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

[ILoveReading]

IMO its a betrayal because if the situation was reversed that is exactly how the show would have treated it.  It wouldn't have been swept under the rug with a shrug and lets give it a shot.  Dean certainly wouldn't have been given an opportunity to promote himself.   So yes its a betrayal.

Sam knew how Dean felt.  If he wanted to work with them that's his right he's a big boy but he took Deans' choice away from him.  He put Dean in a position that made it very hard for him to say no.  When Dean asked Sam to pick a side, he sides with the people Dean didn't trust.  Again Sam can work with them, but he owed it to Dean to be honest right from the start. 

Not to mention The Raid was a very special episode dedicated   to telling us how wrong Dean was to try and control Mary's actions.  Even making him apologize for giving her some hard truths.  They just finished telling the auidence that it was bad bad bad for Dean to do this.  Then they make it clear Sam is going to make sure Dean "comes around."  That makes Sam a massive hypocite that the show gave him a free pass for.

I never saw either of these things as OOC.  IMO, Sam didnt' see this as a way to hunt.  I felt he saw it as a way out of hunting.  If there are no monsters left then he can move on.  I've felt this is something that he's wanted all series.  He's always needed an external reason to hunt.  This is why this whole Chief stuff if far more OOC.  Sam has always been manipulative.  This might be more unpopular opinion but I've always found Sam far more controlling than Dean is.  Sam is just more sly.  He knows Dean's weak spots and threatens to leave if he doesn't get his own way.  

Edited December 16, 2018 by ILoveReading

[ILoveReading]

17 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

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

While I wish this was true, the way Jensen was talking during the last JaxCon panel it clear he loves the working enviroment and the people.  I don't think he's going anywhere until he and Jared decide to call it quits. 

Spoiler

I don't think we're getting a confrontation with John.  It sounds like they gave it Sam.  Jared gave an interview in which he said Sam gets closure he didnt' even know he needed.  I highly doubt that conversation will talk about how hard it was for Dean and how he ended up in hell and John wondering if Dean will forgive him.  Sam Smith said Mary is elated.  Jensen or Dean was not even mentioned in the article in any context what so ever.

[catrox14]

5 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

Only if Jensen wants out and only signed for one year, not two.  There's no way TPTB would halve their fanbase deliberately.

IMO, they have already moved the show from being about Sam, Dean, and Cas, to being about Jack and Lucifer, not that Jack and Lucifer are about Dean, Cas and Sam.

I go back to that Blind Item from Ausiello and I do think it's Jensen. I could also be wildly wrong. It's just a gut feeling and I see hints especially the Billie encounter.

[catrox14]

1 minute ago, ILoveReading said:

was talking during the last JaxCon panel it clear he loves the working enviroment and the people.  I don't think he's going anywhere until he and Jared decide to call it quits. 

Jensen is cagey. And he's not going to spoil Dean's actual true death IMO. Things change for people. Maybe the shoerunners are going to ice TFW 1.0 altogether. (Not kidding) and reboot with Jack and KaiaSue.

[ahrtee]

2 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Jensen is cagey. And he's not going to spoil Dean's actual true death IMO. Things change for people. Maybe the shoerunners are going to ice TFW 1.0 altogether. (Not kidding) and reboot with Jack and KaiaSue.

I'm pretty sure they're hoping they can reboot with Jack and the WSs once the "real" SPN ends.   And I think they'd have to give some kind of final (full-season) wrap up for that, ending,  maybe (hopefully) with Sam and Dean handing over the keys to the bunker and riding off into the sunset, (or going out in a blaze of glory, Butch and Sundance-style), thus giving the network the chance to continue with SPN: The Next Generation.  

[gonzosgirrl]

14 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

I'm pretty sure they're hoping they can reboot with Jack and the WSs once the "real" SPN ends.   And I think they'd have to give some kind of final (full-season) wrap up for that, ending,  maybe (hopefully) with Sam and Dean handing over the keys to the bunker and riding off into the sunset, (or going out in a blaze of glory, Butch and Sundance-style), thus giving the network the chance to continue with SPN: The Next Generation.  

Isn't this what they've done (twice over?)  with Vampire Diaries?

While I'm not 100% convinced they have the balls to do it for reals, I, too, have been predicting Dean's death since pretty much the beginning of Dabb's reign (of suck), cemented by the sentimental ending of Regarding Dean.

[Aeryn13]

I think the studio would put pressure on them to not end the show on a "down" note. That usually hurts rewatch potential for syndication/streaming. And I wouldn`t put it past them to envision some TV movie couple years after the show ends. So at this point, I can`t foresee any permanent deaths, not even Dean. If he were to leave the show (which I honestly doubt, not until it concludes, more`s the pity), he would do so in a "wait a minute, couldn`t he come back" way. Disappear in action in some way. 

Until then every death ever is a joke. Noone dies on this show apart from Crowley and that is only because Mark Sheppard would rather be boiled alive than come back.  

[gonzosgirrl]

31 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

I think the studio would put pressure on them to not end the show on a "down" note. That usually hurts rewatch potential for syndication/streaming. And I wouldn`t put it past them to envision some TV movie couple years after the show ends. So at this point, I can`t foresee any permanent deaths, not even Dean. If he were to leave the show (which I honestly doubt, not until it concludes, more`s the pity), he would do so in a "wait a minute, couldn`t he come back" way. Disappear in action in some way. 

Until then every death ever is a joke. Noone dies on this show apart from Crowley and that is only because Mark Sheppard would rather be boiled alive than come back.  

If they gave a single fuck about rewatch potential they would not have so thoroughly negated every flashback/time travel/dreamscape iteration of Mary Winchester and delivered the abomination of a character that is Dabbernatural Mary Winchester. Not to mention making a joke out of canon, lore and death. 

