in which a character gets sidelined or has a string of losses without, I think, the showrunners having any intention of painting the character as fundamentally inept/jerky/whatever (one example who comes to mind is Tyrion in Game of Thrones, who is supposed to be brilliant, but has basically gotten everything wrong as Dani's adviser). My explanation is that writers sometimes take it for granted that character X is awesome/smart/a hero, and so when the time comes where they need something to go wrong for plot reasons, it doesn't occur to them that maybe it is a problem if that same character who screwed up last time they needed a plan to go wrong screws up again. 

[ILoveReading]

My prediction for next season-

Michael finds a better "stronger vessel" after 3 episodes

Lots of lectures about how dumb Dean was for saying yes from Mary, Sam, Bobby, and Cas.

More guilt for Dean.

Lots of references to weak Dean. 

Dabb must be salivating right now.

[Res]

2 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

My prediction for next season-

Michael finds a better "stronger vessel" after 3 episodes

Lots of lectures about how dumb Dean was for saying yes from Mary, Sam, Bobby, and Cas.

More guilt for Dean.

Lots of references to weak Dean. 

Dabb must be salivating right now.

Yep, but don't worry. Dean will still be there to put up with all of it quietly and still do whatever for Sam whenever Sam needs it. After all, according to Dabb, that's all Dean's good for. All other responses will be taken to the bitterness thread because I'm very bitter. But I am looking forward to Jensen playing a new character and will enjoy it for the little time he's allowed.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

Lots of references to weak Dean. 

Yeah, unfortunately, that is Dabb`s kink. So I`m bracing myself.

[ILoveReading]

2 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

Yeah, unfortunately, that is Dabb`s kink. So I`m bracing myself.

Michael coudn't even take out Lucifer.  They couldn't even let Dean have that moment.

[Katy M]

1 minute ago, ILoveReading said:

Michael coudn't even take out Lucifer.  They couldn't even let Dean have that moment.

What are you talking about?  Dean killed Lucifer.  Pretty much as Dean, with Michael jucie in him.  Much better than Michael doing it.

[ILoveReading]

3 minutes ago, Katy M said:

What are you talking about?  Dean killed Lucifer.  Pretty much as Dean, with Michael jucie in him.  Much better than Michael doing it.

MichaelDean lost that fight.  Lucifer was doing the whole smiting thing, if Sam hadn't thrown him the blade both Michael and Dean would be dead. 

They still could have had MichaelDean win the fight and still had Sam toss the blade.

Edited May 18, 2018 by ILoveReading

[Katy M]

11 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

MichaelDean lost that fight.  Lucifer was doing the whole smiting thing, if Sam hadn't thrown him the blade both Michael and Dean would be dead. 

They still could have had MichaelDean win the fight and still had Sam toss the blade.

That wouldn't have been very realistic since Lucifer had his juice and Jack's.  He still ended up winning.  I thought it was a fairly good fight, but a little corny with the "flying"

[ILoveReading]

1 minute ago, Katy M said:

That wouldn't have been very realistic since Lucifer had his juice and Jack's.  He still ended up winning.  I thought it was a fairly good fight, but a little corny with the "flying"

Michael was supposed to have extra juice from having his sword.  There was no point in Dean saying yes if it didn't really change anything

[BoxManLocke]

8 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

Michael was supposed to have extra juice from having his sword.  There was no point in Dean saying yes if it didn't really change anything

I mean, regular Dean wouldn't have been able to sustain a beating from overcharged Lucifer.

 

But they shouldn't have made the fight so one-sided, that I agree with.

[ILoveReading]

I see people saying that Michael has to deal with Dean.  

But this is Dabb's Dean and obviously Dabb dosen't see Dean as heroic or strong.

He sees him as an extention of Sam.   Period.  Tonight made that obvious.  So I wouldn't be surprised if Dean's just along for ride with Sam once again getting all the heroic and saving Dean rather than Dean overcoming Michael. 

[Res]

4 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

I see people saying that Michael has to deal with Dean.  

But this is Dabb's Dean and obviously Dabb dosen't see Dean as heroic or strong.

He sees him as an extention of Sam.   Period.  Tonight made that obvious.  So I wouldn't be surprised if Dean's just along for ride with Sam once again getting all the heroic and saving Dean rather than Dean overcoming Michael. 

Now, don't be too cynical. Maybe there's another little green army man stuck in the ashtray on the other side of the Impala that the sun can shine on just so . . . take heart. *rolling eyes with heavy sarcasm*

 

ETA: and I was really looking forward to Jensen playing crazed, caged, sociopath Michael. Instead, he gets 1D asshat Michael.

Edited May 18, 2018 by Res

[FlickChick]

1 hour ago, ILoveReading said:

My prediction for next season-

Michael finds a better "stronger vessel" after 3 episodes

Lots of lectures about how dumb Dean was for saying yes from Mary, Sam, Bobby, and Cas.

More guilt for Dean.

Lots of references to weak Dean. 

Dabb must be salivating right now.

I seriously doubt it will last that long. Unless, of course, that we watch Sam et. al. searching desperately for runaway Michael. We could even take bets on how long Dean is Michael and make an interesting game of it. *sarcasm*

[cavelupum]

Popping in for a little post-finale vent, since I think it fits better here than in the episode thread.

