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

[ILoveReading]

Quote

"The bit that they screwed completely was demon Dean, that would have been so much fun."
 

Mark Sheppard is my spirit animal

[FlickChick]

I was watching "Safe House" on TNT this morning - I do love that episode! What comes on after it but "Red Meat" which I thought at the time was a farcical, OTT portrayal of SuperSam. (Little did I know). Guess who wrote the episode - Dabb & Berens! Together - sort of explains a lot, doesn't it? SuperSam is the half-dead hero who can kill the bad guys and save the day. Dean is the poor schmuck who is willing to kill himself to save his brother, and when that doesn't work, actually is saved by his half-dead brother. What a crock! Just the beginning of their reign...

Edited January 16, 2019 by FlickChick
Correct spelling is important.

[AwesomO4000]

Brought over from the "Bitter Spoilers" thread just to be safe. No spoilers here:

3 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

I think canon supports Sam being the favored son.  We know that John was proud of him and checked up on him while he was at school.

I mainly disagree. And John checking up on Sam at school... I have another not as warm and fuzzy interpretation of that that nags at me. It's not like John let Sam know he was there, checking up on him, so he wasn't doing it for Sam. He was doing it either for himself - and how much of that was Dean suggesting that they go check on Sam? - or to make sure that Sam wasn't going evil.

One of the reasons why I don't think that Sam was so much the "favored son" or at least he wasn't the son that John had any faith in was the fact that John didn't tell Sam anything in the end. Even though I agree that it was an awful thing to do, John told Dean that he would either have to save Sam or kill him. Wow... to me that says that John had little faith in Sam. It was up to Dean - the good son, the dependable son - to make sure Sam didn't go bad. To me, that says that John really didn't think much of Sam as a reliable person. John just assumed that without Dean there to watch him, Sam would go evil.

And I don't think that even Dean necessarily thought that Sam was the "favored son" much of the time. The interesting thing about Dean knowing that the John wasn't John but the YED and that he knew this because he thought John would have been angry at Dean for wasting a bullet from the Colt was that Dean "wasted" that bullet saving Sam. So what would that say about John if Dean thought that using a bullet to save Sam was "wasting" it. Even if that meant that John would have wanted Dean to find another way, that would at least mean Sam taking an even worse beating in order for Dean to do that... still meaning John would have been more concerned about that bullet than about Sam's health.

In my opinion, the biggest supporter of Sam was Dean. DEAN was the reason Sam had a bit of a better childhood. For me Dean gets almost all the credit, while John gets very little.

But I get that miles vary.

Quote

We know that John tried to keep Sam isolated from hunting.

Now this I agree on, though I think it was mainly because Sam was younger. In the end, Sam wasn't that much older than Dean when he started hunting.

Quote

As a result of John's so called parenting, Dean grew up with no sense of identity outside of Sam. He had one job, protect Sam at any cost.  He grew up believing he didn't matter.

This I do mostly agree with, though I think Dean did have an identity as a hunter, and I think that was something he did have outside of Sam. When Sam went to school, Dean continued hunting and had a life outside of Sam. Even when Dean was taking care of Sam, he still managed to have a social life of his own, so I don't think Dean was only about Sam.

Perhaps the really messed up thing is that Sam ended up thinking their family life was better after all... Despite the above, at least Dean figured out that it was messed up.

In the end, Sam had an identity outside of Dean (For me, "had" being the key word)... BUT he usually ends up learning a lesson and giving that up again and again to go back to having only an identity with Dean. Looking back from the beginning of the show, which brother actually ended up becoming more like the other?

1 hour ago, devlin said:

...WTF, that makes no sense and since when has John been sam’s idol and coach.

For me, it does make sense based on what the show has been trying to say since starting season 1 even (around about "Nightmare.") In my opinion, the narrative has generally seemed to be supporting the idea that Sam made a selfish decision and abandoned the family by going to college, and in general Sam has been learning that lesson ever since. Little we have seen since has showed Sam not regretting that decision and any attempts to go in any other direction against John's ideas and family have lead to bad things happening or Sam not really being happy after all.

