ILoveReading September 10, 2018 Share September 10, 2018 38 minutes ago, Katy M said: I've often wondered if people who complain that In the Beginning and The End are Sam-Centric and DEan doesn't get any Dean-centric episodes, would like it, if there were an episode that was supposedly all about him, but Jensen was only in one or two scenes. My guess would be not. Speaking for myself I'd be okay with this. I won't lie, I'd miss seeing Jensen on my screen but if the episode was well written and I felt Dean's presence through his absence and it wasn't a Dean is (insert negative trait) and Sam is a (insert positive trait here), or a very special lesson ep for Dean, I would probably like it. Even though Jared was on screen for 30 seconds in In The Beginning, Sam was still very present in that episode. It was the same thing last season, thought Deans' grief we felt Cas's presence. Spoiler Unfortunately, I don't get this feeling with the Michael storyline this season, I'd miss Dean but I'd be okay if Dean didn't come back until the season finale and Jensen got to play Michael all season. But from the sounds of spoilers it sounds like everyone is growing and flourishing without Dean because he's that oxgen sucking character who somehow prevents other characters from growing. Seriously, that comment left me bitter. 51 minutes ago, Katy M said: He saw his future. Based on the way the season played out, I disagree. He saw a future in which he kept his distance from Sam because like @Myrelle said he learned that he must take care of Sam always and forever. Even though the ep is in my top 10, it's Jensen's performance that puts it there. In terms of Plot it was just another very special episode where Dean learns a lesson, and his place and Sam's body guard. What bothers me the most about this is that the show won't let Dean stand his ground with Sam but then it makes him learn another very special lesson about how he's too bossy and controlling with Sam and needs to let Sam grow up. That's was irritated me about the end of last season. They pulled this old dead horse out of storage, and even had Sam specifically remark that Dean puts him at the kiddie table. Sam made a choice. If he didn't like the choice he made, boo hoo. Suck it up and grow up. Sam is a 35 year old man. At some point that needs to stop being an excuse. Spoiler They're continuing it with this leader Sam stuff. So I'm dreading the aftermath of when Dean comes back and he as to grovel at Sam's feet for not recognizing Sam as the supreme leader. It's like Curious Case. We're told that its Dean who plays poker and pool to get them money, but at that point in the series we only see Sam doing it on screen and when its a plot point, Dean suddenly can't play poker anymore. So Sam can save day even though poker was more of Dean trait. Dean's always been the leader. But its never been acknowledged on screen. But now that its a plot point they're pushing Sam into it and acting like it was just more bossy Dean. Yes this leaves me bitter to the extreme. 5 Link to comment
Myrelle September 10, 2018 Share September 10, 2018 36 minutes ago, Katy M said: Isn't just having good episodes and good characters, regardless of who they are, more important? I'm sad to say that I've stopped hoping for this and re-watching S6 on TNT told me why. The writing has just kept going further and further down the drain for me since The End and I no longer think that this group of writers is capable of giving us consistently good episodes and consistently good characters, but I think our best shot at that will depend on how long they will allow Jensen play Michael because as others here have stated(see ILoveReading's post above), I think that the aftermath is going to be a disaster for Dean because I can't see this bunch of writers allowing him to grow from this in any other way than learning what a terrible thing possession is and how horrible it was for him to have forced it upon Sam in S9 and no one will dispute that or even attempt to dispute it-as he himself, has always wound up eventually doing for others(and made to do by the writers and showrunners-all of them, tbh) when they've done very similar things. I wish that I had more hope, but experience with this show won't let that happen for me, until(and if) they actually do change this aspect of the writing for Dean. 1 Link to comment
ILoveReading September 10, 2018 Share September 10, 2018 (edited) I was actually fine with the balance of the show until Fallen Idols when the show dumped the whole mess from season 4 into Dean's lap. The season 5 finale just rubbed salt into the wound. Then when they sent Sam to hell it sealed the deal. Dean's hell story line was the one thing that was about Dean. I was disappointed in how they handled Dean's PTSD so I was not interested in what so ever in Sam's, especially when they made Dean degrade his own experience. I was so disappointed they gave that storyline to Sam. I stopped caring about balance and good story telling. I just wanted the show to do right by Dean. Edited September 10, 2018 by ILoveReading 5 Link to comment
Myrelle September 10, 2018 Share September 10, 2018 8 minutes ago, ILoveReading said: I was actually fine with the balance of the show until Fallen Idols when the show dumped the whole mess from season 4 into Dean's lap. The season 5 finale just rubbed salt into the wound. Then when they sent Sam to hell it sealed the deal. Dean's hell story line was the one thing that was about Dean. I was disappointed in how they handled Dean's PTSD so I was not interested in what so ever in Sam's, especially when they made Dean degrade his own experience. I was so disappointed they gave that storyline to Sam. I stopped caring about balance and good story telling. I just wanted the show to do right by Dean. I absolutely hated Fallen Idols, too; but I was still hoping right up until the finale that they would do right by Dean, but the finale put a fork in it for me. And S6-8 just drove the fork in deeper. 1 Link to comment
Pondlass1 September 10, 2018 Share September 10, 2018 Dean's issues - even at the beginning - are rarely followed through or given consequence. Maybe it's my Dean bias, but it seems so apparent to me that any Dean trauma gets swept under the carpet. Something's eating Dean is a running thread through most seasons. But my biggest gripe with this Dabb bunch is that main characters have evolved into pure stereotypes. Dabb sees them not as a complex crew each with their own foibles - but as one-note characters in a TV adventure story. Dean eats all day and not very bright, but he's brave and impulsive. Sam researches and patiently tolerates wild and crazy Dean antics. Cas - well, I don't know what to make of Cas these days. And my biggest beef that I complain about all the time - is that everyone and their dog are overnight super hunters. Sam and Dean are nothing special now. It's a fun job, not lonely or dangerous or self sacrificing at all. And Dabb has his favs. It's way more fun to write for them. In fact Sam and Dean now swirl around the peripherals. instead of being the focus. I hope Kripke returns and writes the final half of the final season. I know he had his problems but he at least cared for his brothers- he created them after all. 5 Link to comment
Aeryn13 September 10, 2018 Share September 10, 2018 (edited) Quote I've been here a long time and this board used to be a heavily weighted Sam board, IMO; and during that time Aeryn was my Hero/Heroine. Just sayin' that because I think it needs sayin'... Awww, you are making me blush. Quote I've often wondered if people who complain that In the Beginning and The End are Sam-Centric and DEan doesn't get any Dean-centric episodes, would like it, if there were an episode that was supposedly all about him, but Jensen was only in one or two scenes. If it was an episode that focused on something positive and valuable that the character brings to the table preferably not "what can he do for others", I`d be overjoyed. There are a few episodes, I cringe so much in embarassment about the humiliating comic relief or the humiliating "dumby dumb" stuff or the lesson episodes where he has to grovel before *insert character I want to punch here* where I wish, he wouldn`t have been in the episode, rather than having to watch that. Quote I stopped caring about balance and good story telling. I just wanted the show to do right by Dean. I agree, at this point I can only judge episodes by how badly his character is screwed over this week. Or have the occasional happy reprieve. Then there is the very odd episode that features Dean in a rather neutral, side-character way but where I find either story or guest stars interesting. The Lily Sunder episode worked for me in that vein. Edited September 10, 2018 by Aeryn13 3 Link to comment
AwesomO4000 September 10, 2018 Share September 10, 2018 3 hours ago, Myrelle said: You mean like the Curious Case of Dean Winchester? Except to me, that one was less about Dean and more about informing us how awesome Sam was and building Sam up so that we could get on with his single-handedly saving the world storylinethat S5 became after The End, and all while Dean was given the honor of holding his cape, because that's what Dean learned in The End, IMO."We keep each other human" became code for you can't leave your brother's side no matter what he's said or done to you in the past because he needs you to support him if he's going to save the world single-handedly. But this is just another old disagreement concerning this show, IMO. So I'll try and keep things succinct and just say that I vehemently disagree with this thought Perspective is a funny thing, because what I thought that Dean learned in "The End" was that he couldn't leave Sam, because if he did, Sam would entirely screw up and doom the world. His "we keep each other human" - though while yes, he was a bit horrified of what he himself became - in my opinion was one of Dean's partial "apologizing" (in this case only giving part of the truth) to get a fast result that I talked about earlier in the thread. Because Dean didn't really learn anything that he didn't already think - mainly that Dean thought that Sam was a screw up - and he continued to think this throughout most of season 5. In my opinion, Dean felt like saving the world was all on him, which while I understand the argument that in the end it was more on Sam, my argument would be that it should have been on Sam. He (Sam) broke the world according to the narrative, he should make the sacrifice to fix it. Even if the entire thing that Dean learned in season 5 was that sometimes you can't do it all yourself - which I don't think it was, but I'll go with it - at least he didn't have to start an apocalypse to learn it like Sam did. In season 4, Sam thought he had to save the world... and in believing that almost doomed it with the message - to me - being very clear that Sam's arrogance in thinking he had to save the world alone was the main thing that caused the apocalypse. Quote And I'll add that the reason the S5 finale still sticks in the craw of so many Deanfans is because it was the resolution of a five year story arc and plotline that pretty much cemented and defined what the showrunners thought the two brothers roles were in it(and I say showrunners because I think Gamble had just as much to do with it as Kripke did, at that point-maybe even more, tbh), and it rendered and relegated every single one of Dean's plotline-connections in that 5 year time frame into either sub-plots of Sam's big, main plotline(that rarely went unmentioned or alluded to in some way in any episode-even those that were supposedly Dean-centric)or into a complete red herring that was accomplished through the worst bait and switch writing I've ever seen-the kind that leaves a viewer thinking what could and/or would ever stop them from doing this again, after this one. And after doing asll of those thing yet again in S6-8, culminating the same way with the Trials sl in S8, it was only after that that they deigned to give us S9-11 as a "balm", of sorts, and to try and parallel that first big Sam storyline because by that point they'd finally gotten the hint/message that Jensen also wanted Dean to be written as a main character on this show in the same vein that Sam was-meaning he wanted a piece of the big, single-handed heroics, too-and that it wasn't just his "delusional" fans asking now. JP/Sam still got the better writing and time-wise, the longer arc, but IMO, Dean fans learned long ago that "balance" in that regard was never going to be fully realized, in any case. I disagree. Two of those 5 years were wrapped up in the Azazel storyline, which was concluded via Dean and John... Sam, in my opinion, had almost no part in wrapping that up at all. Sam got defeated by Azazel via Jake, but his resisting Azazel and not doing what Azazel wanted had little effect on the plot. And once Sam was dead, Azazel immediately moved on to Jake... no big deal. Sure, Azazel said that he was glad Sam was back, but it really didn't