 

The only thing I wanted out of this season was Sam being the one to end Lucifer. Dean was already set to have what was arguably the much more intriguing storyline in the finale and into S14 with all the spoilers flying around about Jensen playing a new character, and I was totally fine with that; I just wanted Sam to kill the Devil. I felt certain the show was heading in that direction by acknowledging Sam’s trauma and desire for vengeance this season after flagrantly disregarding his history with Lucifer at the end of S11. When Sam was done in by vampires and had to endure the shame of being brought back by and indebted to his tormentor, I thought that surely this continued twisting of the knife had to have a greater purpose beyond being needlessly cruel and was building up to a huge and satisfying payoff for Sam.

 

After everything, that Sam’s only involvement in Lucifer’s demise was tossing Dean a blade was completely anticlimactic for me, though given the writers’ track record, I guess I should be thankful they didn’t have Sam tied up or knocked unconscious during the fight. He definitely got to contribute something, but I feel it should have been mostly his victory with help from others, not providing an assist so Dean could land the kill. Granted Dean was seconds away from being killed himself so I acknowledge that Sam’s role was much greater and more critical to their success than it seemed at face value, but that’s the problem — IMO, it should have felt distinctly like it was Sam’s win and it just...didn’t. Not at first, anyway. It was the one thing I was really looking forward to and for it to be so underwhelming is a big disappointment. I suspect (hope) I’ll find more satisfaction in it with time and a couple of rewatches.

 

On the bright side, Jared sold the hell out of Sam’s utter relief at Lucifer finally, finally being gone for good, and I will always and forever appreciate his ability to bring this amazing character to life. It’s too bad Sam’s happiness was so short-lived, but it was still beautiful and gratifying for this fan to see, and if Dean being in Michael Land for a time means we’ll get some Sam focus, POV, and bonding with other characters like Jack and Mary next season, I’m 100% all for it.

[devlin]

3 hours ago, cavelupum said:

Popping in for a little post-finale vent, since I think it fits better here than in the episode thread.

 

The only thing I wanted out of this season was Sam being the one to end Lucifer. Dean was already set to have what was arguably the much more intriguing storyline in the finale and into S14 with all the spoilers flying around about Jensen playing a new character, and I was totally fine with that; I just wanted Sam to kill the Devil. I felt certain the show was heading in that direction by acknowledging Sam’s trauma and desire for vengeance this season after flagrantly disregarding his history with Lucifer at the end of S11. When Sam was done in by vampires and had to endure the shame of being brought back by and indebted to his tormentor, I thought that surely this continued twisting of the knife had to have a greater purpose beyond being needlessly cruel and was building up to a huge and satisfying payoff for Sam.

 

After everything, that Sam’s only involvement in Lucifer’s demise was tossing Dean a blade was completely anticlimactic for me, though given the writers’ track record, I guess I should be thankful they didn’t have Sam tied up or knocked unconscious during the fight. He definitely got to contribute something, but I feel it should have been mostly his victory with help from others, not providing an assist so Dean could land the kill. 

Unlike dean who had been beaten and choked into unconsciousness while sam got to kill the demon who had not only tortured dean relentlessly but also managed to break him so completely that he became his worst nightmare. 

[companionenvy]

I thought this was pretty clearly a Dean-win with a Sam-assist. Throwing a weapon to someone is kind of the definition of an assist, in the context of battle. The episode as a whole also reinforces my confusion over the idea that Dabb et al sidelines Dean, sees him purely as slapstick comic relief, etc. There are episodes where Dean is portrayed as comically crude or ignorant, and it is annoying, but when push comes to shove, this is not the kind of episode you write for a sidekick you have no respect for. This is especially glaring given that this episode involved what appears to be the death of Lucifer, who has always been more associated with Sam. If SPN is primarily Sam Winchester's hero's journey, there's no way Dean takes the lead in the final takedown of Sam's arch-enemy. And even outside that one fight, this was very much Dean-centric. He had the great scene with Jack, he shot Jack, he trapped Michael - and he got what is bound to become one of the most iconic moments of this series in the shot of Michael-sword Dean with wings. 

It is true that Dean was losing, but he's still the one who ultimately got the kill, and it was still his decision to allow Michael in in order to have a chance against Lucifer. And he got to do it as Dean Winchester, not as Michael's passenger. As this is bitch/jerk, I'd also point out that this comes at the heels of Sam's plan to kill Lucifer failing - and, in fact, Sam's brief stint as "leader" of their charge into AU world ending with Sam getting taken out by a vamp. So it isn't as if Sam has been covering himself in glory. Even last year, when he led the raid on BMOL headquarters, Sam didn't get a crowning moment of awesome during the fight itself; Jody got the single biggest kill. 

I've seen a few posts here and in the episode thread pointing out that Sam got to kill Alistair without an assist from Dean. But I really don't see these situations as comparable. Alistair had a major role in Dean's life, but he only actually appeared in a few episodes in a single season. That's a world of difference from Lucifer, who has been a major player, in one way or another, for I think seven seasons (4-7, if we count Hallucifer, and then 11-13)? And if we're going that far back, Dean also killed the YED without an assist from Sam, even though Sam's connection to Azazel was stronger. I also think it is worth remembering that Sam's kill of Alistair wasn't presented as a total triumph; it was a red flag indicating the dark path he was on. It showed us how strong Sam was, but in the context of that season, Sam being super-strong was a subject of concern, not celebration. 