After John died we had Sam giving that speech at the end of "Everybody Loves a Clown" saying that he (Sam) was basically wrong his entire life for being angry with John and questioning their way of life, and that pretty much stands - in that the show never shows anything later to contradict that - from then on. The most glaring examples would probably be how nothing that  young Sam did in "Afterschool Special" made any kind of difference and he learned that leaving home didn't really make him happy after all and Sam teaching "Adam" how to be a hunter. emulating John and cementing his change of attitude towards the "right" way of thinking.

Sometimes we'll get Sam showing some of his previous questioning of their lifestyle, but the narrative doesn't let it last. Sam was pretty much brainwashed just as Dean was that this was the right way and any time he might get it in his head that he should try to beak away from that, the narrative smacks him down (Jessica, "Afterschool Special," season 8) and he's back to John did his best, we could've had much worse, and "we didn't miss a damn thing."

That's something that I have accepted about this show for a long, long time.

2 hours ago, devlin said:

Dean’s upbringing has completely damaged him in regards to how he sees himself in relation to those around him, which is why we see him making the decisions he makes.

This is basically true, but no, the show isn't going to bring this up much, because as with Sam, the tone seems to be that John was mainly right to bring them up this way.

[devlin]

I see the sam/ John relationship as an antagonistic father/son relationship. To me it’s similar as to a father wanting his son to follow in his footsteps in the family business and the son rebelling, wanting to do his own thing with a little bit of the supernatural thrown into the  mix. 

The dean/John was a horrible mix of soldier to follow orders, partner( without the intimacy) to provide John with emotional support, mother of his son to provide protection. As far as I’m concerned John only looked to dean for what he could provide for him and never saw him as an actual person. The scene in IMTOD perfectly showed that. He thanked him for providing emotional support, for protecting john’s son and then he gave his soldier his orders

[Res]

2 hours ago, devlin said:

I see the sam/ John relationship as an antagonistic father/son relationship. To me it’s similar as to a father wanting his son to follow in his footsteps in the family business and the son rebelling, wanting to do his own thing with a little bit of the supernatural thrown into the  mix. 

The dean/John was a horrible mix of soldier to follow orders, partner( without the intimacy) to provide John with emotional support, mother of his son to provide protection. As far as I’m concerned John only looked to dean for what he could provide for him and never saw him as an actual person. The scene in IMTOD perfectly showed that. He thanked him for providing emotional support, for protecting john’s son and then he gave his soldier his orders

ITA. Much like Bobby and Sam, John only saw Dean as an actual person when convenient and most of the time it wasn't convenient. Then they all go after him when he does emotions wrong when they never really let him do emotions to begin with because that's never really convenient either. So why would he ever believe he really mattered to any of them? 

It's funny that IMHO the truest speech ever given to Dean by one of the bad guy was given by Azazel in Devil's Trap. I think Dean knew it as well but locked it all back up in his mind where he locks all that stuff up. 

[ILoveReading]

From @gonzosgirrl is the media thread

Quote

I'm sure it is, but why promo it now, when it's the mid-season premiere and Michael!Dean that they should be promoting the hell out of.  IMO, in this world of soundbites, this cover and publicity will be forgotten by the time the episode airs.

.  There was barely any promo pics, very little publicity about the premier tonight, no sneak peak (so far) all kinds of promos about future episodes, and the lastest

Spoiler

promo pic for episode 11 don't even include one pic of Dean.  I stopped believing the "they cant' talk about it" excuse years ago.

Dabb has had no problem blabbing major things not happening with the Michael story line, like Dean wans't secretly possessed and there would be no follow up because Dean was "immune" to trauma. 

It almost like they're hoping this get low ratings so they can blame the Michael story

[gonzosgirrl]

1 hour ago, ILoveReading said:

It almost like they're hoping this get low ratings so they can blame the Michael story

Uhhuh. Then they can jump for joy over how many people just lurve Sam saving his big, dumb, weak brother and Nick facing his past.