make any difference. Jake opened the gates of hell like Azazel wanted, and the supposed "boy king" plotline died along with Azazel... when Dean and John killed him. So that was two years of plotline wrapped up there while Sam lied on the ground not even in earshot of the action. Talk about a red herring. Sam was "the one" except that when Sam was killed, Jake would do just as well and when Azazel died, it was all just a side note anyway. Sam got no personal resolution for what Azazel did to him. Also in order for Sam to be saved, Dean sacrificed - as well as helping kill Azazel - switching the storyline to Dean in season 3. So I disagree that the season 5 finale was the resolution to a "five year story arc," because in my opinion it wasn't. The Azazel arc of two years was only tangentially related to the Lucifer story arc, because as we learned later, the angels were manipulating things. The only thing Azazel was needed for was to feed Sam demon blood. Everything else was secondary and the part where Azazel affected the Winchetser family was wrapped up by Dean and John in season 2. The plot arc wrapped up in season 5 was started in earnest in season 4. Because Azazel was gone, Sam stopped having active powers at the end of season 2, so his powers in season 4 came - as far as we know - from the demon blood. So for me, my opinion that it wasn't a 5 season arc, but a 2 season one is valid. As far as I know, even Kripke pretty much made it that way also. From what I heard, he tired of the "psychic kids" storyline from the first two seasons and so unceremoniously dropped it, and later brought in the angels to take care of the loose ends left by Dean's hell storyline. I'm not sure how season 7 was the same. Dean finished out the Leviathan storyline when he killed Dick Roman. Sam had the hallucinating Lucifer arc, but it was emotional and tangential to the main plot - which in my opinion was more Dean-centric. Ghost Bobby was also emotional, but it tied into Dean's need for revenge that drove his going after Dick Roman. It was a simple revenge plot with some interesting emotional side things and some fun characters in my opinion. And in my personal opinion, I still don't get the appeal of the season 8 trial storyline. It was terrible. In my opinion, Dean didn't get the story arc, because it was never meant to be finished, and the writers didn't think - based on Dean's personality according to Carver (which I think was a huge step backwards from what Gamble set up) - Dean would fit that. Dean's self-esteem issues would mean that he would have no reason not to close the gates of hell. Dean would entirely think that closing the gates would be worth his death. It was all set up for Sam to learn how crappy he was, but then be "saved" by the power of love from Dean... only to write that as a bad thing for Sam later where he'd learn a very special lesson in season 9. I mean yes, they could have had Dean go through the trials and learn, that yes, he was worth it and he shouldn't have to give up his life to close the gatess, but that would require Carver to have let the characters grow and move on, and he was all about regressing the characters and angst. So in my opinion, he would've turned it into Dean somehow being "arrogant" for thinking that way and therefore feeling guilty about not closing the gates... Carver couldn't even let Sam do that without having Sam try to say it was somehow Dean's fault, and then later showing it was just Sam being a jerk for not appreciating how Dean would do anything - even some pretty crappy stuff - to save him. For me, the trial arc was crap all around and I wouldn;t want to have it - or really any of season 8 - for either character. Even the purgatory arc, which had the potential to be awesome, was wasted, and Benny who could have been an interesting character was basically turned into - in my opinion - a "look at this awesome character who nobody appreciated and who got mistreated by everyone. Poor Benny." The plot even took Dean and Benny's friendship and made Dean look disloyal - which in my opinion is just wrong, because Dean is the last character on this show who should be shown as not being loyal. Season 8 was total crap, in my opinion, and I wouldn't want any of the plots for Dean for Sam or vica versa. I would rather the entire season have not happened actually. There's not one episode I would really miss that much. I liked "Everybody Hates Hitler" for example, but would give it up in a second if it meant that season 8 could be erased from the show. It was an exercise in a showrunner going with plots that made little sense based on character, and then when fans didn't (understandably in my opinion) respond positively, instead of course-correcting (something that could easily have been done), shoving those arcs further down our throats and insisting we just didn't understand the genius of them. That's how I felt watching season 8. I'm not going to get started on season 9 beyond that Dean got a lot more than being the main character in that season, because they also trashed - or more accurately, for me, continued to trash - Sam's character in the process. And then made a joke out of it. 3 hours ago, Pondlass1 said: Dean's issues - even at the beginning - are rarely followed through or given consequence. I feel the same thing for Sam, too with an example being the previously mentioned Sam's rage issue thing... which I'm not even sure why they mentioned myself it if it was never intended to be addressed again. 1 Link to comment
Katy M September 10, 2018 Share September 10, 2018 10 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said: Perspective is a funny thing, because what I thought that Dean learned in "The End" was that he couldn't leave Sam, because if he did, Sam would entirely screw up and doom the world. His "we keep each other human" - though while yes, he was a bit horrified of what he himself became - in my opinion was one of Dean's partial "apologizing" (in this case only giving part of the truth) to get a fast result that I talked about earlier in the thread I thought he learned that they were "stronger together." Mostly because he said just the opposite at the beginning of the episode. So, without Dean, Sam says yes to Lucifer, and without Sam, Dean becomes a callous soldier. 5 Link to comment
catrox14 September 10, 2018 Share September 10, 2018 I think "The End" was one of the few episodes that managed to be both Dean, Sam and even Cas centric. That's probably why it's my favorite episode ever. It's one of the most balanced episodes ever written IMO. I can even make a bit of a case that the episode was really about Cas more than anyone because he changed the most. Sam was entirely present in the episode by his split with Dean and Jared had a fantastic moment as Lucifer. Dean was fully present throughout because he was the one learning. and he saw himself. Jensen did a terrific job playing very different versions of Dean. Cas was fully present because he waited for Dean, got Dean out of Zachariah's construct and in the future basically became human and died in battle next to Dean. Misha slayed as future stoner Cas. I don't think anyone got the shaft in that episode acting or character wise. 1 Link to comment
Myrelle September 10, 2018 Share September 10, 2018 1 hour ago, AwesomO4000 said: I disagree. Two of those 5 years were wrapped up in the Azazel storyline, which was concluded via Dean and John... Sam, in my opinion, had almost no part in wrapping that up at all. Sam got defeated by Azazel via Jake, but his resisting Azazel and not doing what Azazel wanted had little effect on the plot. And once Sam was dead, Azazel immediately moved on to Jake... no big deal. Sure, Azazel said that he was glad Sam was back, but it really didn't make any difference. Jake opened the gates of hell like Azazel wanted, and the supposed "boy king" plotline died along with Azazel... when Dean and John killed him. So that was two years of plotline wrapped up there while Sam lied on the ground not even in earshot of the action. Talk about a red herring. Sam was "the one" except that when Sam was killed, Jake would do just as well and when Azazel died, it was all just a side note anyway. Sam got no personal resolution for what Azazel did to him. Also in order for Sam to be saved, Dean sacrificed - as well as helping kill Azazel - switching the storyline to Dean in season 3. After which it was switched back to Sam again-big time-if you want to look at it that way. And as ILoveReading stated, then it became about the saving the world single-handedly-and Sam didn't bring on the Apocalypse by himself, no matter what other characters said because in fact, he could have never started the Apocalypse by breaking the last seal, if Dean hadn't broken the first seal, all because he was apparently not strong enough to withstand torture as well as dear old dad could-none of which was ever even addressed again leaving fandom to have to entirely headcanon how Dean might have felt about that, or even if it was true. I'm good with just agreeing to disagree. It's where we usually end up on most things concerning this show, anyway. 1 Link to comment
ILoveReading September 10, 2018 Share September 10, 2018 I'm trying to figure out how they keep each other human works. If Dean tries and tells Sam what he wants to do is stupid (like thinking he's God's chosen and thinking he can go into Lucifer's cage) Sam complains that Dean is treating him like a child and does it anyway. Then Dean has to bail Sam out. It's rare Sam actually listens to Dean. And Sam choose a demon over his brother, didn't even try to lift a finger to help him after purgatory. Then choose Death instead of fighting to get back to his brother. Plus if Dean does open up to Sam, Sam tends to tell him he's doing it wrong or blames Dean for it. So IMO, "Keep each other human." is fancy words. If you look beyond the tell. Link to comment
catrox14 September 10, 2018 Share September 10, 2018 38 minutes ago, ILoveReading said: So IMO, "Keep each other human." is fancy words. If you look beyond the tell. I always thought it was much more about Dean having seen what he thought was an inhumane version of himself in the future and doing things he wouldn't do now, and seeing inhuman Samifer is why he phrased it as "keep each other human". 2 Link to comment
AwesomO4000 September 10, 2018 Share September 10, 2018 2 hours ago, catrox14 said: I think "The End" was one of the few episodes that managed to be both Dean, Sam and even Cas centric. That's probably why it's my favorite episode ever. It's one of the most balanced episodes ever written IMO. I can even make a bit of a case that the episode was really about Cas more than anyone because he changed the most. Sam was entirely present in the episode by his split with Dean and Jared had a fantastic moment as Lucifer. Dean was fully present throughout because he was the one learning. and he saw himself. Jensen did a terrific job playing very different versions of Dean. Cas was fully present because he waited for Dean, got Dean out of Zachariah's construct and in the future basically became human and died in battle next to Dean. Misha slayed as future stoner Cas. I don't think anyone got the shaft in that episode acting or character wise. I might agree with this more if Sam had had any effect on Dean's decision, but he didn't. Sam's appeal to Dean in the beginning of the episode fell on deaf ears, and if it weren't for the manipulation by Zachariah - if Zach's version of the future is to be believed - Dean never would have listened (meaning Sam didn't have had any effect on the plot.) And while I enjoyed the episode and did think Jared did a good job as Lucifer... that wasn't Sam. That was Lucifer. Sam had long given up - for reasons we were never told, but have to assume based on the non-information, was probably because Sam was too weak to do it on his own and so caved and gave in to Lucifer. So basically what we saw - maybe - was a ghost of Sam who had given up and was therefore irrelevant now to what we saw in that future except for causing it to begin with by being weak and/or perhaps a traitor to humanity... which the idea of Sam being a traitor was even touched on in the episode. That's not exactly what I would call a good showing for Sam's character. Sam himself was barely in the episode or given any kind of point of view by which we could understand why he had done what he had done... and that's because why Sam said yes to Lucifer was considered irrelevant by the plot - even future Dean remarked something to the effect of he didn't care why Sam did it - because the focus was on everyone else having to deal with Sam's apparent screw up. And this basic lack of point of view and motivation for Sam is one of the main reasons why I don't consider "The End" a balanced episode. If anything it's pretty Sam negative as well as being very Sam light. So I completely disagree with your premise that no one got the shaft character-wise. I though that Sam very much did myself. I agree that Jared had great acting opportunities with playing Lucifer, but that's not the same thing as Sam. Sam very much got thrown under the bus in terms of point of view and time onscreen, in my opinion. (See also my comments below). But who knows, maybe there is someone more Sam-leaning who agrees with you. (I would tend to think no, though) My idea of a balanced episode would be something like "Scarecrow," "The Usual Suspects," and to an extent "Nightshifter" for early episodes. "Changing Channels" and "Mommy Dearest" would be good middle season examples. ("Time After Time..." for Sam and Dean, but without Castiel in that one). And "First Born" and "Soul Survivor" (sort of since it was technically Demon Dean), for all 3 of them and "Baby" (though it leaned somewhat Dean near the end, we had Sam-focus in the beginning) and "Safe House" for balanced Sam and Dean episodes for the later episodes. The last two are two of my all time favorites for this reason. 