[Aeryn13]

Quote

If they gave a single fuck about rewatch potential they would not have so thoroughly negated every flashback/time travel/dreamscape iteration of Mary Winchester and delivered the abomination of a character that is Dabbernatural Mary Winchester. Not to mention making a joke out of canon, lore and death. 

While I agree, that is all kinds of stuff that happens when the show is on-going. Rule of thumb is, though, that a really unhappy end makes people less likely to go back and rewatch or new people to check a show out. Lots of shows try for at least semi-happy endings. I think SPN will, too. It`s probably gonna end rather randomely open-ended, with a "we got more work to do" over the opened trunk of the Impala. I predict "safe and lame". 

[DeeDee79]

3 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

While I agree, that is all kinds of stuff that happens when the show is on-going. Rule of thumb is, though, that a really unhappy end makes people less likely to go back and rewatch or new people to check a show out. 

That’s what happened to me with House. It was one of my favorite shows until the final season with its shitty finale. I’ve never rewatched because I’m still bitter.

[ahrtee]

5 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

That’s what happened to me with House. It was one of my favorite shows until the final season with its shitty finale. I’ve never rewatched because I’m still bitter.

Same for me with House (though I admit I stopped watching the whole last season because he'd become so completely unlikeable).  At least I still like (and understand) Dean so I can keep watching.

I had the "bad ending" reaction to Quantum Leap, which I loved but *hated* the unhappy ending and so it ruined the show in retrospect.  If you're going to end a show with a splash (and not just peter out), I think it should be hopeful, at least.  I'm just a sucker for happy endings, I guess. :)

[DeeDee79]

4 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

Same for me with House (though I admit I stopped watching the whole last season because he'd become so completely unlikeable).  At least I still like (and understand) Dean so I can keep watching.

I had the "bad ending" reaction to Quantum Leap, which I loved but *hated* the unhappy ending and so it ruined the show in retrospect.  If you're going to end a show with a splash (and not just peter out), I think it should be hopeful, at least.  I'm just a sucker for happy endings, I guess. :)

I’m the same way. If it’s not particularly happy at least make it palatable enough that a rewatch will be pleasant. 

[gonzosgirrl]

28 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

While I agree, that is all kinds of stuff that happens when the show is on-going. Rule of thumb is, though, that a really unhappy end makes people less likely to go back and rewatch or new people to check a show out. Lots of shows try for at least semi-happy endings. I think SPN will, too. It`s probably gonna end rather randomely open-ended, with a "we got more work to do" over the opened trunk of the Impala. I predict "safe and lame". 

I guess what I'm saying is the ship has sailed on me enjoying a rewatch already. Doesn't matter how they end it.

[catrox14]

I must be a glutton for punishment because I will rewatch most of Angel and especially s5 and especially the finale because I think it was an honest amd teue to the show ending. To me, I don't think a dark ending ruins a show if it's true to the show. To me any member of TFW dying would be appropriate.

Edited December 16, 2018 by catrox14

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I guess what I'm saying is the ship has sailed on me enjoying a rewatch already. Doesn't matter how they end it.

Oh, personally, I don`t find much rewatch potential either. Unfortunately, even my previous favourite episodes have been closed to ruined.

It`s more a general rule on how audiences respond. And I even get it, I generally prefer happy endings to my shows. With Grimm, for example, I was so happy they erased the sad ending and went for a happy one. It was really bad writing but I didn`t care, it means I`ll happily rewatch the show again. 

Quote

I must be a glutton for punishment because I will rewatch most of Angel and especially s5 and especially the finale because I think it was an honest amd teue to the show ending. 

Angel left it open enough. Despite the odds, you can imagine how they all survived. I mean, that`s even what the comics did. I rewatch it, too and don`t think the ending was bad for the show.

I did watch the Vampire Diaries shows, though, and while TVD ended on a bit bittersweet but still largely happy note, Originals very much did not. I enjoyed the former and hated the latter.    

[DeeDee79]

8 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

With Grimm, for example, I was so happy they erased the sad ending and went for a happy one. It was really bad writing but I didn`t care, it means I`ll happily rewatch the show again. 

I felt exactly the same about the finale. I was so upset when Hank and Wu were killed and swore that I wouldn’t be able to rewatch when they kept on killing after that. A reset may seem cheesy but I’m glad that they did it.

[catrox14]

14 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

Angel left it open enough. Despite the odds, you can imagine how they all survived.

I never thought they survived but went out fighting.(I know about the comics but I don't consider that TV Canon). I see that kind of ending for SPN and I would be okay with it as long as it's well written.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I never thought they survived but went out fighting.(I know about the comics but I don't consider that TV Canon)

I don`t see those as canon either. Apparently they did some shit stories later on so no thanks. However, I did imagine they survived.  :)

So if SPN does something like this, no problem. Granted, I`d have no problem if Dean got a big heroic bow-out either.

[ahrtee]

I'd only be OK with a heroic bow-out if it led to something else (taking charge in heaven, eg, or just a happy hereafter somewhere.)  We had the going out with a bang/heroic ending with Jo and Ellen, and it just made me sad.  

[Pondlass1]

It's just not the same show (for me anyway) that I started out with.  When watching older episodes I'm quite struck by how smart they once were.  They figured things out themselves.  There wasn't always some convenient spell or gizmo and if there was the brothers had a to figure a way to get their hands on it.  They didn't rush half cocked into situations or have it all so easy.  Now it's the same predicament only a different week.  A colossal big bad that turns out to be nothing.  These big bads can snap fingers and destroy the universe. But instead they pontificate and posture and and go on and on about how evil they are and what evil they will do.  But they never do it. 