*hurl*

[ILoveReading]

This is Dabbnatural.  Nothing revolves around Dean.  Unless Jensen is leaving the show (which he know he's not) then what ever he read, is going to revolve around Sam.  It's always does.  I can't get my hopes up.

I'm sure this will be dropped in a couple of episodes anyway.

[gonzosgirrl]

When I'm arguing about what I want from the brotherly relationship and the episode balance in future, I'll point to 14x10. Yes, Sam (and Cas) 'saved' Dean, but it was done organically. More Team Free Will than Super!Sam or Magic!Cas. I believed Sam was desperate and at the end of his rope - that he wanted to save his brother, not just save the day. They all fought in the dream world, and they all got their asses kicked. Yes, it was Sam who ultimately shoved Michael through the locker door way, but it was Dean who thought of it, and opened the door. It was Cas who was able to lead them to Dean in the first place. It was Poughkeepsie. It was teamwork. It was what I fell in love with about the show, and all I would need to go on loving it.

 

ETA: I feel the need to add, that this was far from perfect and I don't expect a repeat of it any time soon, but I have to give credit where it's due. And this is the best we've gotten for a long while.

Edited January 18, 2019 by gonzosgirrl

[Pondlass1]

On 1/16/2019 at 10:25 PM, devlin said:

As far as I’m concerned John only looked to dean for what he could provide for him and never saw him as an actual person

The saddest thing was when Dean knew it had to be a demon possessing John Winchester because he said he was 'proud'.  

I have a sinking feeling that Dabb & Co are clueless about the real Dean and John relationship and that the "big publicized return plot" could be as way off track as the dreadful version of Mary we got.  They seem to think the reckoning should be between Sam and Dad.  But it was good soldier Dean that bore the brunt and carries the scars to this day.  Sam got a childhood.  Dean didn't.

[AwesomO4000]

But Sam got disowned, literally thrown out of the family. Dean didn't... Now arguably Dean did get left later on, but he didn't officially get disowned like Sam did.

Now I entirely get that some will argue that well, Sam didn't want to belong to the family anyway and likely thought "good riddance" as he left. I don't exactly agree with that, but in my opinion even if that were true, it still wouldn't take away the sting of being disowned and having the feeling that you didn't belong and weren't wanted for you, yourself, pretty much substantiated by your father seemingly not caring less if you left and never came back.

I agree that Dean had his own traumas growing up, but he didn't realize a lot of them at the time... in that Dean looked at many things as fun and great - or at least did a good job of convincing himself that he did - and likely remembered them that way, since his memories implanted them that way even when he figured out otherwise later.

Sam had a different kind of trauma. Sure he had a childhood, but it was one he wasn't always happy with, and the things that did make Sam happy and the things he wanted - a home, friends, a stable life - were things his father generally disapproved of or didn't find to be important. Sam didn't feel like he belonged - as Lucifer was later fond of reminding him - and then when he got thrown out of the house, all of that was pretty much proven. The message pretty much being: You want to do things differently? Well then we don't need you or want you. Good riddance, and please let the door smack you in the ass on your way out. And then the world told him something similar: You want to do your own thing? Silly you: that will only cause pain and trauma to everyone around you. You can't have "normal" and you better get used to it.

So in my opinion - and it's actually kind of diabolical how the show did this - Dean learned at a young age from John that his self-worth was wrapped up in Sam and his family and his duty, so he didn't really get a lot of individual drive. Sam learned it later on, in that his wanting individuality and a life away from what he thought he didn't want was something he could never have and even trying for it would only cause bad things to happen. With the added "lesson" of "If only you had listened to your father and accepted your place in the family and not tried to be an individual, you would have saved everyone a lot of heartache..." which is pretty much the lesson Sam did learn.

I guess it's personal opinion as to which someone sees as worse. I personally think that they are both equally tragic - just in different ways.