3 hours ago, Katy M said: I thought he learned that they were "stronger together." Mostly because he said just the opposite at the beginning of the episode. So, without Dean, Sam says yes to Lucifer, and without Sam, Dean becomes a callous soldier. This is true, but considering what that means in terms of one character perhaps becoming callous, but at least trying to save humanity versus Sam dooming humanity, in my opinion the "stronger together" message of this episode is way more because of Dean than screw up little brother Sam. One could look at that future and say if not for Sam having said "yes," everything would have worked out fine and Dean's insistence that them being apart was better would have worked. The only reason it didn't work was because Sam was what: too weak, too arrogant, too indifferent, was mentally tortured into it, what? ...and said "yes"? Who knows why, because the writers didn't think that was important enough to let us know. In my opinion, if the episode had been more balanced, we would have had a flashback or at least Castiel filling in why Sam said "yes." But instead we had future Dean saying he didn't care, and just by the fact that Sam did say "yes" branded him as a traitor to humanity no matter what the reason. Link to comment
Katy M September 10, 2018 Share September 10, 2018 24 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said: One could look at that future and say if not for Sam having said "yes," everything would have worked out fine and Dean's insistence that them being apart was better would have worked. The only reason it didn't work was because Sam was what: too weak, too arrogant, too indifferent, was mentally tortured into it, what? ...and said "yes"? Who knows why, because the writers didn't think that was important enough to let us know. I don't know that that's necessarily true. Let's pretend Sam didn't say yes and just died in some showdown in Detroit like Future Dean originally said happened. OK, so Lucifer has to make due with lesser vessels. By this time nobody's going to say yes to Lucifer, but he tricks them by saying he's some other angel that can take down Lucifer and I'm sure he'd get some yesses. Dean still doesn't say yes to Michael and since the angels can't have the Apocalypse their way, they still leave. Dean's life still becomes what it is except without having to be mad that Sam said yes, or feeling guilt that that happened, or whatever it is Dean feels about that. But, he would still have to fight Lucifer no matter who the vessel is and the world would still be decimated by the croatoan virus and Cas would still be de-angelized, so, I don't think it's as simple as "Sam screwed up, therefore this happened to Dean." Link to comment
catrox14 September 10, 2018 Share September 10, 2018 49 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said: In my opinion, if the episode had been more balanced, we would have had a flashback or at least Castiel filling in why Sam said "yes." But instead we had future Dean saying he didn't care, and just by the fact that Sam did say "yes" branded him as a traitor to humanity no matter what the reason. I never viewed Sam as being a traitor to humanity in this episode. I think the message that was to be taken away is that Dean not being there to help Sam, to support Sam's position is why Sam said yes. Or just to simply stop Sam in whatever way. I think saying he's a traitor to humanity is way too harsh. 4 Link to comment
AwesomO4000 September 11, 2018 Share September 11, 2018 2 hours ago, Katy M said: I don't know that that's necessarily true. Let's pretend Sam didn't say yes and just died in some showdown in Detroit like Future Dean originally said happened. OK, so Lucifer has to make due with lesser vessels. By this time nobody's going to say yes to Lucifer, but he tricks them by saying he's some other angel that can take down Lucifer and I'm sure he'd get some yesses. Dean still doesn't say yes to Michael and since the angels can't have the Apocalypse their way, they still leave. Dean's life still becomes what it is except without having to be mad that Sam said yes, or feeling guilt that that happened, or whatever it is Dean feels about that. But, he would still have to fight Lucifer no matter who the vessel is and the world would still be decimated by the croatoan virus and Cas would still be de-angelized, so, I don't think it's as simple as "Sam screwed up, therefore this happened to Dean." You're right that there are other options, but that's not what this particular episode showed us. That's what I meant by "One could look at that future (the one in the episode)" and come to that conclusion, because that was the only scenario the show gave us. And in the episode, Dean had to fight Lucifer in such an extreme way, because Sam said yes and gave Lucifer his one true vessel. In Dean's plan earlier in the episode neither would say "yes," so the angels would be thwarted and the fight wouldn't happen. In the future the show showed us, Sam said "yes" and so the world was doomed. It also could have happened with another scenario, true, but the show chose to show us this one, and in this one, Dean was in that position because Sam said "yes." And because Sam said "yes," even in the best scenario after that - Dean also saying yes - there would still likely have only been the chance to save half the planet. 2 hours ago, catrox14 said: I never viewed Sam as being a traitor to humanity in this episode. I think the message that was to be taken away is that Dean not being there to help Sam, to support Sam's position is why Sam said yes. Or just to simply stop Sam in whatever way. I think saying he's a traitor to humanity is way too harsh. I looked back at the dialogue and I remembered wrongly concerning Future Dean's reaction. I thought that he'd said he didn't care why Sam said "yes" when he actually said "I wish I knew." As for the rest though, saying Sam betrayed humanity may be harsh, but in the absence of any other information, I pretty much think that's what the show appeared to be saying. If the message to be taken away was that without Dean, Sam was too weak to keep from saying "yes" thereby letting Lucifer have his preferred vessel in which he would most likely destroy humanity... I'm not sure what else to call it that isn't equally as bad as a traitor to humanity. Cowardly? Power hungry? Weak? I guess from my point of view, it shouldn't have been Dean's responsibility that Sam not say "yes," especially since Sam knew the consequences... and if this episode is saying that Sam would say "yes" anyway - in the absence of a reason - the episode is telling me that Sam is the weaker, less heroic character who can't hack it without his brother and ultimately crumbles under pressure and knowingly (and that is the key to my complaint) sells out the planet because of it. Because yes, FutureDean was ultimately broken and would sacrifice his friends... but the reason why is because he thought he had no choice. The entire world was falling apart and as far as he knew, he was the only one who might be able to stop it. And the episode showed us that. I think, however, by not showing us why Sam said "yes" - and I don't think it really would have been that difficult to do: just a throwaway line by Castiel - that it was doing Sam's character a disservice in deference to plot. By not giving Sam a reason to say "yes" that was sympathetic or showing that he felt he had no choice - like say Lucifer killing people in front of Sam because he wouldn't say "yes" and promising it would stop if he did say "yes" - in my opinion, the writers left it hanging there that Sam was most likely the weak link and the reason Dean and everyone else in the scenario was doomed. But this wasn't the first time that the writers didn't really bother to give Sam's point of view in a critical (imo) situation, so it didn't really surprise me. In my opinion, Dean's point of view, characterization, and motivations have generally been more respected by the writers whereas Sam's are more likely to be sacrificed to further the plot. I think it's why Sam can sometimes be a little bit of a conundrum... because sometimes the writers just have Sam do stuff - like drink demon blood, say "yes" to Lucifer in the potential 2014 future, or not look for Dean after he gets blown up - without really bothering to explain why Sam does it. For me, anyway... I get that others' opinions will vary. Link to comment
ahrtee September 11, 2018 Share September 11, 2018 1 hour ago, AwesomO4000 said: As for the rest though, saying Sam betrayed humanity may be harsh, but in the absence of any other information, I pretty much think that's what the show appeared to be saying. If the message to be taken away was that without Dean, Sam was too weak to keep from saying "yes" thereby letting Lucifer have his preferred vessel in which he would most likely destroy humanity... I'm not sure what else to call it that isn't equally as bad as a traitor to humanity. Cowardly? Power hungry? Weak? I find it interesting that it's someone who actually *likes* Sam who sees those horrible motives, whereas most people I know tend to be more pragmatic--as in, we don't know what extenuating circumstances there were, but I'm sure there was something. Part of it, I'm sure, is that I still had faith in the writers (at that point). And since they'd been setting up Sam as the savior for all those seasons, I see no reason why they would do something off screen to negate that, especially just as a throwaway line. IMO, the reason why Sam said yes wasn't explored more there was NOT to make him look bad, but because *it didn't matter in that storyline.* That entire scenario, just like the ones in DSOtM, was set to make Dean say yes when Zach zapped him back to his time. It was designed to make him feel guilty and be determined to take on Michael to stop Sam before he said yes. If they'd gone into reasons and explanations, then it wouldn't have the desired effect. So no, I don't think it was any kind of deliberate slam against Sam. But if you want to consider (more positive) reasons why Sam might have said yes? Think about Swan Song. That was a deliberate, considered decision. And if Sam *hadn't* been able to overcome Lucifer, would he have been considered a "traitor"? To carry that one step further, since there are those who believe that just having Dean there was enough to give Sam the strength (or whatever) to overcome Lucifer, then maybe *that* was the moment where the realities split: one scenario where Dean was there and Sam won, and another where, as in The End, Dean and Sam hadn't spoken for years and so Sam decided that he could do things on his own and failed. I could accept that as Sam staying in character, as opposed to him just saying yes because he gave up or thought it was a good idea. I tend to look for reasons that make sense for the characters, not automatically assume the writers are out to throw someone under the bus. If they continue to act OOC later, then I can rethink the writers' motives. YMMV. 6 Link to comment