Having two ordinary humans going up against bigger and bigger and BIGGER super beings each season is a mistake.  The big bads are now way too powerful... and rarely very bad and there's always a spear or blade or something.

The weekly plot used to move slower, building tension and suspense as the story unfolded over the 43 minutes.  Now we file our nails as Dean dies for the umpteenth time or the super monster advises he/she will destroy the world. Yeah, right.

And then there's the belittling of the hunting profession.  It used to be scary, lonely, dangerous, and kinda epic.  It required wild & crazy heroes with a heartbreak reason for joining the ranks.  Now it's just fun and games and anyone can do it.

Dean and Sam Winchester are just not special any more - or even particularly bright.  They have disappeared into the woodwork.

[companionenvy]

2 hours ago, catrox14 said:

I never thought they survived but went out fighting.(I know about the comics but I don't consider that TV Canon). I see that kind of ending for SPN and I would be okay with it as long as it's well written.

I agree - and as someone who HATES excessively angsty endings, I thought the Angel finale was fantastic because it was true to the show and not purposelessly tragic or nihilistic. Much as I want our boys to be happy, I could cope with them dying a similarly meaningful death to end the show without feeling I'd wasted years investing in them.

[tessathereaper]

13 hours ago, devlin said:

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

Yeah that's seems pretty obvious to me.  Sam lied about being on Dean's side, he went behind Dean's back to do something Dean specifically didn't want to do.   And again it wasn't something done in the heat of the moment.  Sam considered and decided he would go behind Dean's back and do this.

[devlin]

i saw a post on tumblr which got me thinking, which  brought up the point that TFW’s possessions might be completely different, despite what dean thinks. Cas is an angel and sam had just guzzled three humans worth of demon blood. I have to love my boy who without the help of any supernatural influence was strong enough to house an archangel and then annoy him enough to make him leave despite feeling like he was constantly drowning 

[ILoveReading]

1 minute ago, devlin said:

i saw a post on tumblr which got me thinking, which  brought up the point that TFW’s possessions might be completely different, despite what dean thinks. Cas is an angel and sam had just guzzled three humans worth of demon blood. I have to love my boy who without the help of any supernatural influence was strong enough to house an archangel and then annoy him enough to make him leave despite feeling like he was constantly drowning 

I wish someone would point this out to Dean rather than letting him constantly think an arch angel got the better of him. 

He did it without plastic toys.  Go Dean.

[BabySpinach]

4 minutes ago, devlin said:

i saw a post on tumblr which got me thinking, which  brought up the point that TFW’s possessions might be completely different, despite what dean thinks. Cas is an angel and sam had just guzzled three humans worth of demon blood. I have to love my boy who without the help of any supernatural influence was strong enough to house an archangel and then annoy him enough to make him leave despite feeling like he was constantly drowning 

That's a great point. Intentional or not, Dean was ultimately shown to be plenty strong enough on his own, regardless of his previous self-flagellation over any supposed weakness or inadequacy. He managed to bother an archangel to such a degree that the latter left him to construct an elaborate psychological game, solely to render him more compliant. And it must have taken a lot of bothering for Michael to even temporarily abandon his perfect vessel. I'll certainly treasure scraps such as these that demonstrate the unbreakable resilience of Dean Winchester, especially since they're probably never going to textually address it in the show.

Besides, Cas' supposed "terrible" possession was all Tell and no Show. In 11.18, he was just staring glassy-eyed at a television and telling Crowley straight-up that Lucifer mostly left him alone. That doesn't even remotely compare to Dean's experience. 

[gonzosgirrl]

1 hour ago, tessathereaper said:

Yeah that's seems pretty obvious to me.  Sam lied about being on Dean's side, he went behind Dean's back to do something Dean specifically didn't want to do.   And again it wasn't something done in the heat of the moment.  Sam considered and decided he would go behind Dean's back and do this.

This. I can't comprehend how it can not be seen as a betrayal. Certainly, Sam had every right to go along with the BMOL if that's what he wanted to do. His choice to go behind Dean's back about it tells me a) he must have had at least some doubt that it was the right thing to do, and b) his choice to involve Dean in his decision was a betrayal of Dean's trust. It seems pretty black and white to me, regardless of its heinousness on the grand scale of brotherly deceptions.

 

27 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

I wish someone would point this out to Dean rather than letting him constantly think an arch angel got the better of him.

There doesn't seem to be anyone with the possible exception of Jody (when she's not auditioning for her own gurl!power show) willing to say things like this to Dean anymore. A weak-sauce 'it's not your fault' the most he gets, and that isn't really very satisfying for this fan.

Quote

He did it without plastic toys.  Go Dean.

Burrrrn.

[ZennyKenny]

8 hours ago, catrox14 said:

From the bitter spoilers thread:

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

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

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

  Hide contents

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

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

TPTB have to know that that would be commercial suicide though, right? I mean surely Dean-less SPN would make the rating plummet.

[companionenvy]

I guess for me, a betrayal is more limited. Actively working against a loved one is a betrayal. Selling out your loved one to an enemy, thwarting the loved one's plans, etc. 

In this case, if anything, Sam had far more reason to be pissed at the BMOL than Dean did. Dean didn't trust the BMOL, and didn't think they should be working with them - but they and the Winchesters weren't working at cross purposes or against one another. It was more a question of methods than of goals. They had even grudgingly worked with the BMOL in the past. 

Should Sam have told Dean? Yes, of course he should have. And the show acknowledges it. But I thought Dean's reaction - kind of pissed, but not furious -- was appropriate given the offense, and given how often the Winchesters and Cas do similar things to one another. I still think "betrayal" is a bit much. 

[Katy M]

39 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

I guess for me, a betrayal is more limited. Actively working against a loved one is a betrayal. Selling out your loved one to an enemy, thwarting the loved one's plans, etc. 