[Reganne]

52 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

But Sam got disowned, literally thrown out of the family. Dean didn't... Now arguably Dean did get left later on, but he didn't officially get disowned like Sam did.

 

I agree.  I think Sam does need closure with John.  One of the last things Sam said to John was "Go to hell!" for one.  Then we had Sam say to Dean that he feels guilty over his relationship with his father after he died.  Then Sam's feelings regarding John's death were seemingly dropped.  The only other time I remember it being brought up was in the Song remains the same where he confessed his feelings to young John which IMO is not really the same thing as actually getting to speak with his father in present day.  Especially considering that young John's memory was wiped. 

 

In real life, people dont get the opportunity to write their wrongs or guilt regarding deceased loved ones, but I can only guess on how many people wish they could.  Not saying Sam was necessarily in the wrong but its apparent he harboured guilt regarding his part in his relationship with his father.

[ILoveReading]

From @PAForrest

Quote

And that fits with what Michael was saying about Dean being tired of having to worry about everyone, or believing still that Sam will bolt and Cas and Jack will continue to screw up and always be a concern for him. I know Michael was twisting everything for the maximum benefit of causing a rift between Dean and the others, but when he was saying all that in the bar-scape, Dean never once said he was wrong. All he said was, "shut up" - in other words, stop talking, stop saying it out loud.

The problem with this is that it not the last season.  S15 is practically guaranteed and if they're putting Dean in semi-retirement than its just more Dean on the sidelines.

Also Dabb is still in charge and he sees Dean as weak, selfish, and clingy, and only willing to sacrifice himself for Sam.   So I can see these words being used as a way to sideline Dean when it comes time for the big fight, with a repeat of s5, where Dean's role was to learn that Sam was a big boy.   So if Michael is saying Dean is tired or worrying, Dean will end up being the one to have to prove he trusts Sam, and that's usually him sitting on the sidelines waving pom poms, or trying to prove to Cas he doesn't see him as a screw up.  I've had more than enough of that.  So this is why I don't like Dean's dreamscape or the way the writers see him.   They don't see it as a guy whose tired.

They see it as a guy who is bossy and controlling and can't let go and needs to learn to let other help.  They already demonstrated this with Sam's leader Sue storyline and acting like he's the greatest thing to ever hit leadership instead of acknowledging that Dean was a damn good leader.  According to these writers, he never was, he was just stopping Sam from taking his rightful place.

Spoiler

I'm guessing that is what the big scene between Cas and Dean is going to be about in episode 12.  Dean telling Cas once again that he's valued and included.  Dean having to defend that he really doesn't see Cas that way, because nothing Dean has ever said and done in the past has counted.

 

The whole things just reeks of a season five bait and switch again.

Edited January 19, 2019 by ILoveReading

[Myrelle]

2 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

The whole things just reeks of a season five bait and switch again.

Not going to argue with you at all because I smell it, too, but for some reason, I'm just not seeing Dean being made to apologize for any hurt feelings that Michael's speeches might have engendered this time-especially if he's in a bad place physically, but if by some chance he tries to, I think that Cas, at least will tell him that there's no need for it; and Cas DID tell Jack not to listen to Michael's lies.

At this point, they all must know that life is and has been hard for all of them and that buried resentments are part and parcel of that and of simply being human, sometimes-and that''s what someone should tell Dean if he tries to apologize for anything that was said by Michael-well, that and that they know why Michael dredged them up-because they should know-even Dean, for that matter.

I DO think that everyone was surprised that Dean had those feelings, though, because sometimes I think that they all feel that Dean is some kind of a family supportive machine, or all-forgiving saint, rather than a real and honest to goodness human being with some extremely complex feelings and emotions about many things, just like them.

Edited January 19, 2019 by Myrelle

[catrox14]

I'm sure in some momnets Dean did feel that way about Sam and Cas. But that doesn't mean Dean hates them for those actions. He loves them regardless. That's what Michael can't or won't admit and that is the wild card here.