AwesomO4000 September 11, 2018 Share September 11, 2018 7 hours ago, ahrtee said: IMO, the reason why Sam said yes wasn't explored more there was NOT to make him look bad, but because *it didn't matter in that storyline.* That entire scenario, just like the ones in DSOtM, was set to make Dean say yes when Zach zapped him back to his time. It was designed to make him feel guilty and be determined to take on Michael to stop Sam before he said yes. If they'd gone into reasons and explanations, then it wouldn't have the desired effect. So no, I don't think it was any kind of deliberate slam against Sam. To carry that one step further, since there are those who believe that just having Dean there was enough to give Sam the strength (or whatever) to overcome Lucifer, then maybe *that* was the moment where the realities split: one scenario where Dean was there and Sam won, and another where, as in The End, Dean and Sam hadn't spoken for years and so Sam decided that he could do things on his own and failed. I could accept that as Sam staying in character, as opposed to him just saying yes because he gave up or thought it was a good idea. I don't entirely disagree here. It was actually part of what I was saying above. The discussion that lead up to my point here was that, in my opinion, the episode "The End" was a Dean-centric episode. Others disagreed with me, saying that "The End" was actually more Sam-centric or balanced. For me, it makes less sense for it to be both. Either as you say, the reason why Sam said "yes" wasn't explored was because the episode was mainly about Dean and how his decision would affect the storyline, or it was all about Sam, and Dean's decision was irrelevant to saving the world, in which case, in my opinion, Sam's motivation would have been relevant and shouldn't have been left out. And I guess what brings this all up is that I often see the argument that "Swan Song" proves that Dean was irrelevant to the plotline, that it was all about Sam saving the world himself and that he writers' intention was to show that Dean didn't even have to be there and could have been replaced by anyone else who drove Baby to the graveyard... My point has always been that I don't think that's true. I've always said that Dean was critical and in my opinion, "The End" was part of setting this up. For me, I guess, it can't be both ways. Either Dean was being shown as important here, or if it was "all Sam," then "The End" was showing Sam having failed and something else had to have changed - if Dean wasn't important - before "Swan Song." And that to me makes less sense given how the episode went. So, I think the episode was trying to say what you said it was... That having Dean there was what Sam needed to not say "yes." But my argument here is that if that is the case, isn't that critical? If Sam couldn't do it on his own without Dean, and Zachariah's future shows us this, then how is Sam the only hero here and Dean is irrelevant? My words may have been a bit harsh concerning Sam's motivations in "The End," because the writers left that door open... and in my opinion they left it open on purpose. They left it open to show that Dean was critical to the future not going to crap. And sure, some will complain that just being there to keep Sam from screwing up somehow makes Dean just the "wind beneath Sam's wings" or something - which I disagree with, but whatever - but my point is, that much like here in "The End" with the writers not meaning to show Sam as bad, I don't think the writers intended to show Dean as irrelevant in "Swan Song." I think they intended to show Dean as absolutely critical. Could they have made it less vague and skipped the army man?*** Sure! But apparently, the writers for whatever reason thought that was understood from the set up beforehand or that detail just was just cool or whatever, but that to me doesn't mean the message was that Dean wasn't important, because they spent an entire episode previously - "The End" - setting up exactly how important Dean was. And if Sam couldn't do it without Dean what difference does it make really in the end if Sam falls in the hole alone... the episode "The End" established that - for whatever reason - without Dean and Sam together, the world was doomed and there never would have even been the chance for Sam to fall in the hole on the first place. And if to emphasize that, "The End" left it vague as to why Sam said "yes," I can accept that, because the cause is a good one. But if it isn't going to make a difference in the message anyway, and the overall impression is still going to be that "it's all about Sam," well, I guess for me that's just annoying, because what was even the point of leaving it all vague in the first place? I'm not sure any of that made any sense, but that's where my brain went and why I got on that bent... hopefully that explains why I did, though probably not. *** (Though with my Lucifer theory, the army man makes more sense, because Lucifer hated Dean, so beating on Dean would be fun for him an wouldn't make a chink in his armor so much, but it did complicate things, so...) 7 hours ago, ahrtee said: I find it interesting that it's someone who actually *likes* Sam who sees those horrible motives, whereas most people I know tend to be more pragmatic--as in, we don't know what extenuating circumstances there were, but I'm sure there was something. Part of it, I'm sure, is that I still had faith in the writers (at that point). And since they'd been setting up Sam as the savior for all those seasons, I see no reason why they would do something off screen to negate that, especially just as a throwaway line. I disagree with you here, however, that Sam had been being set up as the savior for all of the previous seasons. I think originally, actually, Sam was supposed to turn dark and be the bad guy. And, in my opinion, in taking Sam dark in season 4 to partially get that plot in there anyway, for some fans, Sam's character was damaged beyond saving... and I think part of the reason for that was because - like in "The End" - there were times when Sam's motivation was not - in my opinion - adequately explained and/or his point of view wasn't focused on. For example, how much more sympathetic might it have been in setting up why Sam went off the deep end and succumbed to Ruby's manipulation if we had seen something like Sam having to bury Dean? Or if we had been shown exactly why Sam started drinking demon blood in the first place? Maybe for example, Sam couldn't save someone innocent from demons because he couldn't stop or exorcise a demon fast enough, and Sam was devastated by yet another failure. Then Ruby coming in and saying "you know Sam. I know a way you could have saved that little girl /little boy / woman / little girl's father / whatever..." and it would have made some sympathetic sense as to why Sam might be tempted. So I actually don't think the writers thought all the way through what they were doing to Sam's character in season 4, or, in my opinion, they wouldn't have skipped important details like the above. I think the writers wanted to get Sam from A to B and have a bit of a "surprise" element to it, so they left things vague and focused on Dean's point of view. I don't think that they were thinking of how exactly they were going to have Sam redeem himself at that point, but once it all happened, and they took Sam as dark as they did, then they were kind of like "Oh crap. How do we fix this?" And some writers **cough** "Fallen Idols" **cough*** had some rather muddled ways of trying to do that that didn't exactly match the rest of what happened. So basically, I disagree that this was entirely planned from the beginning that Sam would be the savior or exactly how they would do that, which is why I think for some, it never rang true, and for some, they would never forgive Sam for what he did in season 4. 2 Link to comment
Myrelle September 11, 2018 Share September 11, 2018 (edited) 12 hours ago, ahrtee said: But if you want to consider (more positive) reasons why Sam might have said yes? Think about Swan Song. That was a deliberate, considered decision. And if Sam *hadn't* been able to overcome Lucifer, would he have been considered a "traitor"? This is an excellent point. 5 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said: So, I think the episode was trying to say what you said it was... That having Dean there was what Sam needed to not say "yes." But my argument here is that if that is the case, isn't that critical? If Sam couldn't do it on his own without Dean, and Zachariah's future shows us this, then how is Sam the only hero here and Dean is irrelevant? I think the episode was trying to tell us that it was pretty much a done deal that Sam was going to say yes, and that Dean being the champion of free will and choice at that point in the story was going to be needed by his brother's side no matter what Sam's choice turned out to be in the end-which at that time we were uncertain of; but there were hints given that Sam would say yes even in their conversation at the end of the episode, when Dean told Sam that we do things our way and Sam replied that they really didn't have a choice-which was the exact same wording that Dean used just before he allowed Michael in in the S13 finale. And I'm sure that the writers' intent was that Dean's presence was a necessary component to saving the world in the finale, but only as yes, the wind beneath Sam's wings because THAT is exactly what he was in that finale and nothing more. He brought the car that held the army man that gave Sam the strength to overcome Lucifer and he told Sam that he was there for him and that he'd always be there fro him even while Lucifer was beating him to a pulp. That was the role that Dean(and Jensen) was assigned and given in probably the most anticipated finale of the series, up to that point in the series-even if you don't see it as the culmination of a 5 season-long arc(which I stand by because the demon blood that Azazel gave to Baby Sam was an important thread that was established in that sub-plot and that continued to run through and connect other sub-plots to that storyline even after Azazel was killed-so from the Pilot all the way up to and including the finale-and I think that my thoughts concerning the length of that arc are valid also-(and yes, I know I said that we could agree to disagree, but the urge to explain why I feel as I do just seemed to present itself naturally here. I'm done now. Really.). The big problem with that finale that most Deanfans I know (and knew back then), had and continue to have to this day, is that Dean is a character(and JA an actor) who in our opinion deserved to be given much more of a hand/role in the big, heroic take down of Lucifer than what he was allotted. Sam may have looked on while Azazel, was killed, but Dean was on the ground when Alastair was killed by Sam and his cool(according to Kripke) powers and he wasn't even a part of killing Lilith(with those same "cool" powers and who had set the hellhounds on Dean and sent him to his worst torment in hell) and if the consequences of that for Sam were bad ones-so, too, were the consequences bad for Dean making the deal that brought Sam back and taking on the MOC in order to end Abaddon-and one brother's decisions leading to bad consequences leading into the other brother's decisions leading into more bad consequences is pretty much another premise of this series, IMO And one could argue whose decisions were worse and whose consequences turned out to be worse until the cows come home because that's all a matter of viewer opinion and perception and POV as is where it all started, at this point. But I think the big message in the episode The End that has carried through even to the present is that, as humans, we always have a choice because we are free to have a choice, but we don't always feel as if we do-and this thought has even been extended to monsters and angels and demons over the seasons-and it's not a bad message, it's just that sometimes it's been very poorly executed(along with many other things) by the writers and showrunners on this show, IMO. Sam saying yes in that episode was nothing more than a choice made for whatever reason, that yes was not important in this one episode because the "lesson" in this one was for Dean, not Sam(how unusual, eh...<insert sarcasm here>) and that lesson, IMO, was simply don't leave your brother's side or bad things will happen-how he was "schooled" on that(entirely through Sam's vessel storyline) was what made the episode more than just and only Dean-centric to me; and yes, I'd forgotten about Cas being a big part of it, too-so in that sense, I can even see the point that Catrox made concerning it. And I'm with those who loved this one for the acting and the cinematography was gorgeous. I never cared that much for the "lesson" part and I never believed that it was necessary to have Dean apologize to Sam at the end of this one for not taking him back. In fact, that was the only thing in this one that I really, REALLY! didn't like or care for about it and I definitely could have done without it, especially seeing as we were just going to get so many more needless(IMO) Dean apologies as the season wore on. Edited September 11, 2018 by Myrelle 1 Link to comment