In this case, if anything, Sam had far more reason to be pissed at the BMOL than Dean did. Dean didn't trust the BMOL, and didn't think they should be working with them - but they and the Winchesters weren't working at cross purposes or against one another. It was more a question of methods than of goals. They had even grudgingly worked with the BMOL in the past. 

Should Sam have told Dean? Yes, of course he should have. And the show acknowledges it. But I thought Dean's reaction - kind of pissed, but not furious -- was appropriate given the offense, and given how often the Winchesters and Cas do similar things to one another. I still think "betrayal" is a bit much. 

I agree with that.  I think it was stupid to work with the BMOL, and I think he should have told Dean, but I don't see it as the same as a betrayal.  Sure, he was getting tips on jobs from the BMOL, but that seemed to be the extent of it until he told Dean.  Dean didn't even seem to see it as a betrayal because he, perhaps reluctantly, agreed to also work with them.  And, if the supposed betrayed doesn't act betrayed, that's a big clue.

[Aeryn13]

I would have prefered if afterwards Dean had said that he didn't want to work for them. I mean when he was played for a fool, he couldn't help it but he should have said no to becoming their flunky who reported back to them and everything.

That didn't have to play like a big angst-fest but more of a matter-of-fact "you do you and I do me". Mary and Sam were free to make their choice for the BMOL, I would have liked to see Dean make a different choice. 

[tessathereaper]

47 minutes ago, Katy M said:

I agree with that.  I think it was stupid to work with the BMOL, and I think he should have told Dean, but I don't see it as the same as a betrayal.  Sure, he was getting tips on jobs from the BMOL, but that seemed to be the extent of it until he told Dean.  Dean didn't even seem to see it as a betrayal because he, perhaps reluctantly, agreed to also work with them.  And, if the supposed betrayed doesn't act betrayed, that's a big clue.

Not really, I thought Dean was just pretty much thinking this was par for the course, of course no one respected his opinion and lied to him and went behind his back.  Sometimes the betrayed is just tired and figures it's pointless to argue about it.  Pick your battles and all that.

[ahrtee]

1 hour ago, companionenvy said:

I guess for me, a betrayal is more limited. Actively working against a loved one is a betrayal. Selling out your loved one to an enemy, thwarting the loved one's plans, etc. 

In this case, if anything, Sam had far more reason to be pissed at the BMOL than Dean did. Dean didn't trust the BMOL, and didn't think they should be working with them - but they and the Winchesters weren't working at cross purposes or against one another. It was more a question of methods than of goals. They had even grudgingly worked with the BMOL in the past. 

Should Sam have told Dean? Yes, of course he should have. And the show acknowledges it.

But I thought Dean's reaction - kind of pissed, but not furious -- was appropriate given the offense, and given how often the Winchesters and Cas do similar things to one another. I still think "betrayal" is a bit much. 

By this standard, Gadreel wasn't a betrayal either.  After all, Dean wasn't "actively working against a loved one" or "selling out his loved one to an enemy" and if you call stopping him from dying "thwarting the loved one's plans" well, then, remember that Sam *agreed* to stop the trials.  Dying was just the side effect of something he'd already agreed to do.  At the beginning, neither Gadreel nor the BMoL were "enemies" and were doing what they'd promised--curing Sam, getting rid of all monsters.  Sam was himself most of the time, he was cured of an incurable disease, and the few times Gadreel took over Sam was kept safe and happy, without being forced to watch himself out of control (and even saved himself, Cas and Charlie from death).  And the BMoL had all the fancy toys that seemed to make hunting safer and more effective. 

If they hadn't turned Evil, would it still have been a betrayal?  Does the end justify the means?  

Basically, they both tricked the other into doing something they never would have done on their own and lied about it until found out.  Neither one was harmed by it.  Why was one considered so much worse?  Was it only because of Kevin, which couldn't have been anticipated?

As to why Dean wasn't so pissed off about it, IA with @tessathereaper that he was just too tired of it all, since it had happened so many times before.  And maybe Sam *was* so pissed because he had always trusted Dean *not* to lie to him.  After all, if Dean wanted to do something Sam didn't, he usually just told him they were going to do it instead of lying or going behind his back.  Sam could either argue him out of it (which happened most often) or go behind his back to do what he wanted anyway.  

[gonzosgirrl]

34 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

By this standard, Gadreel wasn't a betrayal either.  After all, Dean wasn't "actively working against a loved one" or "selling out his loved one to an enemy" and if you call stopping him from dying "thwarting the loved one's plans" well, then, remember that Sam *agreed* to stop the trials.  Dying was just the side effect of something he'd already agreed to do.  At the beginning, neither Gadreel nor the BMoL were "enemies" and were doing what they'd promised--curing Sam, getting rid of all monsters.  Sam was himself most of the time, he was cured of an incurable disease, and the few times Gadreel took over Sam was kept safe and happy, without being forced to watch himself out of control (and even saved himself, Cas and Charlie from death).  And the BMoL had all the fancy toys that seemed to make hunting safer and more effective. 

If they hadn't turned Evil, would it still have been a betrayal?  Does the end justify the means?  

Basically, they both tricked the other into doing something they never would have done on their own and lied about it until found out.  Neither one was harmed by it.  Why was one considered so much worse?  Was it only because of Kevin, which couldn't have been anticipated?

As to why Dean wasn't so pissed off about it, IA with @tessathereaper that he was just too tired of it all, since it had happened so many times before.  And maybe Sam *was* so pissed because he had always trusted Dean *not* to lie to him.  After all, if Dean wanted to do something Sam didn't, he usually just told him they were going to do it instead of lying or going behind his back.  Sam could either argue him out of it (which happened most often) or go behind his back to do what he wanted anyway.  