Dean was content to own the bar, to have something  of his own that the people he loved/loves can come back to for safety.

I think Michael thought Dean's resentments would cause them to turn on Dean but Cas knew better because he knows that angels are manipulation prone. Michael told some truth but failed to consider human love. And I think Michael doesn't consider that because he doesn't believe in love since God bailed on him.

And that ties back to Dean's issues with John. Michael has had no chance to really go after God about abandoning him because he stays away.  And similarly IMO, John essentially emotionally abandoned Dean from 4 to the time he died. One apology from John that led to him putting the worst burden on Dean I still out there. That is what Dean still needs to deal with re John.

[Myrelle]

46 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I'm sure in some momnets Dean did feel that way about Sam and Cas. But that doesn't mean Dean hates them for those actions. He loves them regardless. That's what Michael can't or won't admit and that is the wild card here.

Dean was content to own the bar, to have something  of his own that the people he loved/loves can come back to for safety.

I think Michael thought Dean's resentments would cause them to turn on Dean but Cas knew better because he knows that angels are manipulation prone. Michael told some truth but failed to consider human love. And I think Michael doesn't consider that because he doesn't believe in love since God bailed on him.

He knows of human love via his possession of Dean, even if he doesn't believe that God loves anyone or anything; and he also knows that Dean said yes, first and foremost, because of that love-it was the reason he gave to Anael, a fellow angel and the first one he'd encountered in this world, for Dean finally saying yes. So he knows that it wasn't because Dean wanted to get away from his loved ones whom he sees only as a burden-those were outright lies, IMO. 

He is a master manipulator of words and half-truths, though. I have to give him that-better at it than even the worst demons that they've encountered, IMO.

I'm not sure if he truly believes that he and Dean are alike, but he definitely wants Dean to believe it.

Edited January 19, 2019 by Myrelle

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I'm not sure if he truly believes that he and Dean are alike, but he definitely wants Dean to believe it.

I think he must know they aren`t. He was the dutiful son enough to kill his brother, for that reason: duty. And he knows Dean would never have done that.

Probably a bit of an unfair comparism since God gave humans free will and while angels seem to have a degree of it, I`m not convinced it is the full extent as humans have. Or they have to fight to reach that state. Either way, doesn`t appear Michael wants to reach kinship with Dean so much as he wants him to shup up. What he apparently HAS changed his mind on is keeping Dean as a vessel. Until Dean offered in the Season 13 Finale, Michael didn`t mention it and it was never even implied that he knew. He obviously could make due with other vessels but now that he`s had him, he wants him forever. Awww? Heh.

Edited January 19, 2019 by Aeryn13

[SueB]

7 minutes ago, PinkChicken said:

still on 14.10
I curious if anyone has thought of a specific better one liner than "thrives on trauma" which wouldn't have taken up any more dialogue to clarify (~yea imo its a low bar, but i mean without re-writing the entire scene).

I think its fairly safe to say that it wasn't supposed to come across quite as bad as it does, because Sam is right in that if you push Dean he will just push back harder, and is unlikely to roll over (especially after less than a couple of hours in this case) under that kind of pressure. But look at me I used a really long sentence to say that and it still doesn't completely cover what I mean. At the same time they couldn't exactly go into Deans head without at least acknowledging it, so they only wanted to touch on it and then move on with the story. I just don't think they really thought about it.

I could write so many words about Dean I cant think of a better word to replace "thrives" while still being concise & leaving the rest of the scene as is. Is there actually a simple solution that would have said what Sam meant in 5 words or less?

Thrives in trauma.  ‘In’ vs ‘On’.  ‘In’ indicates he rises to the occasion.  ‘On’ implies he likes it.  

[BabySpinach]

1 hour ago, PinkChicken said:

still on 14.10
I curious if anyone has thought of a specific better one liner than "thrives on trauma" which wouldn't have taken up any more dialogue to clarify (~yea imo its a low bar, but i mean without re-writing the entire scene).