AwesomO4000 September 11, 2018 Share September 11, 2018 12 hours ago, ahrtee said: But if you want to consider (more positive) reasons why Sam might have said yes? Think about Swan Song. That was a deliberate, considered decision. And if Sam *hadn't* been able to overcome Lucifer, would he have been considered a "traitor"? As I've been saying, point of view is important for me. The reason why it is somewhat different is because the episodes leading up to it set up Sam's entire reasoning for saying "yes," so that we, the audience, knew why he had done it. We knew Sam's reasoning for saying "yes" was because he thought that it might be the way to trap Lucifer. We also had confirmation from Death that this was potentially a legitimate option. With those two things, the writers established Sam's motivation and that he wasn't alone in his thinking. That said, with how things went down, I would still say that an argument could be made that yes, Sam might still have been considered if not a traitor, then at least very reckless, because the way that the writers set it up, Sam said "yes" when he shouldn't have. With Sam's "yes," it initially it looked like it was going to be the end, or at the very least, Michael was going to have to kill Lucifer and maybe half the planet would be saved if they were lucky. For me, this was the writers setting up yet again that Sam alone with his powers was not enough to stop Lucifer... just in case we hadn't gotten it the first time. The writers even threw in a weird-ass excuse why Sam had to be powered up with demon blood in there to show that even that was not enough. Sam all pumped up with demon blood was able to kill the stunt demon body guards with just a thought, but Lucifer still squashed him like a bug. The message being even Sam with all of his blood powers and able to kill demons instantly was not able to get control of Lucifer by himself. If Sam and his powers had been enough, in my opinion, then it would have happened right away when Sam first said "yes." The writers - to me - were showing clearly that this wasn't the case. The one thing - in my opinion - that turned the tide was Dean. Dean didn't give up. Dean rallied the troops (Castiel and Bobby) when they had given up. Castiel and Bobby were going to Stull mainly for and because of Dean. I thought Cas and Bobby had made that clear, because their original plan was to go get drunk somewhere and wait for at least half of the world to end. And in the end, they all were important in that cemetery, in my opinion... especially because my theory of what happened is different from most. I actually don't think that Sam overcame Lucifer. For me, Sam only "won" because Lucifer's pride was wounded, and his pride - just like the first time he was dumped into the cage - was his downfall. The main difference was that this time it was also the downfall of his brother, too. Michael's pride doomed him as well. Michael had a chance to change his mind, but instead continued to insist that he was right and knew better, and continued to insist so even when Dean was potentially offering himself as a vessel (nope Michael knew better) and after Sam had taken his body back (nope that wasn't good enough, Lucifer had to be killed and half the planet potentially toasted because Michael said so), and underestimated Sam's resolve to sacrifice himself, so he got caged too. To a lesser extent, Sam also had to go, too, because he still had some pride issues as well. For me, the reason Dean didn't end up in the cage is because his sin wasn't pride, so it would have been cruel if he had ended up in hell - again - for a sin he didn't commit. 1 hour ago, Myrelle said: And I'm sure that the writers' intent was that Dean's presence was a necessary component to saving the world in the finale, but only as yes, the wind beneath Sam's wings because THAT is exactly what he was in that finale and nothing more. He brought the car that held the army man that gave Sam the strength to overcome Lucifer and he told Sam that he was there for him and that he'd always be there fro him even while Lucifer was beating him to a pulp. That was the role that Dean(and Jensen) was assigned and given in probably the most anticipated finale of the series, Except I disagree. As you said, perceptions and opinions differ, and that's not what I thought happened at all. As I said above, I don't even think that Sam defeated Lucifer, and I thought that that was what the writers were showing. I say that because Dean was also right there with Sam when Sam first said "yes," also saying he was there for Sam and supporting Sam's decision to jump into the cage despite what it would cost Dean... and Sam lost, immediately and completely. So powered up Sam and Dean as the wind beneath his wings wasn't enough to defeat Lucifer, in my opinion. It was important that Sam and Dean be together, as shown by "The End," but it wasn't enough that I saw to deal the final blow, evidenced by the fact that it didn't - in and of itself - deal the final blow. In my opinion, something else happened to defeat Lucifer, and that something was that Lucifer defeated himself... pride goeth before a fall, in this case literally into a hole to hell. In my opinion, Lucifer had to see that it wasn't just that that Dean was there for Sam - and through the flashbacks from the green army man, that Sam was there for Dean, too - that one time when they thought they would win, but even when they were supposed to lose. That it was unconditional. And most importantly of all: that no one would ever be there that way for him - not even his own brother who professed to supposedly love him. And the confrontation in the cemetery was needed to show Lucifer that. And it was that wound to Lucifer's pride that did him in, in my opinion. For me, it was Lucifer who saw the green army man - not Sam - and it was Lucifer who realized what it represented and that he would never have that, angering him and wounding his pride... and much like the demon got shunted from the shock of childbirth in "I Believe..." and couldn't regain control from Jesse's mother even though she didn't know how she had gained the upper hand (since she, too had been fighting the entire time to no avail until the demon got somehow affected by the pain) - this is what I think happened to Lucifer. So I disagree that "Dean is only the wind beneath Sam's wings" is what the writers were showing in "Swan Song," because that's not what I saw. I saw Lucifer's pride defeating him, Michael's pride being his downfall also, and to an extent Sam's pride - fueled by the demon blood - causing him to fail as well. Dean, on the other hand, put his pride aside, forgave Sam and was there for him even when he had reason not to be, and because of that the world was saved and Lucifer defeated. That's my interpretation of what I saw, so as is often the case, it's all a matter of perception and miles will vary. 1 Link to comment
Aeryn13 September 11, 2018 Share September 11, 2018 (edited) Quote That's my interpretation of what I saw, so as is often the case, it's all a matter of perception and miles will vary. I think that is kinda what might bug me the most about the episode. I`ve seen interpretation like yours and ones like "well, Dean was a nice little sidekick for showing up but it wasn`t that important" (from Dean-haters, as well) and that is at least equally valid. In fact, this is where I am, right along with the Dean-haters because I can`t really even convince myself he played a valid role, let alone argue with someone who gleefully calls him a nobody. So in the end Kripke didn`t bother to give him a heroic contribution that was obvious enough to all and sundry that there really isn`t any room for debate. The same thing recently happened with me in a big movie franchise where my fave character was trashed and then received that kind of "eh, take it or leave it" "build up" and I just loathe it every time. Writing like that can`t work for me because by default my headcanon isn`t favorable. If you present something as a limp noodle that I have to talk myself into to view as better, it will be even worse for me. And then I can only think "thank you for dragging my character through the mud". Whether it was by disinterest or lack of talent or whatever the reason was, it`s always bad writing to me. Edited September 11, 2018 by Aeryn13 3 Link to comment
AwesomO4000 September 11, 2018 Share September 11, 2018 21 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said: So in the end Kripke didn`t bother to give him a heroic contribution that was obvious enough to all and sundry that there really isn`t any room for debate. But for me, this doesn't bother me, because I never thought that flashy heroics was what the show was about anyway. I always thought that the show was more about loyalty, family no matter how you define it, and making the right choice even if it might hurt you in the end. About being the human hero who does it because it is right, not because it gets you glory. (To quote a favorite character of mine: "Can't do something smart... then do something right.") The show is filled with characters who have powers, and powers much greater than Sam and Dean, but as Crowley says, that doesn't matter - the "denim clad nightmares" still defeat them in the end. In my opinion, this isn't a superhero show. The most powerful beings don't generally win. And when Sam or Dean do have powers, in my opinion, they often they win in spite of those powers not because of them. Generally the powers get in the way or result in bad things most of the time. Sam's powers allowing him to kill Lilith which started the apocalypse, Dean's powers making him think he could go after Metatron, resulting in his death. There will be smaller "wins" along the way - like Alastair and Famine and Abandon and Death - but when it comes down to the big showdown, generally the message is powers = bad, in my opinion. Dean didn't need powers to kill Zachariah or Dick Roman or Eve. Sam and Dean didn't need powers to defeat War. I don't think that this show cares about flashy - as evidenced by the "big showdown" in Stull Cemetery being Michael and Lucifer arguing - and if they try, they often do it badly - like the recent Michael / Lucifer fight. It's because, in my opinion, they don't care about flashy... that's not - or ever has been - important for their story. And looking for it here is only going to be disappointing, because it's not what the writers care about, in my opinion. And I think that there are many examples... Take Purgatory. What I thought should have been the important story - that Dean lived through that year and learned that he was capable beyond what he could do for people, because he had mad skills - in my opinion wasn't even a consideration. Even the arc that appeared to show some of that - Castiel telling Dean that it wasn't his fault that Dean couldn't save Cas - was subsequently ignored. It was all about Dean was loyal to Castiel and Benny and vica versa... the end. Not what that should mean for character growth for Castiel and especially Dean. Never mind that Dean learned that he could survive in all that with his fighting skills. Nah that's not important. He was loyal to Benny and Castiel... that's all we care about. That's why I disagree that Sam's Amelia arc was supposed to be a good thing - no matter what the writers tried to say later - because Sam wasn't "loyal" to Dean or Kevin, so in the end he was going to fail and wasn't going to complete the trials, because he wasn't worthy, and his guilt bore that out. (That was the message that I got out of that anyway... and we revisited it in season 11, so I don't think I was entirely crazy in that interpretation.) So basically what I am saying is that for the writers, Dean being in Stull, showing family loyalty and imparting his "power of love" IS the show's idea of being a hero. It is the highest and most heroic thing they can think of. It's why they showed in "The End" that without it, the world would be doomed. The "hero" (Sam) would be nothing and fail and not be heroic at all without it, thereby meaning that the person who makes that possible - Dean - is the real hero or at least just as much of a hero, because he's the only one who made it all possible. I think to Kripke the roles are equivalent. Neither can work without the other - though apparently according to "The End", it is perhaps Dean's role that is even more pivotal. Something similar happened in "All Hell... pt 2." Dean wielded the Colt with all of the power in the world to kill YED, but maybe without John there that wouldn't have been enough to kill him. Dean needed that help and assurance from John to make sure it happened. In early season 7, both Sam's first and then Dean's subsequent "power of love" displays helped get through to Castiel and resulted in all of the purgatory souls (except the Leviathans) getting put back in... Sam's angel blade did nothing. Killing Dick Roman required teamwork, not superpowers. Same with Eve. Sam's loyalty and faith in Dean got through to Dean and we got a dead Zachariah instead of a possessed Dean. (I know some would have preferred a Michael / Dean, but in my opinion - and I'm not going to change my mind about this one - Michael was the Bad Guy with no exploitable chinks in his armor, so in my opinion it was right that it didn't happen.) And there are likely more examples, but it all pretty much fits a pattern for me. As I said above, in my scenario and what I think happened in "Swan Song" Sam's "powers" had nothing to do with defeating Lucifer. The powers, imo, more got in the way actually, making Sam over-confident and saying "yes" when he shouldn't have. I thought that the narrative showed that rather well. It was only later, after the demon blood, and when Lucifer was vulnerable, that Sam took advantage - much like Jesse's mother, who was just a regular human, too - and did what had to be done ("hide" the baby, fall into the hole). And for me, that it wasn't Sam who defeated Lucifer makes no difference. For me, that Sam was willing to sacrifice himself and jump into that hole, knowing what that would mean, is what made Sam heroic. There were no powers involved in that decision, and that decision was - for me - the critical thing. I watch this show for that kind of thing, so I'm okay with that. 1 Link to comment