[Aeryn13]

Quote

If SPN is primarily Sam Winchester's hero's journey, there's no way Dean takes the lead in the final takedown of Sam's arch-enemy. 

They might bring Lucifer back and give the conclusive win to Sam so this just becomes a little interlude. I don`t think that would be out there for the show.

Quote

There are episodes where Dean is portrayed as comically crude or ignorant, and it is annoying, but when push comes to shove, this is not the kind of episode you write for a sidekick you have no respect for. 

I do think Dabb sees Dean only as a Sam-adjacent so his worth and role lie in at best being a bodyguard. Also, Dabb loves to portray Dean as weak or at least weaker than Sam so I`m bracing myself for "Sam could overpower Lucifer but Dean is just too weak" stuff. I mean, they belittled Dean`s hell to the point of having him say that 6 weeks in prison was worse. And that is when they even remembered he went there.  

And you couldn`t even beat a positive word about Dean out of Singer, even if you tried. 

If at least one of them at any point ever seemed positive about the character, I wouldn`t be as anxious as I`m with the writing for Dean. 

With some directorial choices in this episodes I`m questioning if Singer is too inept as a director or if it was intentional to make that wireworks fight scene as ludicrous as possible. 

[ILoveReading]

26 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

I thought this was pretty clearly a Dean-win with a Sam-assist.

Dean lost that fight.  It wasn't even close.  Dean would be dead and so would Michael if Sam wans't there.  It was more than an assist. 

Given Dabb's unexplainable love of Mark P and Lucifer there is no guarantee Lucifer is going to stay dead.  The show has had multiple chances to either send him back to the cage and end him but they never took any of them. 

Plus, if this is supposed to be Dean posistive why muddy the waters of why Dean said yes by putting Sam in danger.   Why not have Sam decide he wasn't going to let Dean go it alone, like in Swan Song (the show repeats itself all the time).  The scene could have played out like it did.  Plus, Sam saved Dean ealier in the ep by having the idea to call Jack.

Not to mention when things started going sideways, Mary's line was "lets call Sam."  Not Sam and Dean.  That, IMO is very telling. 

35 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

I've seen a few posts here and in the episode thread pointing out that Sam got to kill Alistair without an assist from Dean. But I really don't see these situations as comparable. Alistair had a major role in Dean's life, but he only actually appeared in a few episodes in a single season. That's a world of difference from Lucifer, who has been a major player, in one way or another, for I think seven seasons (4-7, if we count Hallucifer, and then 11-13)? And if we're going that far back, Dean also killed the YED without an assist from Sam, even though Sam's connection to Azazel was stronger. I also think it is worth remembering that Sam's kill of Alistair wasn't presented as a total triumph; it was a red flag indicating the dark path he was on. It showed us how strong Sam was, but in the context of that season, Sam being super-strong was a subject of concern, not celebration. 

This is my major pet peeve.  The dismissing of significant events in Dean's life becasue they fail in comparison to Sam's traumas.  Even if he was only in a couple of episodes the impact he had on Dean was just as significant as the impact Lucifer had on Sam.  He turned Dean into the thing Dean hated the most.  I think its unfair to dismiss it because it 'wasn't as long as Sam's. or given as much screen time   Dean's character will never have closure with Alistair and he'll always know Alistair got the best of him where as this isn't true with Sam.  He's had several confrontations with Lucifer where he got the best of him.   Including a major assist in this one. 

Dean failed as the Michael sword.  I think this was Dabb's intention.  He thinks Dean is inferior to Sam and I think its more than evident in the writing.  The writers can't even give Dean a scholarly moment without having to make him struggle with a simple latin word.  A language Dean's been exposed to since he was four. 

I disagree about the Yellow Eyed Demon.  I think Dean was just as effected by him as Sam, just in a different way.  Dean lost his childhood, and his identity because of that night.  Events that destroyed his sense of self and self esteem to this very episode.   I think its unfair to dismiss it because Dean wasn't the YED's primary target.

Plus, the show made sure to create a Cain/YED hybrid just so Sam could get his own kill, and with the Michael's lance no less.  So Im sure Sam will get to kill Michael in the end.  I wouldn't even be surprised if the writers give Sam his own possession storyline with Cage Michael. 

This isn't directed at you Companion Envy as I don't believe it was the intention behind your post, just more my frustration that he writers for continually dismissing everything Dean has been through.

[ILoveReading]

5 hours ago, cavelupum said:

The only thing I wanted out of this season was Sam being the one to end Lucifer.

Not that the writers follow their rules but technically Sam couldn't kill Lucifer because the writers put themselves in a corner with the whole Archangels can only kill Archangels with the special arch angel blade. 

I think this ep was basically Dabb giving the victory to Sam.  First we had Jack telling Sam he believed in him and that he could could take out Lucifer.  Then we get an fully powered Dean coming in and basically not be able to to single thing against Lucifer, until Sam threw him the blade.  I think this was Dabb making sure Sam got the win. 