Boom.

[companionenvy]

1 hour ago, ahrtee said:

By this standard, Gadreel wasn't a betrayal either.  After all, Dean wasn't "actively working against a loved one" or "selling out his loved one to an enemy" and if you call stopping him from dying "thwarting the loved one's plans" well, then, remember that Sam *agreed* to stop the trials.  Dying was just the side effect of something he'd already agreed to do.  At the beginning, neither Gadreel nor the BMoL were "enemies" and were doing what they'd promised--curing Sam, getting rid of all monsters.  Sam was himself most of the time, he was cured of an incurable disease, and the few times Gadreel took over Sam was kept safe and happy, without being forced to watch himself out of control (and even saved himself, Cas and Charlie from death).  And the BMoL had all the fancy toys that seemed to make hunting safer and more effective. 

If they hadn't turned Evil, would it still have been a betrayal?  Does the end justify the means?  

Basically, they both tricked the other into doing something they never would have done on their own and lied about it until found out.  Neither one was harmed by it.  Why was one considered so much worse?  Was it only because of Kevin, which couldn't have been anticipated?

As to why Dean wasn't so pissed off about it, IA with @tessathereaper that he was just too tired of it all, since it had happened so many times before.  And maybe Sam *was* so pissed because he had always trusted Dean *not* to lie to him.  After all, if Dean wanted to do something Sam didn't, he usually just told him they were going to do it instead of lying or going behind his back.  Sam could either argue him out of it (which happened most often) or go behind his back to do what he wanted anyway.  

I don't think Gadreel was a betrayal. It was a violation of Sam's autonomy, which is bad, but not the same thing as a betrayal. I also don't have a huge problem with Dean's initial call to let Gadreel in in the first place - I think he handled it poorly after (kicking out Cas, not trying harder to tell Sam what was going on, or to follow up on the red flags Ezekiel was throwing up), but can't blame him for what he did to save Sam while Sam wasn't necessarily in a position to meaningfully consider the situation. 

ETA: I do think while Dean was acting under greater provocation/duress, what he did was legitimately more serious: it is a much bigger deal to let a supernatural being possess your brother without his consent, over a period of weeks, than to lie to you brother about who is giving you the tips for your cases, which is really what the cooperation with the BMOL came down to.

Edited December 17, 2018 by companionenvy

[gonzosgirrl]

I still maintain that if Sam didn't think there was anything wrong with what he was doing, he wouldn't have  hidden it. He is, indeed, a grown man and could have signed on with them regardless of Dean's feelings about it. He outright stated he was going to 'work on' Dean. He could have told him what he wanted to do and 'worked on' convincing Dean openly.  Instead he deceived him - which is right there in the definition of betrayal.

[Katy M]

3 hours ago, tessathereaper said:

Not really, I thought Dean was just pretty much thinking this was par for the course, of course no one respected his opinion and lied to him and went behind his back.  Sometimes the betrayed is just tired and figures it's pointless to argue about it.  Pick your battles and all that.

So, then was Dean betraying himself?

[Aeryn13]

Quote

He outright stated he was going to 'work on' Dean. 

I hated that for the same reason I hated that scene in Season 4 where Dean just tiredly asks Sam not to share his secret but at least to not lie so openly to his face about keeping a secret. With the clear implication that Dean is not so stupid that he didn`t notice. Then Sam looks at him and lies. With pretty much the same look he had in the Siren episode when he delivered the "stronger, smarter, better" line. 

If you think he is that much of a stupid child, at least tell him to his frigging face. 

[catrox14]

7 hours ago, Katy M said:

ean didn't even seem to see it as a betrayal because he, perhaps reluctantly, agreed to also work with them.  And, if the supposed betrayed doesn't act betrayed, that's a big clue.

This comes back to interpretation wrt narrative and scene(s). IMO, it was obvious that both Dean and Sam, felt betrayed by Mary, but moreso Dean, so much so that he told her to get out of the bunker when she confessed her actions.

Then Dean was pissed at Sam for riding the middle when he told Sam to pick a side, which was really between Dean an Mary.  Sam did pick that side by answering Mary's call, that she didn't make to Dean. She convinced Sam to join up and he chose to keep it a secret from Dean until it became weird.

IMO, the moment Dean learned of that lie he was heartbroken and angry. But the narrative made Dean only care that Mary was safe and then he was made to essentially back down from his reasonable position re Mary. That doesn't change that IMO Jensen's acting showed the deep hurt. It was all over his face. IMO, the reason he acquiesced, which is exactly what he did, was to keep the peace. Not because he didn't feel betrayed.

And this just demonstrates that the writing has become so plot driven that characterization is wildly shortchanged. IMO, Dean was being written to be the low-key antagonist to Mary to prop her and let everyone know she was MORE THAN  MOM and how dare her children expect her to be a Mom at all. Sam didn't get hit with that stick because he sympathized with her. Sam lying  to Dean was never indicted  because Sam fessed up and said sorry.

And that IMO was when Sam's toe first touched the Chief!Sam narrative. Because he led the people in the BMOL against the vampire attack and took out the Alpha Vamp. Dean was out with the villain to free Sam up to lead.

[AwesomO4000]

5 hours ago, ahrtee said:

By this standard, Gadreel wasn't a betrayal either.  After all, Dean wasn't "actively working against a loved one" or "selling out his loved one to an enemy"

... Basically, they both tricked the other into doing something they never would have done on their own and lied about it until found out.  Neither one was harmed by it. .  Why was one considered so much worse?  Was it only because of Kevin, which couldn't have been anticipated?