I think its fairly safe to say that it wasn't supposed to come across quite as bad as it does, because Sam is right in that if you push Dean he will just push back harder, and is unlikely to roll over (especially after less than a couple of hours in this case) under that kind of pressure. But look at me I used a really long sentence to say that and it still doesn't completely cover what I mean. At the same time they couldn't exactly go into Deans head without at least acknowledging it, so they only wanted to touch on it and then move on with the story. I just don't think they really thought about it.

I could write so many words about Dean I cant think of a better word to replace "thrives" while still being concise & leaving the rest of the scene as is. Is there actually a simple solution that would have said what Sam meant in 5 words or less?

That's an interesting question. I agree that "thrives" is the key sticking point because the word implies flourishing, succeeding, being the best that you can be, and deep, scarring psychological pain is never the catalyst for that. People thrive in spite of trauma, not because of it. Dabb's assistant's tweet that trauma was Dean's "kink" and that she was into that was just really cringey and uncomfortable to read, BTW.

I did get what Yockey was trying to get across despite the questionable wording, but maybe something like "Trauma just makes Dean fight harder" might have sufficed.

Edited January 20, 2019 by BabySpinach

[catrox14]

I think the word "drives" would have been better. It would have implied that Dean's trauma is nothing good and yet he keeps on keeping on in spite of it. Being driven by something IMO doesn't imply that it's necessarily a good motive but still a motive.

[gonzosgirrl]

It's intriguing, and by that I mean infuriating and sad, how pervasive the de-personing (is too a word) of Dean is when so many people can't even imagine that his reaction to the death book is about himself. I mean, sure, it's probably part and parcel that Sam is involved, has to kill him or something, but even so. Nobody, not even Dean, so selfless or self-hating that they can read about their own, likely terrible, death, and not be a little scared and sad for themselves, at least for a few minutes before they suck it up. But no, it must be about Sammeh!!  What's sad is, they'll probably be proven right.

[ILoveReading]

1 minute ago, gonzosgirrl said:

It's intriguing, and by that I mean infuriating and sad, how pervasive the de-personing (is too a word) of Dean is when so many people can't even imagine that his reaction to the death book is about himself. I mean, sure, it's probably part and parcel that Sam is involved, has to kill him or something, but even so. Nobody, not even Dean, so selfless or self-hating that they can read about their own, likely terrible, death, and not be a little scared and sad for themselves, at least for a few minutes before they suck it up. But no, it must be about Sammeh!!  What's sad is, they'll probably be proven right.

The majority of spec I've seen on other sites say the same thing.  That its about Sam.

On this show its' always about Sam.  They should change the tag line to "family may not end with blood, but you really only matter if your name is Sam."

[Res]

2 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

The majority of spec I've seen on other sites say the same thing.  That its about Sam.

On this show its' always about Sam.  They should change the tag line to "family may not end with blood, but you really only matter if your name is Sam."

Which is why I no longer care about the "family" taglines for this show, especially the ones about them having your back because practically no one ever has Dean's back unless they absolutely HAVE to. It's a coin toss as to whether or not they'll abandon him at any given moment. 

[Aeryn13]

Quote

It's intriguing, and by that I mean infuriating and sad, how pervasive the de-personing (is too a word) of Dean is when so many people can't even imagine that his reaction to the death book is about himself. I mean, sure, it's probably part and parcel that Sam is involved, has to kill him or something, but even so. Nobody, not even Dean, so selfless or self-hating that they can read about their own, likely terrible, death, and not be a little scared and sad for themselves, at least for a few minutes before they suck it up. But no, it must be about Sammeh!! 

It`s a book on how he dies. The most it could be "about Sam" is if Sam were the one to kill him. Though they already put that out there with Rowena. I think Jensen played it the right amount of shocked and non-plussed for it to be something crazy. Which it will be when it`s time for the show to pull a cockamamie plan out of its ass. I`m 99 % sure every speculation right now is wildly overthinking it. IF they even have thought about what it is in the writer`s room. 