Edited May 18, 2018 by ILoveReading

[DeeDee79]

51 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

This is my major pet peeve.  The dismissing of significant events in Dean's life becasue they fail in comparison to Sam's traumas.  Even if he was only in a couple of episodes the impact he had on Dean was just as significant as the impact Lucifer had on Sam.  He turned Dean into the thing Dean hated the most.  I think its unfair to dismiss it because it 'wasn't as long as Sam's. or given as much screen time   Dean's character will never have closure with Alistair and he'll always know Alistair got the best of him where as this isn't true with Sam.  He's had several confrontations with Lucifer where he got the best of him.   Including a major assist in this one. 

This so much. ITA.

[Katy M]

7 hours ago, FlickChick said:

I seriously doubt it will last that long. Unless, of course, that we watch Sam et. al. searching desperately for runaway Michael. We could even take bets on how long Dean is Michael and make an interesting game of it. *sarcasm*

I certainly hope it doesn't last that long.  Michael better be out of my Dean in the first episode.

[ILoveReading]

Just now, Katy M said:

I certainly hope it doesn't last that long.  Michael better be out of my Dean in the first episode.

I wouldn't worry too much.  Im sure Michael will want to get rid of his weak vessel as soon as possible. 

I bet Dabb cant' wait to write that ep

[companionenvy]

1 hour ago, Aeryn13 said:

Also, Dabb loves to portray Dean as weak or at least weaker than Sam so I`m bracing myself for "Sam could overpower Lucifer but Dean is just too weak" stuff. 

Maybe that will happen, but it didn't happen in this episode and, IMO, Dean isn't portrayed as weak any more frequently than Sam is. If Sam were so strong, he wouldn't have been damseled in two out of the last three episodes, in one case killed by a random vamp, and failed in his own plans for defeating Lucifer. There's an occasional super!Sam episode, but also plenty of tied up Sam, screw-up Sam, knocked out Sam, etc. If anything, the rare "Red Meat" version of Sam seems to me to be an attempt to balance the scales when Sam hasn't had all that much to do for a while, or doesn't have as meaty an arc as Dean. 

At this time last season, there was talk about Sam now being the undisputed leader of TFW, and of the community of hunters more generally. That clearly didn't happen, Mary's bizarre "call Sam" notwithstanding. There is no real community of hunters, and Dean still normally takes the lead, to the point where it is still presented as a significant departure when Sam does it instead. So I'm far from convinced that Dabb wrote a highly Dean-centric finale just for the pleasure of tearing him down. That doesn't mean Dean won't need saving -- as both brothers often do -- or that he won't struggle against Michael. But I really don't think this is going to be played as a referendum on how weak Dean is and has always been. Cas is an angel, and he wasn't able to wrest control from Lucifer. We'll have to wait and see.

 

54 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

Dean lost that fight.  It wasn't even close.  Dean would be dead and so would Michael if Sam wans't there.  It was more than an assist. 

But again, isn't that what an assist is? In basketball, an assist doesn't mean "the guy who scored was doing great on his own, but you backed him up." It means you set up the shot; without the person who gets the assist, there is no basket. The person who actually scores is still the one who gets the bulk of the glory.

I'd also like to point out, especially in light of previous discussions of Sam not giving Dean enough credit, that Sam's reaction was "you did it." Dean then had to add "we did it." So Sam, who isn't known around these parts for excessive humility, immediately reacted by crediting Dean, as well he might, given that Dean's the one who ultimately stabbed a blade through the Devil's chest and left him lying on the ground with charred wings. 

I don't want to open up the very old can of worms about whether and to what extent the army man in Swan Song represented Dean or required Dean's presence to function as it did, but leaving that issue aside, Sam was also utterly failing against Lucifer until he saw it. That's kind of par for the course for big fantasy/sci-fi battles. The important thing is who wins in the end - Harry Potter certainly isn't more magically powerful than Voldemort, who actually succeeds in killing him during the climax of Deathly Hallows (it doesn't take); he wins because of an arcane magical rule that means Voldemort's wand can't touch him in the final battle. He's still the hero, because he had the guts to enter the field. Neville Longbottom, by contrast, is a sidekick, even though Voldemort couldn't have been killed at all if Neville hadn't killed Nagini first.

1 hour ago, ILoveReading said:

Even if he was only in a couple of episodes the impact he had on Dean was just as significant as the impact Lucifer had on Sam.  He turned Dean into the thing Dean hated the most.  I think its unfair to dismiss it because it 'wasn't as long as Sam's. or given as much screen time   Dean's character will never have closure with Alistair and he'll always know Alistair got the best of him where as this isn't true with Sam.  He's had several confrontations with Lucifer where he got the best of him.   Including a major assist in this one. 

I actually think they got rid of Alistair way too early, and would have been happy to have an arc with him as a major antagonist. But as much weight as he had in Dean's life, Dean is a character in a story and in narrative terms, Lucifer wound up being a much, much more important figure than Alistair. Whether he should have been or not is a different question; as it is, Alistair was a side-villain, and Lucifer was a Big Boss.  And while Sam may have closure with Lucifer, we could just as easily say that he'll never have closure with YED, who cursed him. Dean's the one who got "that was for our mom" and the kill. Obviously the circumstances are never going to be 100% parallel; my point is that it isn't like Dean has never had an unassisted kill, including one that arguably denies Sam a form of closure - Sam gets back into hunting primarily to get revenge against the thing that killed Jessica. A thing that Dean winds up defeating, without help from Sam. 