For me, Gadreel wasn't a betrayal at first. I had no problem with Dean helping Ezekial/Gadreel to initially possess Sam. It became more of one - or at least really, really close - when Dean started lying after he knew that Gadreel was actively doing crappy stuff. And in my opinion erasing Sam's memories for long periods of time and making Sam think he's going crazy is crappy, questionable stuff, so Dean lying to Sam's face about that, in my opinion was actively working against Sam (who was trying to figure out what was wrong with him [Sam]) and selling Sam out to Gadreel's and Dean's own agenda in a way.

I disagree that Sam wasn't harmed by Gadreel. As soon as Sam was really distressed, in my opinion, that was harm, and for Dean to just lie and try to brush that off as (paraphrase) "nah, you're imagining things. It's just stress from healing. You just need to rest..." etc was working against Sam trying to find out what was wrong. Dean didn't lie about Gadreel until he was "found out." He lied about it after Sam had questions about what was going on, also. He made no attempts to come clean until after things got really bad (Kevin), and he may not have known Kevin getting killed was going to happen, but Kevin told Dean enough that Dean knew things weren't right. Kevin told Dean in a concerned manner about Sam leaving the bunker at all hours and Dean chose to ignore that bit of information instead of immediately being concerned and doing something about that.

Just because the narrative later ignored those things and changed things to Sam not really being harmed after all, that was more of a retcon. Initially Sam was harmed by what Gadreel was doing, even if it was mostly psychological in nature rather than physical.

And for me that's why it was worse: because of the psychological damage to Sam that due to Dean's lying, Dean ended up taking part in and adding to. For me it wasn't Kevin - which you're right: that couldn't have been anticipated. It was the things Dean knew about - Sam's distress and Sam's mind being screwed with - and still lied about and let happen because of his own agenda.

2 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

I hated that for the same reason I hated that scene in Season 4 where Dean just tiredly asks Sam not to share his secret but at least to not lie so openly to his face about keeping a secret. With the clear implication that Dean is not so stupid that he didn`t notice. Then Sam looks at him and lies.

I found Dean lying to Sam about Gadreel to be akin to this, maybe even a little worse. And I say a little worse, because Sam was wanting Dean to reassure him, and Dean instead lied, knowing that things likely were not going to get better for Sam, a little rest was not going to make it better, and that Sam did have something to be concerned about.

Sam lying to Dean was crappy, but they both knew Sam was lying, so the trust was already gone. It maybe seems worse with Gadreel, because Sam did still trust Dean and believed Dean was telling him the truth... until the lies got compounded and Kevin ended up dead.

5 hours ago, ahrtee said:

And maybe Sam *was* so pissed because he had always trusted Dean *not* to lie to him.  After all, if Dean wanted to do something Sam didn't, he usually just told him they were going to do it instead of lying or going behind his back.  Sam could either argue him out of it (which happened most often) or go behind his back to do what he wanted anyway.  

I disagree. Well at least that Dean doesn't lie or go behind Sam's back. Sam might still trust Dean *not* to lie to him, but in my opinion he should know better, because Sam had had enough experience with Dean lying to him and going behind his back before. The narrative just often has Sam get over it and/or doesn't present it as having been the wrong thing to do. Dean lying to Sam about John's last words, lying to Sam about hell, lying to Sam about his intentions to say "yes" to Michael, lying to Sam about Amy Pond, and to a lesser extent but more recent to then: lying to Sam via omission about Benny are some examples off the top of my head.

8 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Then Dean was pissed at Sam for riding the middle when he told Sam to pick a side, which was really between Dean an Mary.  Sam did pick that side by answering Mary's call, that she didn't make to Dean.

At first Sam did pick Dean's side as far as I remember. When Dean told Mary to get out of the bunker, you could see that Sam was hesitant, but he backed Dean's choice and told Mary to go. ("You better go.") And Sam had backed Dean's choice for days after that, but he was reconsidering and maybe wanting to try to patch things up. But Dean made Sam feel like crap for not wanting to cut Mary out entirely, because she was family. (Weird how they changed opinions on that one from season 9, but writers do what they want I guess...)

And when Sam "answered Mary's call," it wasn't because she just texted Sam to say "hi." She tricked Sam and told him that it was "urgent."

That Sam then took that... and the betrayal of finding out about the Colt... and then joined up with the BMoL, I can only say makes no sense character-wise or that Sam's actually a masochist.

[ILoveReading]

8 hours ago, companionenvy said:

Selling out your loved one to an enemy,

 

 

5 hours ago, companionenvy said:

It was a violation of Sam's autonomy,

These are both things Sam did to Dean.  He knew full well Dean's position on the Brits and he still took away Dean's choice about whether or not he wanted to work for them.  He lied and made Dean things under their command when Dean had no idea.  When Sam finally came clean, Dean was left in a spot here his programming really wouldn't' allow him to say no.  He wans't going to let Sam go alone into the lions Den.  If he said "no" I can see Sam pulling out the kiddie table card again as he tends to when Dean disagrees with him.  Dean really had no choice here but go along to get along.

20 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

And I say a little worse, because Sam was wanting Dean to reassure him, and Dean instead lied, knowing that things likely were not going to get better for Sam, a little rest was not going to make it better, and that Sam did have something to be concerned about.

This, IMO, is the prefect example of Sam blame shifting. (Not saying that was your intention or you were making that point)  It's only Sam's fault because Dean made him do it in the first place by not holding Sam's hand.  Sam was the one that was lying.  The burden shoudln't be on Dean.  Dean gave Sam the perfect opening.  He says, "Keep your secrets, just stop lying."  Sam's response was to lie.  If he needed assurance from Dean, he should stop playing games and just admit it.  Dean's not psychic. 

Sure there were multiple times for Dean to admit the whole Gadreel thing and he chose to keep lying.  The show never gave Dean the excuse that Sam made him do it by demanding he always put Sam first. 