In other thoughts, did anybody think this episode gave a disintered finger to the previous retcon about how reapers are angels? I mean, back then they used to be parts of Cas` angel army and yada yada.

Here Michael even said, in his world, they looked up Death and enslaved the reapers. And Cas couldn`t see Violet. They have clearly be de-angeld and other-specified again. And it wasn`t done by throwing shade or anything, it was so matter of factly done in a "we don`t give a fuck about this nonsense from Season ...."  Hahahahaha.    

[AwesomO4000]

3 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

On this show its' always about Sam. 

I completely disagree. In the last half of this show - meaning the last 7 seasons - the show has mainly been about Dean.

I had actually written here about 3 paragraphs about why I think this is the case, but deleted them all (just imagine they were well thought out and brilliant) because I've said it all before. Even now though arguably yes, Sam has an arc only about him, it's not a mytharc arc. That again belongs to Dean as is the usual for the show in the second half of its run, and which doesn't bother me at all as long as the Dean mytharc isn't accompanied by trashing of Sam's character or making him look incompetent.

37 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

It`s a book on how he dies. The most it could be "about Sam" is if Sam were the one to kill him. Though they already put that out there with Rowena. I think Jensen played it the right amount of shocked and non-plussed for it to be something crazy. Which it will be when it`s time for the show to pull a cockamamie plan out of its ass. I`m 99 % sure every speculation right now is wildly overthinking it. IF they even have thought about what it is in the writer`s room. 

Yes, this. I agree with this. (Ignore any thunder or other indications the world is coming to an end. ; ) ). It's Dean's book and about his fate, and Dean realistically can be dismayed about his own fate, even if it doesn't involve Sam at all, especially if in dying it's something worse than just dying... like for example as @SueB said, it requires Dean to be alone with just Michael for an extended period of time. Sam, being his brother, is going to be affected, but the main focus is on Dean here.

37 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

In other thoughts, did anybody think this episode gave a disintered finger to the previous retcon about how reapers are angels? I mean, back then they used to be parts of Cas` angel army and yada yada.

Here Michael even said, in his world, they looked up Death and enslaved the reapers. And Cas couldn`t see Violet. They have clearly be de-angeld and other-specified again. And it wasn`t done by throwing shade or anything, it was so matter of factly done in a "we don`t give a fuck about this nonsense from Season ...."  Hahahahaha.  

Now that you point this out... This is awesome!

And I agree with you and them on that analysis.

The original retcon was in itself a finger to all of the previous reaper canon - in addition to being an affront to the character of Death and just plain ridiculous (in my opinion, apologies to any who liked that retcon) - so just desserts and all of that.

I know a lot of people here don't like Dabb and the current writers - and they've certainly perpetrated some of their own retcons, especially because the ones who perpetrated the original reaper retcon are still there (ooh, other writer burn?) - but if the rest of the writers want to give a disinterested finger to any more previous Carver LoL!canon or retcons in this same matter of fact way, I'm all for it.

I wonder if Ross-Lemming and Buckner even noticed. If so, I would like to imagine their indignant "Hey! ...Wait a minute..." and smile.

Edited January 20, 2019 by AwesomO4000

[gonzosgirrl]

6 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I wonder if Ross-Lemming and Buckner even noticed. If so, I would like to imagine their indignant "Hey! ...Wait a minute..." and smile.

I honestly wonder if they, or any of the other writer/producers, ever watch episodes that aren't their own. I say that without sarcasm or hyperbole. Oh, some of them pay lip-service to their co-workers on social media, praising an episode (Perez/Yockey/Glynn especially), but there is so much inconsistency in their characterizations and disregard for even the most mundane bits of canon, I really do wonder.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I honestly wonder if they, or any of the other writer/producers, ever watch episodes that aren't their own.

Didn`t Bucklemming even specifically once said that no, they don`t. And they were all smug and self-righteous about it? They have said they pretty much are interested only in writing mytharc and I think it was with a dash of "it is what we make it, fuck other canon". They were unbearably arrogant about it.   