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I certainly hope it doesn't last that long.  Michael better be out of my Dean in the first episode.

I certainly hope Jensen isn`t cheated out of this even quicker than out of Demon!Dean. That would be the worst. This is the first different character they have given Jensen in 13 years to both Jared and Misha`s multiple. And I had to suffer through a lot there without even getting something for my guy. Now I do hope Jensen-fans get a day in the sun.  

Quote

Sam gets back into hunting primarily to get revenge against the thing that killed Jessica. A thing that Dean winds up defeating, without help from Sam. 

They later invented Brady the demon as Jessica`s real killer - and had Sam kill him. Just like they brought in another Yellowed Eyed Demon and specifically gave the kill to Sam so he would have one. 

Last Season the same logic flew out the window when it came to killing a hellhound for example.   

Quote

That doesn't mean Dean won't need saving -- as both brothers often do -- or that he won't struggle against Michael. But I really don't think this is going to be played as a referendum on how weak Dean is and has always been.

I hope not but I`m very anxious on that front. Dabb hasn`t been able to stop himself thus far. And Singer lives to ruin things for Dean-fans.  

Edited May 18, 2018 by Aeryn13

[ILoveReading]

27 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

I don't want to open up the very old can of worms about whether and to what extent the army man in Swan Song represented Dean or required Dean's presence to function as it did, but leaving that issue aside, Sam was also utterly failing against Lucifer until he saw it.

If the amulet had fallen out of Dean's pocket and it was the amulet that gave Dean strength to stab Lucifer then I'd say its comparable to Swan Song.   But Sam himself go the assist, not an avatar of Sam.  That for me is the difference. 

Sam still could have been given the assist even if Dean won the fight.

27 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

But as much weight as he had in Dean's life, Dean is a character in a story and in narrative terms, Lucifer wound up being a much, much more important figure than Alistair

Disagree because again this is dismissing what Dean went through as not as important or as traumatizing as what Sam did.  From a character standpoint Dean's hell experience fundamentally changed him, and to say that doesn't matter because it wasn't given screen time is belittling Dean's trauma as not that big a deal.  

It's like in that episode of the Big Bang Theory.  Penny asks Sheldon to share something personal.  Sheldon says that he;s not okay with Youtube changing their user ratings system.  Penny mocks it and when Sheldon points out she hurt his feelings she says she didn't think it was a big deal.  Sheldon points out its big deal to him and that was the point.  This is how Dean's hell time should be treated.  It mattered to Dean.    So it shouldn't matter if Alastair was on screen five minutes or five years.  The point is, its a big deal to Dean's character.   It should be treated as such.   IMO, this isn't an excuse for the writer to ignore how much Dean suffered. 

Edited May 18, 2018 by ILoveReading

[cavelupum]

3 hours ago, devlin said:

Unlike dean who had been beaten and choked into unconsciousness while sam got to kill the demon who had not only tortured dean relentlessly but also managed to break him so completely that he became his worst nightmare. 

Dean also got to kill Azazel completely on his own despite the fact that Azazel destroyed both of their lives and fed demon blood to Sam as a baby, an act of violation that had lasting repercussions and left him feeling tainted his entire life. For me personally, this isn’t about scorekeeping; Lucifer should have been Sam’s kill, and there’s not really anything that’s going to change my mind about that. For my part, I wish they’d never brought Lucifer back in the first place, and that goes double now that I’ve seen how they chose to end his story.

59 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

Not that the writers follow their rules but technically Sam couldn't kill Lucifer because the writers put themselves in a corner with the whole Archangels can only kill Archangels with the special arch angel blade.

I feel that the writers handwave and retcon their way out of so much that it wouldn’t have been a terribly difficult task for them to somehow fudge this one a bit if it was at all important to them that Sam be the one to definitively end Lucifer. Heck, have Jack retain just enough of his own archangel grace that as Sam stabs Lucifer, he could grab on to Sam’s arm and channel what remained of his power into fueling the blade’s effectiveness — and that’s just something silly I came up with on the fly while typing this post, I’m sure professional writers could make it happen somehow in a more satisfying way. Alternatively, they could have simply not written that rule at all in the first place, given it was something that only became part of the lore this season and doesn’t jibe at all with the way regular angel blades work. I feel like there’s already at least a little laxity in the interpretation as written because it was made clear that Dean was the one actually driving the bus when the archangel blade was used successfully against Lucifer, not Michael — Michael was just powering Dean up at the time as opposed to being the one in control.

[Katy M]

58 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

I certainly hope Jensen isn`t cheated out of this even quicker than out of Demon!Dean. That would be the worst. This is the first different character they have given Jensen in 13 years to both Jared and Misha`s multiple. And I had to suffer through a lot there without even getting something for my guy. Now I do hope Jensen-fans get a day in the sun. 

I love Dean.  I would miss him if he weren't around for half the season or more.  I realize that most people on this board apparently dont' like Dean, since they always want him possessed, or turned into a demon or something.  But, I disagree.  I think Dean is awesome.