Each was responsible for their own actions. 

[gonzosgirrl]

30 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

Sure there were multiple times for Dean to admit the whole Gadreel thing and he chose to keep lying.  The show never gave Dean the excuse that Sam made him do it by demanding he always put Sam first.

Not to mention that Gadreel manipulated Dean by holding Sam's life over his head when Dean did want to tell him. Sam was under no such duress.

[Res]

9 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

I would have prefered if afterwards Dean had said that he didn't want to work for them. I mean when he was played for a fool, he couldn't help it but he should have said no to becoming their flunky who reported back to them and everything.

That didn't have to play like a big angst-fest but more of a matter-of-fact "you do you and I do me". Mary and Sam were free to make their choice for the BMOL, I would have liked to see Dean make a different choice. 

Unfortunately, it was getting close to the end of the season so they had to keep the brothers together for the fans, yadda, yadda, yadda, hence Dean had to give in to his family like always.

[Cambion]

45 minutes ago, Res said:

Unfortunately, it was getting close to the end of the season so they had to keep the brothers together for the fans, yadda, yadda, yadda, hence Dean had to give in to his family like always.

Well, that's not terribly OOC for a person who puts everyone else in his life above and before his own needs.  So, I buy it, because it's not so much giving into his family as it is subverting his own needs and desires in order to meet others' needs.  

[AwesomO4000]

2 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

This, IMO, is the prefect example of Sam blame shifting. (Not saying that was your intention or you were making that point)  It's only Sam's fault because Dean made him do it in the first place by not holding Sam's hand.  Sam was the one that was lying.  The burden shoudln't be on Dean.  Dean gave Sam the perfect opening.  He says, "Keep your secrets, just stop lying."  Sam's response was to lie.  If he needed assurance from Dean, he should stop playing games and just admit it.  Dean's not psychic. 

I maybe didn't make myself clear here. (Sorry about that). Sam lying to Dean in season 4 was all on Sam. I'm not trying to blame Dean on anything about that at that point. (Dean maybe shouldn't have lied about hell, but that's an entirely different thing.)

When I was talking about Sam wanting reassurance, I was talking about the Gadreel situation. Sam was asking for Dean's reassurance when he was freaking out about losing time and maybe going bad again. He wanted Dean to help him figure out what might be wrong with him [Sam]. Dean instead told Sam nothing was wrong, it was just that he was still having effects from almost dying. Dean then was not only lying, he was trying to keep Sam from finding out what really was wrong with him and protecting Gadreel even though Gadreel was doing awful stuff to Sam.

Now I  understand if someone argues that erasing Sam's memories was no big deal. I don't happen to agree, but I get it. However Dean himself knew what it was like to have missing memories and what that felt like, because he said himself when Tessa returned his memories to him that there had been a hole where those memories had been. So Dean should have known how distressing having missing memories was. But he didn't ask Gadreel to decrease the amount of Sam's memories he erased or ask Gadreel to not take Sam over unless it was absolutely necessary. He didn't even seem to object at all when Gadreel told Dean that's what he was doing to Sam... and that's because Dean wanted Sam to be healed more than he was concerned about what it was doing to Sam.

I agree that Sam was doing something similar when he wasn't telling Dean about their jobs coming from the BMoL in that he wanted Dean to hunt with him more than he was concerned about how Dean would feel about working for the BMoL, but the BMoL wasn't doing anything to Dean. They weren't erasing Dean's memories or invading his private thoughts like Gadreel was doing to Sam. For me that's the difference. One's being a jerk in order to get what you want - and it annoys me that Dabb had Sam be a jerk to Dean*** - but  the other is letting a foreign entity do potential psychological damage and not saying anything to try and stop it in order to get what you want. For me, the second one is worse.

*** For me personally, I don't think any showrunner has treated Sam well in terms of characterization since Gamble left. It seems to me more that plot takes precedence over his characterization much of the time.

3 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

Sure there were multiple times for Dean to admit the whole Gadreel thing and he chose to keep lying.  The show never gave Dean the excuse that Sam made him do it by demanding he always put Sam first. 

True, but I do think they let Dean off the hook but letting the whole thing (Sam being badly affected) drop by not having it referenced again, even by Sam, and worse by not only turning it into not having been that bad by implying that Sam maybe hadn't feel threatened, but that Sam might have even suspected he'd been possessed but didn't think he needed to do anything about it, because Gadreel hadn't felt evil. None of that had been shown previously, but the narrative had Sam say that that's how it went down. And so that lessened what Dean did and almost made it seem like acceptable collateral damage in order to heal Sam.

3 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Not to mention that Gadreel manipulated Dean by holding Sam's life over his head when Dean did want to tell him. Sam was under no such duress.

Dean could have worked around Gadreel, in my opinion. Dean's smart. He could have left Sam clues or code words or used any number of ways. For me, the threat was just an excuse Dean used to justify his lying. As for Sam being under no duress, maybe not. But I think he was feeling some pressure about being caught between Dean and Mary. He might've thought that if he could convince Dean that the BMoL had some redeeming qualities that maybe he could use that to reunite the whole family. It's not an excuse for being a jerk like he was, but I can see some motivation there.

[companionenvy]

10 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

These are both things Sam did to Dean.  He knew full well Dean's position on the Brits and he still took away Dean's choice about whether or not he wanted to work for them.  He lied and made Dean things under their command when Dean had no idea.  When Sam finally came clean, Dean was left in a spot here his programming really wouldn't' allow him to say no.  He wans't going to let Sam go alone into the lions Den.  If he said "no" I can see Sam pulling out the kiddie table card again as he tends to when Dean disagrees with him.  Dean really had no choice here but go along to get along.