Aeryn13 September 11, 2018 Share September 11, 2018 Quote So basically what I am saying is that for the writers, Dean being in Stull, showing family loyalty and imparting his "power of love" IS the show's idea of being a hero. It is the highest and most heroic thing they can think of. I disagree because Sam did get the flashy obvious moment. Now he might have thought Dean was a bit more valuable than he came across there to a lot of people but he can`t have not noticed that he wrote a "Sam saves the world" scenario. The only world-saving scenario in the show that got this amount of set-up was Amara (I know there were other apocalypses but those threats were played as more kiddie table in those respective Finales) and Dean only got the talky moment there and even that he had to share with pigeon lady. Quite lackluster for a supposed hero moment. Then the Lucifer thing had potential as well as a viable threat in the last Finale but they muddled this up enough to make it seem as if Dean was only thinking of small-minded, pathetic (and frankly loathsome if he is willing to screw over the world just for his family) reasons and not at all for the greater good. That alone made him look lesser. On top of that we of course had the marionette fight and the crucial assist from Sam. Quote Something similar happened in "All Hell... pt 2." Dean wielded the Colt with all of the power in the world to kill YED, but maybe without John there that wouldn't have been enough to kill him. Dean needed that help and assurance from John to make sure it happened. He needed actual, physical help from John, obviously a valuable contribution. Assurance or any kind of "wind beneath my wings" wasn`t a part of that. Sam provided actual, physical and verry necessary help in the killing of Lucifer. Such things mean something to me, yellow crayon moments just don`t. I guess at this point it doesn`t matter anymore because the only episode to even slightly hold the potential to rival the Season 5 Finale in terms of considered importance will be the Series Finale and I`ve given up hope that Dean would at least be allowed an equal moment with Sam of flashy heroism in it. He`ll probably be the onlooker at this point. 3 Link to comment
AwesomO4000 September 12, 2018 Share September 12, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, Aeryn13 said: I disagree because Sam did get the flashy obvious moment. Now he might have thought Dean was a bit more valuable than he came across there to a lot of people but he can`t have not noticed that he wrote a "Sam saves the world" scenario. My guess is they did this because they had pretty much tarnished Sam's character pretty badly in season 4... beyond what was needed for the storyline, in my opinion. It was like a make up call by a referee. Or compensation. Sort of a "sorry we turned your favorite character into a lying, brother mocking, demon-screwing, blood-sucking, arrogant, drug addict, killer of innocent people... here have this heroic scene to make up for it." And I know that there are likely complaints about what happened with Dean in season 4, but for me, there just isn't any comparison, since for me, in the end, Dean was the only one who came out looking in any way good in season 4... and I do mean the only one... except maybe Anna, but they took care of that in season 5. Quote The only world-saving scenario in the show that got this amount of set-up was Amara (I know there were other apocalypses but those threats were played as more kiddie table in those respective Finales) and Dean only got the talky moment there and even that he had to share with pigeon lady. Quite lackluster for a supposed hero moment. I thought the season 2 finale was pretty flashy and had quite a bit of set up. John did help, but Dean got the flashy fiery bullet and slow motion effects... along with all of the closure with YED. And you may call the other finales "kiddie table," but there were a couple of them, so they add up in my opinion. And in general, the onscreen stuff for those "kiddie apocalypses" was mainly Dean with other help that wasn't Sam. There were also some major players, too, some of those with set up and flashy effects - like Zachariah for example. Those may not count for you, but for me they do count. 3 hours ago, Aeryn13 said: Then the Lucifer thing had potential as well as a viable threat in the last Finale but they muddled this up enough to make it seem as if Dean was only thinking of small-minded, pathetic (and frankly loathsome if he is willing to screw over the world just for his family) reasons and not at all for the greater good. That alone made him look lesser. At least Dean had other motives. And he defeated (yes with help) Lucifer. Those "loathsome" reasons you mentioned were all that were given to Sam in season 10... and then Sam started an apocalypse because of it... that he had almost no part in stopping later beyond cheerleader, even though many other characters, including Rowena, had an active role in contributing. So for me, I guess I just don't see this as much of a snub to Dean unless they also snubbed Sam too, and likely worse since Sam had no saving the world motive to even pretend to point to and instead put the world in danger. Again. And even if you stripped away all of the world-saving reasons - which tough to do in my opinion since the goal was killing Lucifer who had been a threat for years - Dean was saving two of his family members and not only did that, but got the bad guy to boot. Comparing that to Sam saving one - with a bunch of help, oh and Dean also getting rid of a threat without even batting an eyelash - and causing an apocalypse in doing so, I'm thinking that Dean looks much better in comparison here no matter which way you compare those scenarios. I sympathize that you didn't get the Dean saves the world by himself scenario that you wanted, but at the same time, you also didn't have to get the crap that Sam got saddled with both before and after that one save {which in my opinion Sam didn't accomplish on his own either - but I didn't need him to.) I would much rather Sam hadn't had that if it meant that his character not been trashed beforehand or the other times he was. So I guess neither of us got exactly what we wanted. Edited September 12, 2018 by AwesomO4000 1 Link to comment
Myrelle September 12, 2018 Share September 12, 2018 (edited) 18 hours ago, Aeryn13 said: I think that is kinda what might bug me the most about the episode. I`ve seen interpretation like yours and ones like "well, Dean was a nice little sidekick for showing up but it wasn`t that important" (from Dean-haters, as well) and that is at least equally valid. In fact, this is where I am, right along with the Dean-haters because I can`t really even convince myself he played a valid role, let alone argue with someone who gleefully calls him a nobody. So in the end Kripke didn`t bother to give him a heroic contribution that was obvious enough to all and sundry that there really isn`t any room for debate. The same thing recently happened with me in a big movie franchise where my fave character was trashed and then received that kind of "eh, take it or leave it" "build up" and I just loathe it every time. Writing like that can`t work for me because by default my headcanon isn`t favorable. If you present something as a limp noodle that I have to talk myself into to view as better, it will be even worse for me. And then I can only think "thank you for dragging my character through the mud". Whether it was by disinterest or lack of talent or whatever the reason was, it`s always bad writing to me. IA with all of this. As regards the writing process, I'm also not one whose prone to try and talk myself into seeing things in a certain light that, IMO, should be readily apparent. And as for the bolded part, I remember reading about a forward that was written by Adam Glass in the Season 6 Companion book(way back in the day) wherein he pretty much gave Sam, and Sam alone, all of the credit for stopping the Apocalypse in the S5 finale. It was ages ago, but I still remember it. Now I think Glass was new to the show, at the time, but it was speculated that for him to have come to the conclusions that he did in that forward within a published work he would have either had to have watched the show or at least been given cliff notes from someone in the writers' room. I'd guess Gamble, if that was the case. I, personally have always felt that she was the main pusher of the idea that it should be Sam, sans Dean, as the one who should jump into the big plothole in the ground in that finale, thus making him into more of the sole BDH hero of that arc-in her mind, too, and at least. I've always felt that she really didn't want Dean anywhere near that part of it and further that Kripke wasn't going to fight her over it. I have that companion book somewhere. I'll try to dig it out because now I'm curious about that again, myself. Edited September 12, 2018 by Myrelle 1 Link to comment
ILoveReading September 12, 2018 Share September 12, 2018 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Myrelle said: IA with all of this. As regards the writing process, I'm also not one whose prone to try and talk myself into seeing things in a certain light that, IMO, should be readily apparent. I might be able to see Dean as important if it wasn't for the toy. As it is, this episode sent a clear message that Dean can be replaced by an inanimate object. Not only that the object does a better job. That and not a single person behind the scenes or on screen has ever admitted Dean was needed in that scene (that I can recall). Whenever its mentioned its Sam saved the world or Sam took one for the team. There were multiple blogs and reviewers that credited the car. Kripke, himself, said Dean's role was to learn to love Sam more and accept his cool powers. There was Adam Glass's introduction in the season 6 compainion. For me I could care less what happened after Sam got control because the pivotal moment in that scene was Sam gaining access to his memories and that was the car and the toy. This is why I suspect the toy was written in, to dilute Dean's role even further. I'll never understand why they needed an avatar for Dean if Dean was right there. Mary, John, Bobby and Cas didn't need objects to remind them what Dean meant to them. Dean begging and pleading was enough. So what does it say about the supposed brotherly bond that Sam was the only one that needed a prop. Good thing Dean is sentimental and it wasn't raining that day or he'd be dead and the world would be burning. Edited September 12, 2018 by ILoveReading 5 Link to comment
Myrelle September 12, 2018 Share September 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, ILoveReading said: I might be able to see Dean as important if it wasn't for the toy. As it is, this episode sent a clear message that Dean can be replaced by an inanimate object. Not only that the object does a better job. That and not a single person behind the scenes or on screen has ever admitted Dean was needed in that scene (that I can recall). Whenever its mentioned its Sam saved the world or Sam took one for the team. There were multiple blogs and reviewers that credited the car. Kripke, himself, said Dean's role was to learn to love Sam more and accept his cool powers. There was Adam Glass's introduction in the season 6 compainion. For me I could care less what happened after Sam got control because the pivotal moment in that scene was Sam gaining access to his memories and that was the car and the toy. This is why I suspect the toy was written in, to dilute Dean's role even further. I'll never understand why they needed an avatar for Dean if Dean was right there. Mary, John, Bobby and Cas didn't need objects to remind them what Dean meant to them. Dean begging and pleading was enough. So what does it say about the supposed brotherly bond that Sam was the only one that needed a prop. I hear you, but at this point, I think I would have been content with him just being given a more active role in getting Lucifer into to the hole. They could have let him have power over the keys, at least, but Sam even did that. It just seems so obvious to me that they wanted and attempted to undermine and/or do completely away with any actively heroic role that Dean could possibly have been given in stopping the Apocalypse. Even in the episodes prior to it, you could feel it coming with PONR and Two Minutes to Midnight(especially that last one, wherein both Death and Bobby flat-out told Dean he had to let Sam do this). Bah. I should have never attempted to re-watch some of S6 last week. It was the first half and I never re-watch much from that half(Live Free and You Can't Handle the Truth are about it) because it stirs up too much anger and resentment of this sort in me. 3 Link to comment