 

34 minutes ago, cavelupum said:

Dean also got to kill Azazel completely on his own despite the fact that Azazel destroyed both of their lives and fed demon blood to Sam as a baby, an act of violation that had lasting repercussions and left him feeling tainted his entire life. For me personally, this isn’t about scorekeeping; Lucifer should have been Sam’s kill, and there’s not really anything that’s going to change my mind about that. For my part, I wish they’d never brought Lucifer back in the first place, and that goes double now that I’ve seen how they chose to end his story.

I would say John helped immensely with killing Azazel.  If he hadn't wrestled him out of the meat suit for a couple of minutes giving Dean time to pick up the Colt, Dean would have been toast.  But, they're all a team.  It shouldn't matter who gets the death blow as long as it's given.

 

35 minutes ago, cavelupum said:

I feel that the writers handwave and retcon their way out of so much that it wouldn’t have been a terribly difficult task for them to somehow fudge this one a bit if it was at all important to them that Sam be the one to definitively end Lucifer.

I don't think so either, especially considering it wasn't shown.  It was just a line between a human and a demon.  Why would they know?  Have either of them ever tried to kill an archangel with an archangel sword?  My guess would be no. In fact, as far as we know there are only 4 archangel in the SPN universe--Gabriel, Lucifer, Raphael, and Michael.  Raphael was actually killed by supercharged Castiel exploding him.  And, nobody else, again to the best of our knowledge, has tried to stab the others with archangel swords proving that it doesn't work.  If there are only the 4 angels, there are also only the  4 angel swords, and understandably they have kept them guarded unto themselves.  So, that is pure conjecture.  

We also know that Uriel said pointblank that only an angel could kill another angel, when he obviously must have meant only an angel blade could kill an angel, because people and demons have been killing angels left and right ever since.  And, Castiel originally suspected demons of the angel kills before Uriel said anything.  If it were that obvious that only angels could kill angels, they would have never ever bother suspecting Alistair.

39 minutes ago, cavelupum said:

I feel like there’s already at least a little laxity in the interpretation as written because it was made clear that Dean was the one actually driving the bus when the archangel blade was used successfully against Lucifer, not Michael — Michael was just powering Dean up at the time as opposed to being the one in control.

And, while i'm glad of that, it didn't really make any sense.  If I were Michael, I wouldn't have left this fight in Dean's hands.  Michael has centuries more of angelfighting experience than Dean.  And, if Dean died, he died.  Michael doesn't really strike me as a delegating kind of guy in this situation, especially where the stakes are so high.


 

[Aeryn13]

Quote

 I realize that most people on this board apparently dont' like Dean, since they always want him possessed, or turned into a demon or something. 

Or they are interested in supernatural storylines in show called Supernatural and are looking forward to Dean finally getting one that was thrown into the garbage back in Season 5.

If Sam was my favourite, I would feel like "okay, someone else can have a shot" since Sam got it multiple times and I would feel well-fed as a fan. However, wanting something cool for Dean, I`m very much starved. And I do not think it is a deep offense to want something for your favourite character that actually excites you. 

Maybe other people like the emo-stuff but I`m not one of them. I like the supernatural stuff and I soak up every bit of supernatural storyline for him.    

[Katy M]

24 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

If Sam was my favourite, I would feel like "okay, someone else can have a shot" since Sam got it multiple times and I would feel well-fed as a fan. However, wanting something cool for Dean, I`m very much starved. And I do not think it is a deep offense to want something for your favourite character that actually excites you. 

It's not for his character, though.  Not really.  It's for his meatsuit.  And, I don't like it when Sam gets possessed or loses his soul either.  I like Sam and Dean to be Sam and DEan.  They can be Sam and Dean and still fight supernatural creatures.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

It's not for his character, though.  Not really.  It's for his meatsuit. 

I don`t mind that. For me it is still an exciting storyline for that character. Noone is talking about him being gone permanently. But at least play it out a bit. Have Dean try to fight through on occassion so you can have a compelling internal struggle story. Jensen is up to that IMO.

Quote

And, I don't like it when Sam gets possessed or loses his soul either. 

You don`t like such plots, okay, but others do. That doesn`t mean they hate the character or have something against them. And at least with Sam, you had multiple chances to see if it was to your liking. Why is it such an indefensible crime to want that for Dean? There were years and years of "stories" on the show that I didn`t like but others did. I`m not gonna feel bad if finally there is something that pleases me but not others.     

And I dearly hope they don`t cut off the story before it even has a chance to blossom. I selfishly hope that this time I`m on the lucky side that gets pleased. Please, Jensen was so disappointed with the quick end to demon!Dean, I kinda hope if it comes to it, he`d make his displeasure known if the same thing happened again. 

Edited May 18, 2018 by Aeryn13

[cavelupum]

47 minutes ago, Katy M said:

I would say John helped immensely with killing Azazel.  If he hadn't wrestled him out of the meat suit for a couple of minutes giving Dean time to pick up the Colt, Dean would have been toast.  But, they're all a team.  It shouldn't matter who gets the death blow as long as it's given.

Very true, and I should have mentioned that John helped. However, my point stands that Sam at least played no part in ending Azazel despite what he did to both brothers and Sam specifically. Also, much like Azazel’s death is attributed to Dean despite John’s involvement, I suspect Lucifer’s death will be counted among Dean’s kills regardless of the fact that he couldn’t have done it without Sam.