Programming or not, Dean's a fully grown adult - one who has disagreed with and even parted ways with Sam in the past. We don't know how Sam would have reacted if Dean had stood firm, but I don't think that it would have been with the kiddie table charge, something he brings up when DEAN is making decisions unilaterally. That's the opposite of what was going on here, so it wouldn't make a ton of sense. 

Dean gave a pretty rational explanation for why he grudgingly followed Sam - they've worked with plenty of sketchy people (you know, like the literal king of hell) in the past, and intel is intel. 

[devlin]

18 hours ago, Katy M said:

I agree with that.  I think it was stupid to work with the BMOL, and I think he should have told Dean, but I don't see it as the same as a betrayal.  Sure, he was getting tips on jobs from the BMOL, but that seemed to be the extent of it until he told Dean.  Dean didn't even seem to see it as a betrayal because he, perhaps reluctantly, agreed to also work with them.  And, if the supposed betrayed doesn't act betrayed, that's a big clue.

I certainly see it as betrayal. When someone makes it clear that they want nothing to do with a certain group, only to have another person deceive him into working for them, how can it not be a betrayal of their principles? And I would argue that dean was not acting betrayed. The look on his face said it all and I think the only reason dean began to work with them was that sam had made it clear that regardless of dean, sam was going to work with them. It was a matter of dean once again swallowing his feelings in order to keep the peace.

[Aeryn13]

57 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

Programming or not, Dean's a fully grown adult - one who has disagreed with and even parted ways with Sam in the past. We don't know how Sam would have reacted if Dean had stood firm, but I don't think that it would have been with the kiddie table charge, something he brings up when DEAN is making decisions unilaterally. That's the opposite of what was going on here, so it wouldn't make a ton of sense. 

Dean gave a pretty rational explanation for why he grudgingly followed Sam - they've worked with plenty of sketchy people (you know, like the literal king of hell) in the past, and intel is intel. 

I think he would have gone with tve kiddie table thing because it would have been a "you don't trust me so you don't follow me" thing. 

I hated that Dean fell in line also. Though when it was about "well, that is my cue to become your great leader", then Sam was fine seeing it as a singular thing. Why those other hunters didn't tell him off, I'll never understand. In what world does the one who fell for the enemies lies get to lead over all those who didn't? And with that exact reasoning to boot? Opposite world?

[ILoveReading]

3 hours ago, companionenvy said:

omething he brings up when DEAN is making decisions unilaterally.

Based on how Sam has acted in the past when Dean doesn't agree, I think its a pretty accurate guess to say that Sam would have played the  little brother card.

This is something Sam does frequently.  Something Sam did with the Brits.  He manipulated the situation to suit his own purposes and agenda.    I suspect that if I did a detailed analysis of the show I'd find that Dean gives into Sam far more than Sam gives into Dean.  Sam is also grown man who has a long history of standing up to Dean.  "You treat me like a child" needs to stop being Sam's excuse when something he didn't agree with doesn't go his way.   He's closer to 40, not 12.

Dean also laid out a valid argument why he should go alone into the AU.  Someone had to stay with Gabriel and Sam needs him so it makes more sense for that to be Sam, and also as back up if something went wrong.  Sam agreed whether he liked it or not.  He grudingly accepted Dean's plan  If Dean accepted Sam's reasoning with the Brits,even though he didn't like it, its the exact same situation here.

Dean didn't put Sam at the kiddie table.  Unilaterally making a decision would have been Dean waiting until Sam was asleep and going without telling Sam.  That's not what happened.  Sam sounded like a kid having a tantrum because weeks later he decided he made the wrong decision. 

[AwesomO4000]

4 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

I suspect that if I did a detailed analysis of the show I'd find that Dean gives into Sam far more than Sam gives into Dean. 

I guess it might depend on which situations you included and how they were included, but I think it would go the other way.

I might also depend on if you included when one goes off  and does what they want anyway if the other agrees with it retroactively. Usually Sam going off on his own ends up turning out to be wrong and he admits so, while with Dean it doesn't usually go south, and Sam generally ends up admitting that Dean was right. (A couple of examples of the latter: Amy Pond and Dean taking on the mark of Cain. An example for Sam would be saying "yes" to Michael. Dean pretty much decided Sam was right to insist that Dean didn't after his initially trying it anyway.) So I guess that would be giving in after the fact, but for me that still counts.

[ILoveReading]

1 hour ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I guess it might depend on which situations you included and how they were included, but I think it would go the other way.

I'm mostly talking about the before situations not after.  I don't see Sam as this poor put upon oppressed younger brother whose every move is controlled by Dean.   In a matter of life and death, yes, but not day to day.  Day to day I've always seen Sam as the more dominate brother.  Sam gives as good as he gets.  IMO, Dean is the bossy one but Sam is the far more controlling one.  Ex Benny.  Dean says, in or out but make a choice.  Sam says Dump Benny or I dump you.  How I wish Dean would would be given dialogue to stand up. 

 

1 hour ago, AwesomO4000 said:

. Usually Sam going off on his own ends up turning out to be wrong and he admits so, while with Dean it doesn't usually go south, and Sam generally ends up admitting that Dean was right

I see this as the opposite.  I find Sam gets rewarded for his mistakes whereas Dean is often punished for being right.   Prime example being the Brits.  Sam gets a self promotion to leader.  Dean ends up as a flunkie under chief Sam who asks permission to go out on hunts.  Benny is another example.  Dean was right but Sam got rewarded when Dean ended up cutting off contact for no other reason than Sam having a temper tantrum.  Even with Amy, despite Sam saying he was right Sam kept bringing her up.  I think that was one of the few storylines where Dean didn't end up having to apologize for his actions.       We will never agree so I'll agree to disagree on this point.