AwesomO4000 September 12, 2018 Share September 12, 2018 2 hours ago, Myrelle said: And as for the bolded part, I remember reading about a forward that was written by Adam Glass in the Season 6 Companion book(way back in the day) wherein he pretty much gave Sam, and Sam alone, all of the credit for stopping the Apocalypse in the S5 finale. Which is interesting, because I consider many of Adam Glass' episodes to be either Sam as damsel in distress, fairly Sam unfriendly, or both. Those that weren't were generally very Dean-centric with either Sam barely there, Sam learning a very special lesson, or both. (with "Bad Boys" being an good example where Glass didn't even bother to get Sam's age even close to right.) He also wrote one of the most, in my opinion, insulting to Sam lines I remember from the show thrown in as a "joke" which really wasn't in my opinion. Of all of Adam Glass' episodes, I really like only 2: "Mommy Dearest" and "About A Boy." "Like A Virgin"*** and "Mother's Little Helper" are okay, but even that last one was a "Sam learns a special lesson episode" and much of the "action" for Sam's part in it was shared with flashbacks to side characters. I could have liked "As Time Goes By," but it was mainly all about Sam being a damsel in distress and completely incompetent so that Grandpa Henry would have to sacrifice to save the day. Even the two episodes of his I really like ("Mommy Dearest" and "About a Boy") are more Dean saving the day with the second one even being a typical Sam as Damsel in distress episode, but at least Sam isn't written as a complete jerk like he is in many of Glass' episodes, so there's that... And Glass did give us Sam's "you pulled a Dean Winchester" - which is nice of Sam and a good moment from him, but is in the end more about Dean. So based on Glass' episodes from the show, if I had to guess anything, I would guess that he either hadn't watched the show much before he wrote the forward, or he didn't much agree with what he wrote, because - for me - it didn't show up much in his own episodes... a lot of which featured Sam as a damsel in distress and getting saved rather than doing any saving. *** I like Eleanor. Link to comment
Katy M September 12, 2018 Share September 12, 2018 16 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said: or both. Those that weren't were generally very Dean-centric with either Sam barely there, Sam learning a very special lesson, or both. (with "Bad Boys" being an good example where Glass didn't even bother to get Sam's age even close to right.) I love the episode Bad Boys. It's my fave of S9, though that's not a very high bar, but egads, if Dean was 16, Sam should have been 11/12. That kid was 8 tops. And, I think i'm probably overestimating. 1 Link to comment
ahrtee September 12, 2018 Share September 12, 2018 5 hours ago, Katy M said: I love the episode Bad Boys. It's my fave of S9, though that's not a very high bar, but egads, if Dean was 16, Sam should have been 11/12. That kid was 8 tops. And, I think i'm probably overestimating. That's OK, because I don't believe 16-year-old Dean would be so uncomfortable around girls (and never been kissed???) (And since that seemed to take place in summer, he'd be closer to 17.) Even if they did move from place to place, there was time enough for Sam to have friends. Weren't they originally supposed to be younger and TPTB decided that "Dean" didn't look young enough and so decided to make him older? They should have stuck with the original ages. 1 Link to comment
gonzosgirrl September 12, 2018 Share September 12, 2018 (edited) 23 minutes ago, ahrtee said: That's OK, because I don't believe 16-year-old Dean would be so uncomfortable around girls (and never been kissed???) (And since that seemed to take place in summer, he'd be closer to 17.) Even if they did move from place to place, there was time enough for Sam to have friends. Weren't they originally supposed to be younger and TPTB decided that "Dean" didn't look young enough and so decided to make him older? They should have stuck with the original ages. I read somewhere (probably fanfic, lol) that since it was taking place from Dean's POV, that's how he saw both himself (not the ladies' man he pretended to be) and his 'memory' of Sam as a little kid who needed him. Yeah, I know. Edited September 12, 2018 by gonzosgirrl 1 Link to comment
Res September 13, 2018 Share September 13, 2018 (edited) 9 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said: Which is interesting, because I consider many of Adam Glass' episodes to be either Sam as damsel in distress, fairly Sam unfriendly, or both. Those that weren't were generally very Dean-centric with either Sam barely there, Sam learning a very special lesson, or both. (with "Bad Boys" being an good example where Glass didn't even bother to get Sam's age even close to right.) He also wrote one of the most, in my opinion, insulting to Sam lines I remember from the show thrown in as a "joke" which really wasn't in my opinion. Of all of Adam Glass' episodes, I really like only 2: "Mommy Dearest" and "About A Boy." "Like A Virgin"*** and "Mother's Little Helper" are okay, but even that last one was a "Sam learns a special lesson episode" and much of the "action" for Sam's part in it was shared with flashbacks to side characters. I could have liked "As Time Goes By," but it was mainly all about Sam being a damsel in distress and completely incompetent so that Grandpa Henry would have to sacrifice to save the day. Even the two episodes of his I really like ("Mommy Dearest" and "About a Boy") are more Dean saving the day with the second one even being a typical Sam as Damsel in distress episode, but at least Sam isn't written as a complete jerk like he is in many of Glass' episodes, so there's that... And Glass did give us Sam's "you pulled a Dean Winchester" - which is nice of Sam and a good moment from him, but is in the end more about Dean. So based on Glass' episodes from the show, if I had to guess anything, I would guess that he either hadn't watched the show much before he wrote the forward, or he didn't much agree with what he wrote, because - for me - it didn't show up much in his own episodes... a lot of which featured Sam as a damsel in distress and getting saved rather than doing any saving. *** I like Eleanor. Out of all of the episodes that Glass wrote, the only one I actually liked was "Mommy Dearest" but I wish they'd have had Eve be the season's big bad, instead of Cas. Even then, it wasn't anything to write home about. I hated "About A Boy" even though the young actor was a great Dean. The story and making Dean into a pop teen to entertain his daughter wasn't well done IMO. In addition, the bolded comment really didn't work for me. It was trying way too hard, IMO. I was very glad when Glass left. I hated "Bad Boys" as well. None of the story worked for me. Not at all. Edited September 13, 2018 by Res 1 Link to comment
AwesomO4000 September 13, 2018 Share September 13, 2018 (edited) 6 hours ago, Res said: I was very glad when Glass left. I hated "Bad Boys" as well. None of the story worked for me. Not at all. Two things we entirely agree on. : ) 6 hours ago, Res said: In addition, the bolded comment really didn't work for me. It was trying way too hard, IMO. I bought it mainly because I think Jared was able to sell it for me, and at that point in the series - season 10 - I could maybe see it. I agree it was a bit heavy-handed though... but then again I found a lot of Glass' episodes to be heavy-handed, and at least that episode wasn't downright Sam negative. I can also see why you might dislike the episode though. And it didn't begin to make up for "Southern Comfort" (Haaaate, and another story that didn't work for me at all) or "Sharp Teeth" (that Garth line still grates on me, and of course we had Sam having to be saved yet again... and come to think of it, that story didn't work for me either.) I haven't read that forward that's been talked about, so will have to take the word of those who have, but based on his episodes, I really wonder where it came from, because Glass never really had Sam as heroic in any of them that I recall, and in at least one Sam was downright passive, bordering on cowardly. I guess a case could be made for at least some Sam self-sacrifice in "Adventures in Babysitting," but Glass still managed to make Sam look completely incompetent. Yup, I was really glad when Glass left. 11 hours ago, ahrtee said: That's OK, because I don't believe 16-year-old Dean would be so uncomfortable around girls (and never been kissed???) (And since that seemed to take place in summer, he'd be closer to 17.) Even if they did move from place to place, there was time enough for Sam to have friends. Weren't they originally supposed to be younger and TPTB decided that "Dean" didn't look young enough and so decided to make him older? They should have stuck with the original ages. Yeah, that was completely ridiculous, in my opinion... and not going with canon. Unless we're to believe that Dean was leaving Sam at Plucky's to chase girls when Sam was 12 or that Dean was really going somewhere other than chasing girls when he left Sam at Plucky's. But even if Dean was supposed to be 14 1/2, I agree with @Katy M that the Sam in the car looked more like 8 tops - which still would've been two years too young and at 10 would've been well past the time he would've been playing with a toy airplane rather than reading a book or something. Not to mention seemingly totally oblivious and uninterested in what was going on - which didn't seem like Sam at any age we saw him beyond 6. Sam in the Christmas episode flashbacks, for example, was already finding John's journal and asking a cazillion questions. The whole thing made little sense to me and should've been fixed before going to air. Even weirder is that the director, Kevin Parks - according to SuperWiki - is supposed to have almost encyclopedic knowledge of the show (being nicknamed Parksapedia) and was the first assistant director on odd numbered episodes. He was even portrayed in "The French Mistake" and so had presumably been around the show for quite a while... which makes it all even more non-sensical that they went with the ages and portrayals that they did in that episode, since there isn't an excuse like "well, the director just didn't know any better." Edited September 13, 2018 by AwesomO4000 Link to comment
Pondlass1 September 13, 2018 Share September 13, 2018 Ages have been wonky on this Show in many episodes. Where Cole sees Dean kill his father he's supposed to be 10 years (?) younger but when we meet him as an adult he appears same age or even older than Dean. Sam playing with a toy airplane? - that was laughable. How did that get by vetting? The actor portraying Dean in Bad Boys did a really good job with mannerisms but looked nothing like Dean. Was this supposed to take place when Dean was 16? Because at 16 I'm pretty sure Dean was well over 6 foot and certainly not a virgin and Sam at age 12 was feeling the brunt of dad's temper now that he didn't have Dean to rage at. That's why Sam missed Dean. The only good thing to come out of this episode was that Dean won medals for wrestling. But at least the actors on this series are the age of their characters. It's not as silly as TVD where the Salvatore bros are supposed to be high school age at the beginning (vamps never age) yet totally looked in their mid-30s by the time the show ended. LOL. Link to comment
catrox14 September 13, 2018 Share September 13, 2018 1 hour ago, Pondlass1 said: but when we meet him as an adult he appears same age or even older than Dean. Sam playing with a toy airplane? - that was laughable. How did that get by vetting? That's because for Chuck knows what reasons, they cast Travis Aaron Wade who didn't look at all close to 25. I think, however, that the character was supposed to be between 25-30. Poor casting there. 1 hour ago, Pondlass1 said: Was this supposed to take place when Dean was 16? Bec Dean was supposed to originally be 14 I think it's possible they aged him up because Dylan Everett was so good as Dean. Of course, they could have had Dean be 15 and that would make him still being a virgin more plausible then at 16. Although, I don't know why it's assumed Dean had sex at 16 either. I think he probably kissed a girl before that but he might have not had actual sex until he was 17 maybe. It's not unheard of even for Dean. 1 Link to comment