 

As a general addition to the discussion, Dean will undoubtedly suffer and struggle at Michael’s hands more uniquely and intimately than anyone else will next season by virtue of being possessed by him, and Michael clearly has the more meaningful connection to and history with Dean. If despite all of that Sam gets to kill Michael in the end with a little help from Dean, then I expect Dean fans will feel exactly as cheated and unsatisfied as I’m feeling right now.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

If despite all of that Sam gets to kill Michael in the end with a little help from Dean, then I expect Dean fans will feel exactly as cheated and unsatisfied as I’m feeling right now.

It can not be any worse than the Season 5 Finale. The levels of cheated and disappointed I felt after this have never been (and are unlikely to ever be) reached again. So, I`d say: been there, done that already. 

[companionenvy]

1 hour ago, ILoveReading said:

Disagree because again this is dismissing what Dean went through as not as important or as traumatizing as what Sam did.  From a character standpoint Dean's hell experience fundamentally changed him, and to say that doesn't matter because it wasn't given screen time is belittling Dean's trauma as not that big a deal

I'm not trying to belittle the character's trauma. I actually agree with you that the show belittled Dean's trauma by not sufficiently dealing with his time in hell and making minimizing comments about it in later years. But at the end of the day, we're still left with the reality that Alistair has been in 5 episodes and Lucifer has been in 30, which makes him the character to whom the narrative has given far more time and importance. Killing him is on that level a bigger deal than killing Alistair in the context of the story, even if that isn't necessarily true for Dean personally.  If you actually have co-leads, both of them, IMO, should probably play a role in killing a character who has been an on-screen major antagonist for years.  Whereas you get more leeway for someone who has only been around for several episodes. It certainly would have been satisfying for Dean to kill Alistair, but Alistair wound up serving another purpose in the story. There are plenty of "hell, yeah!" moments in SPN; realistically, not every plot thread is going to or should end with the character who most "deserves" it getting the most satisfying outcome possible.

Again, I've never needed 100 % parity, and our sense of what constitutes equal treatment is so subjective that figuring out whose denied kill was more of an insult to which character and by exactly how much seems to me not necessary, even to the extent that it is possible. I'm interested in broad strokes. Both Sam and Dean have gotten some good kills. Both Sam and Dean have shown themselves to be impressive fighters, but have also been bested and outmatched in fights -- including fights they wound up winning partially by luck or outside intervention. Both Sam and Dean have found themselves in the supporting role when the other took the lead in a victory - including a victory that, arguably, would have been more emotionally satisfying for the brother on the sidelines. 

I do think there should be some general parity, given that both brothers are leads. I don't actually mind that Dean wound up being the one to kill Lucifer, but given how prominent Dean was in this finale - and how comparatively little Sam has done in the back half of this season -- I would hope that Sam would get significant contributions in the beginning of S14. I also think, as you know, that Sam has a noticeably higher proportion of goat to hero moments than Dean does, so I would be very upset if Sam once again either fails to save Dean or does something reckless that incurs terrible consequences. That doesn't mean I need Sam to be the one to defeat Michael - but given that Dean just defeated Lucifer, if he did, I wouldn't see that as an overwhelming insult to Dean's character, either.

My takeaway from this episode is that I'd have to squint a lot to see this as anything but a very, very good episode for Dean. I can't imagine that most Dean fans would have been pleased if their roles were switched throughout the episode, and then Sam wound up saying "yes" to Lucifer to enable him to kill AU Michael, complete with shot of Sam with angel wings. Even if Sam was losing and Dean threw him the weapon he needed, which is  the kind of role that often goes to people like the hero's girlfriend or best buddy in this type of story. 

People have been clamoring for Dean!Michael, and for Dean to get more supernatural arcs more generally, for years. We just got that. I have no idea whether the show is going to have the guts to keep it up for long, or whether that would even necessarily be a good thing for the show, assuming it meant losing the character of Dean Winchester for any length of time, but for now - I would have thought this episode was a pretty unambiguous win for fans of the character. YMMV. 

[cavelupum]

28 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

It can not be any worse than the Season 5 Finale. The levels of cheated and disappointed I felt after this have never been (and are unlikely to ever be) reached again. So, I`d say: been there, done that already. 

Well, the good news for those who felt Dean was robbed in S5 is that he’s clearly getting a second shot at being Michael’s sword, and I am certain he’ll be allowed to shine by overcoming and/or defeating Michael in some way. Meanwhile the book appears to have been permanently and irrevocably shut on the Lucifer and Sam storyline, and the ending cheated Sam out of a victory that rightfully should have been his. JMO.

[MysteryGuest]

1 hour ago, Aeryn13 said:

And I dearly hope they don`t cut off the story before it even has a chance to blossom. I selfishly hope that this time I`m on the lucky side that gets pleased. Please, Jensen was so disappointed with the quick end to demon!Dean, I kinda hope if it comes to it, he`d make his displeasure known if the same thing happened again. 