AwesomO4000 September 13, 2018 Share September 13, 2018 45 minutes ago, catrox14 said: Although, I don't know why it's assumed Dean had sex at 16 either. I think he probably kissed a girl before that but he might have not had actual sex until he was 17 maybe. It's not unheard of even for Dean. Yeah, I'd actually have no problem with Dean still being a virgin at age 16 for whatever reason... However that he supposedly hadn't even kissed a girl yet - when the show had already established that Sam knew Plucky's because Dean dropped him off there to go chase girls sometimes - seems laughable to me. Unless I'm supposed to believe that in all the time Dean chased girls he never made out with any, or that a 12 year old Sam (if Dean supposedly didn't "chase girls" until he was 16) would actually stay at Plucky's rather than insist on going to a library or staying home (since John was already leaving Sam home alone to go to school on his own around that age by that time in the series, I think.) And the Dean we saw as a senior in high school - so 18? - didn't seem at all uncomfortable around girls, so that would've - to me - been a rather big turn around / personality change from 16 1/2 to 18 1/2. ...Though I guess that's more probable than a 12 - or even 10 - year old Sam playing passively with a toy plane in the back seat of the car after not seeing Dean for 2 months. (I agree with @Pondlass1: how did that get by vetting?) And I'm not sure what Glass - or anyone on the show - was trying to convey with that one, but it looked fairly bad for everyone Winchester except Dean. The John part of the story was pretty damn callous in my opinion, too... and also weirdly not believable to me. Would secretive John actually let Dean stay in someone else's care for two months and not be paranoid that someone might find out the family secrets somehow? Even to teach Dean a lesson that seems an awful big risk for John to take for me. What if Dean accidentally let something slip? Letting Dean get chewed out by the judge and letting him spend a couple nights in jail and/or do community service maybe seems more plausible to me, because at least then Dean would be in John's sight, and, more importantly, not in someone else's sight for a long period of time. Link to comment
gonzosgirrl September 15, 2018 Share September 15, 2018 (edited) 7 hours ago, catrox14 said: I can't understand why it's not even been a sneak peek. Not even a tiny bit and why it's not in the promo photos either since it's well known it was shown at SDCC. The only thought I have is that it's either such a brilliant and possibly disturbing scene they don't want to ruin it ....Or it's been cut. I'm leaning towards it's been cut. ETA: the other thought I just had is that they are doing a special premiere for EW so maybe it's all being held for those lucky few. Or, it's because it's all about Jensen, no other regular cast member involved, and they won't put that out there as promo for... reasons. Regardless of how long the character goes on, they seem to be doing their best to downplay it at this point. From the talking points now, the story seems to be about everyone but him. (Brought over from bitter spoilers. No actual spoiler here, but most definitely someone being screwed. IMO of course.) Edited September 15, 2018 by gonzosgirrl 3 Link to comment
ILoveReading September 15, 2018 Share September 15, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, gonzosgirrl said: Or, it's because it's all about Jensen, no other regular cast member involved, and they won't put that out there as promo for... reasons. Regardless of how long the character goes on, they seem to be doing their best to downplay it at this point. From the talking points now, the story seems to be about everyone but him. (Brought over from bitter spoilers. No actual spoiler here, but most definitely someone being screwed. IMO of course.) Just look at the end of last season. Every writer was hyping episode 21, the big Sam ep, but the finale nothing. I still can't even figure out what that Salt and Burn hashtag they were tweeting about meant. In the finale, they spent 30 minutes angsting of that AU hunter. I spent 25 of those minutes wondering who she was and why I was supposed to care. There was no build up to the Michael storyline. It was clearly only addressed when they couldn't squeeze another minute out of every other plot. Then Dean proceeded to get his ass handed to him, and don't even get me started on the marionette fight. Spoiler The search for Dean this season clearly takes place off screen. I still think the only reason this story is seeing the light of Day was because it was a contract year and they need to push this whole leader Sam thing and it clearly wasn't working with that nasty Dean character there sucking all the oxygen out of the room. I dread the aftermath, Im sure there are going to be multiple lessons for Dean. I wouldn't even be surprised if the show ignored the Lucifer threat and have Sam whines that Dean told him he could handle Lucifer and he needed to stop treating Sam like a child Edited September 15, 2018 by ILoveReading 3 Link to comment
Myrelle September 15, 2018 Share September 15, 2018 3 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said: Or, it's because it's all about Jensen, no other regular cast member involved, and they won't put that out there as promo for... reasons. Regardless of how long the character goes on, they seem to be doing their best to downplay it at this point. From the talking points now, the story seems to be about everyone but him. (Brought over from bitter spoilers. No actual spoiler here, but most definitely someone being screwed. IMO of course.) Yup. And it's probably because the ink has had plenty of time to dry on the new contracts, so it's back to business as usual on this show. IMO, of course. 1 Link to comment
Res September 15, 2018 Share September 15, 2018 8 hours ago, Myrelle said: Yup. And it's probably because the ink has had plenty of time to dry on the new contracts, so it's back to business as usual on this show. IMO, of course. Oh, I'm positive about it which is even more irritating when you think about how much Jensen cares about the show and its crew, not to mention how loyal he is to the showrunners. Ugh. It makes me nauseous how his loyalty is rewarded every year and what they do to his character. Heck, this is the 1st year I didn't watch the SDCC panel as soon as it was on youtube. In fact, I didn't watch it until last week and didn't even realize I had missed it because the tweets that had come out of the panel were so discouraging. I don't even know when the new season starts and am not sure if I will even watch live this year, or even 7 days later. I'm so irritated with the way they continually diss my fan group. I just can't even . . . You know it's beyond sad when you are praying for your favorite character to be killed off just so TPTB won't destroy more of his legacy. Link to comment
catrox14 September 15, 2018 Share September 15, 2018 8 minutes ago, Res said: Oh, I'm positive about it which is even more irritating when you think about how much Jensen cares about the show and its crew, not to mention how loyal he is to the showrunners. Ugh. It makes me nauseous how his loyalty is rewarded every year and what they do to his character. Heck, this is the 1st year I didn't watch the SDCC panel as soon as it was on youtube. In fact, I didn't watch it until last week and didn't even realize I had missed it because the tweets that had come out of the panel were so discouraging. I don't even know when the new season starts and am not sure if I will even watch live this year, or even 7 days later. I'm so irritated with the way they continually diss my fan group. I just can't even . . . You know it's beyond sad when you are praying for your favorite character to be killed off just so TPTB won't destroy more of his legacy. Then worst part is they might not even give him a heroic or terribly tragic yet meaningful death. Link to comment
Res September 16, 2018 Share September 16, 2018 1 hour ago, catrox14 said: Then worst part is they might not even give him a heroic or terribly tragic yet meaningful death. Is it sad that I know they won't? In fact, I'm absolutely they won't. It's also sad that I keep hoping that our viewship drops every year. Not enough to be cancelled. Just enough for the CW higher ups to take notice and actually do something about the direction of showrunner and exec producers. 1 Link to comment
ahrtee September 16, 2018 Share September 16, 2018 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Res said: Is it sad that I know they won't? In fact, I'm absolutely they won't. It's also sad that I keep hoping that our viewship drops every year. Not enough to be cancelled. Just enough for the CW higher ups to take notice and actually do something about the direction of showrunner and exec producers. And then you're assuming they'll notice and will take an action you would like. I think it's more likely they'd decide (a) the boys are getting too old for the desired demographics and they need to bring in a young Cousin Oliver...oh, wait. Or (b) they need more empowered females, so they'll have to bring in...oh. How about (c) The show doesn't fit the current CW model, and so they'll need to make it more of a soap opera with monsters than... Oh, shit. Edited September 16, 2018 by ahrtee 6 Link to comment
catrox14 September 16, 2018 Share September 16, 2018 59 minutes ago, ahrtee said: And then you're assuming they'll notice and will take an action you would like. I think it's more likely they'd decide (a) the boys are getting too old for the desired demographics and they need to bring in a young Cousin Oliver...oh, wait. Or (b) they need more empowered females, so they'll have to bring in...oh. How about (c) The show doesn't fit the current CW model, and so they'll need to make it more of a soap opera with monsters than... Oh, shit. I legit snorted at this cause....yup. 2 Link to comment
Res September 16, 2018 Share September 16, 2018 51 minutes ago, catrox14 said: I legit snorted at this cause....yup. Same here! LOL! I'm laughing to keep from legit crying over this fubar sitcom that's about to become sitromcom with Bobbary(?) . . . Mabby(?) . . . Maubby(?) Ugh. even that makes me nauseous. Link to comment
gonzosgirrl September 16, 2018 Share September 16, 2018 43 minutes ago, Res said: Same here! LOL! I'm laughing to keep from legit crying over this fubar sitcom that's about to become sitromcom with Bobbary(?) . . . Mabby(?) . . . Maubby(?) Ugh. even that makes me nauseous. Momby. 5 Link to comment
gonzosgirrl October 1, 2018 Share October 1, 2018 (edited) Spoiler 5 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said: So after a truncated storyline, Dean is going to feel bad later in the season because he remembers the bad things 'he' did. Why does that sound vaguely familiar? Edited: taking the rest to BvJ. I can only blame myself for my disappointment that they could or would ever deliver on the Spoiler Michael/Dean story in any original way. I'd like to believe the story wasn't influenced by 'fan' reaction to the possibility of Spoiler Jensen having a lengthy, focused storyline, but I don't. I'd also like to think they won't punish Dean and his fans for being so uppity (and foolish) as to expect something great for him, but nope, pretty sure that's a done deal, too. (Sorry, I don't know how else to talk about the bullshit that is the upcoming season as it pertains to the writers shitty treatment of Dean/Jensen without spoiler tags) Edited October 1, 2018 by gonzosgirrl 1 Link to comment
Myrelle October 1, 2018 Share October 1, 2018 2 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said: (Sorry, I don't know how else to talk about the bullshit that is the upcoming season as it pertains to the writers shitty treatment of Dean/Jensen without spoiler tags) Spoiler I think the second that he signed on the dotted line, was when they started planning the bait and switch. 2 Link to comment
Res October 1, 2018 Share October 1, 2018 58 minutes ago, Myrelle said: Hide contents I think the second that he signed on the dotted line, was when they started planning the bait and switch. Considering how often they do this to him and his character, he only has himself to blame at this point. Although with the family he has and how much he cares about the crew, it's to be expected that he'll continue to sign on the dotted line. Link to comment
Pondlass1 October 1, 2018 Share October 1, 2018 Jensen is a difficult man to read. He holds a lot to his chest and he's loyal to a fault. But he's been more and more outspoken in his disappointments. He was genuinely excited about Michael. He was chuffed that the storyline was apparently going to last a while. I think he got to select the wardrobe, he worked on his voice and posture and knowing Jensen he thought a lot about his portrayal. But now it seems Michael is done by episode 3 (a la DemonDean), there might be flashbacks, Dean/Michael might return sometime during the season - but might not. And then all this silliness about destruction of earth (yawn). Come on writers, think of something new for once!! I wonder if Jensen's signed a 2-year deal? I have a feeling season 15 will be announced as the last. Hope they bring back Kripke or at least fire Dabb for the final goodbye. 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.