This is a totally different situation, though.  I wanted them to explore Demon Dean more, too, but I'm not too keen on Dean being possessed for half a season.  And it will all depend on what their game plan is for Michael.  Are they going to continue to have him be just one-dimensional evil, or are we going to see him struggle a bit over who he wants to be in this world?  I don't necessarily want to watch Dean in a constant battle for the upper hand in his own vessel, and I also don't want him to be just a passenger while Michael runs around killing people.  I'm honestly not sure where they're going to go with this one.

As someone who does love the emotional stuff and the brother bond, this one was satisfying for me.  The brothers took Lucifer out together, which was what they planned to do.  Neither one could have done it without the other.  It doesn't mean that Dean is somehow weak because he couldn't overtake a souped up Lucifer.  He made a desperate decision, knowing full well that it might not work.  And it wouldn't have if Sam hadn't been there.  I thought it was great.

[Myrelle]

13 hours ago, Res said:

ETA: and I was really looking forward to Jensen playing crazed, caged, sociopath Michael. Instead, he gets 1D asshat Michael.

I wanted this also for numerous reasons, one of them being that Dean is CagedMichael's True Vessel, not AUMichael. Now they can bring back CagedMichael and have him possess Sam so that Sam will get an even bigger kill than Lucifer when he takes out AUMichael-and likely all on his own w/o even an assist from Dean-and I highly doubt that Sam's big kill would happen in a similar manner to how Dean's worked in this episode AKA being beat to a pulp until Dean actively assists him in some big way that makes what he does the difference between failure or success for Sam. And tbh, I wouldn't even care if Sam was given the AUMichael kill(if it's to be given to anyone) as long as he wasn't wearing CagedMichael when he did it.

Lucifer has always been Sam-connected(with a one-time side of MC getting to play that role). I would hope that, for that reason, if no other, Dabb/Singer would keep Dean/JA CagedMichael-connected, but Dabb can just never be trusted to do right by Dean/JA-not by this fan anyway. So now that fear/worry remains.

I honestly feel that this storyline was predominantly written as a bone for Jensen to re-sign. He can't have been happy with the writing for his character in S12. That was the worst ever, IMO. But now that the ink is dry on the contracts, I'm sure they will get back to writing Samnatural again.

And I definitely feel like they've been trying with all that's in them to give Dean's leadership role over to Sam since S11. Dabb went all out for it with the BMOL sl at the end of  S12. Yes, the execution sucked, but the dialogue within that finale script cannot be denied, even if what went on with their handing over other of Dean's best character traits to Sam in that season-the weapons master role being the one that irked this Dean fan more than any other-is still debatable to some.

And now that Dean is "gone", for all intensive purposes, Sam will again take the lead and I can see that being a source of contention when Dean comes back-because we know he will-and I can also see Dean ceding the leadership role to Sam because, IMO, that's really what Dabb and Singer(and likely even JP) want out of all this for the Sam character. And, again IMO, it's solely JA who's stood in the way of that since Dabb took over.

Still, I'm going to try and enjoy the Dean/Michael storyline for as long as it lasts and hope that Jensen has enough BTS clout to make it last for at least half a season this time because when Dean comes back, it will be to Dabb's version of Dean again-and It makes me so sad to say this, but I don't really care for his version of Dean at all and even Jensen hasn't been able to save him sometimes-so more power to Michael/Dean for as long as we get to keep him and AFAIC, because I can't see that character being written the same as Dabb's Dean-not in any way.

Edited May 18, 2018 by Myrelle

[Katy M]

19 minutes ago, Myrelle said:

I wanted this also for numerous reasons, one of them being that Dean is CagedMichael's True Vessel, not AUMichael.

They're really the same Michael, so they would have the same True Vessel.

[catrox14]

18 minutes ago, Katy M said:

They're really the same Michael, so they would have the same True Vessel.

How so? Lucifer isn't the same Lucifer in both worlds. Why would Michael be the same?  AW Michael killed AW Lucifer not Our Lucifer.

[Katy M]

3 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

How so? Lucifer isn't the same Lucifer in both worlds. Why would Michael be the same?  AW Michael killed AW Lucifer not Our Lucifer.

They have the same DNA or whatever.  The AU is a split off from when Mary made her decision.  So, at that point, they were the same.

[catrox14]

2 minutes ago, Katy M said:

They have the same DNA or whatever.  The AU is a split off from when Mary made her decision.  So, at that point, they were the same.

Oh right that theory. The one I fully disagree with.  Even if that does apply to the AW humans, which I don't think it does, there is no evidence it applies to the archangels.  The archangels pre date Mary's decision. Why would AW Michael have made the distinction between His Lucifer and Our Lucifer if they were the same? 

[Katy M]

1 minute ago, catrox14 said:

Oh right that theory. The one I fully disagree with.  Even if that does apply to the AW humans, which I don't think it does, there is no evidence it applies to the archangels.  The archangels pre date Mary's decision. Why would AW Michael have made the distinction between His Lucifer and Our Lucifer if they were the same? 

 

Exactly.  They pre-date that decision. So, there would be less difference between them and humans who would have a larger percentage of there life, if not the whole thing, after that decision.  He made the distinction between His Lucifer and Our Lucifer because there would be some difference in the last 40 or 50 years.  There wouldn't be so many people the same, as in there wouldn't be any people the same, if this weren't a split off universe.