 

Quote

Yes, this. I agree with this. (Ignore any thunder or other indications the world is coming to an end. ; ) )

Heh, I know it happens sometimes. I think the Earth won`t fall...yet.  :)

Edited January 20, 2019 by Aeryn13

[ILoveReading]

57 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

It`s a book on how he dies.

It could be something lame like, Sam jumps back into the cage with Michael and Lucifer, you die of old age.

I wish I had more faith, but with the exception of Amara, it always winds up coming around back to the old save Sam/kill Sam and or, learn to let go and see Sam as a big boy scenario. 

Unfortunately, Michael's speech isn't helping in this area.  Because while I know that Dean doesn't' feel that way (even if he did at one point), but Dean is usually made to pay for these kinds of things.  There is a double standard here.  People can say whatever they want about Dean, whether its under the influence, or a possessed loved one or a stranger, and there are a million and one excuses why its okay not to defend Dean, or why he doesn't need it because it obvious its done to get a rise.  Or why its wrong for Dean to be hurt and upset by it. 

That rarely applies to Dean, even if justified.  What he said to God was reduced to God accusing Dean of confusing him with this father.  The Raid is another perfect example.  Nothing he said to Mary was really out o line but in the end he apologized for it. 

So even if there is a grain of truth now or in the past, I think Dean should have more than earned the benefit of the doubt from his loved ones, but things rarely work this way.   Since Cas has been in a 3-4 year funk about not belonging, I'm sure he'll take Michael's word to heard and believe them.  Same with Jack and Sam will complain to Dean that hes "chief" now and Dean doesn't have to put him at the kiddie table, and get all hurt about how Dean could possibility believe he'd still leave.   Dean will apologize.

I really hope I'm wrong.  What we see is the revesere of this.  With Cas, Sam and Jack all telling Dean how much he's wanted and needed and that they didn't believe a word out of Michael's mouth.

Spoiler

But the scene with Cas, which has been called a turning, I'll be pleasantly surprised if its not speech 508495 that Dean really does see Cas as a brother and a friend and not just as an object.  And the turning point is Cas believing him.   Or that this storyline doesn't devolve into storyline number 839493 of Dean needing to let Sam go and seeing him as an equal.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I wish I had more faith, but with the exception of Amara, it always winds up coming around back to the old save Sam/kill Sam and or, learn to let go and see Sam as a big boy scenario. 

Unfortunately, Michael's speech isn't helping in this area.  Because while I know that Dean doesn't' feel that way (even if he did at one point), but Dean is usually made to pay for these kinds of things. 

Believe me, I`m not taking anything in this show on faith. I spent the entire MOC storyline, that is, each and every single episode, preparing myself for the bait and switch. I could hardly even enjoy any of it the first time around. 

With the Michael thing, I don`t think most writers are even interested enough to make it a big thing about Sam. And Sam has his Chief thing where Dean has not said one word against it and was instead very supportive. As for Michael`s speech, lots of people seem to leave out the first part of it where Michael said Dean was happiest and most relieved when Sam left and he was hunting alone with John. I don`t see that being adressed because it was clearly bs. 

Now can I say something between Dean and Cas where Dean clarifies that he doesn`t see Cas as Michael said? Probably. Depending on how it`s played, it could be a sweet or at least inoffensive moment. The Nougat probably has to hear some mollycoddling words also. I`ll just roll my eyes through that. 

I guess the next episode will give an indication in general on how things will proceed. Personally, I will die of shock if a compliment for Dean passes Mary`s lips. I mean, in episode 10 both Sam and Cas and even Jack had words to say on how strong Dean is - and he proved them right.  

[devlin]

5 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

The majority of spec I've seen on other sites say the same thing.  That its about Sam.

On this show its' always about Sam.  They should change the tag line to "family may not end with blood, but you really only matter if your name is Sam."

The show will always come back to sam. Which should be fine except he is played by the weaker actor so it feels forced by the writers 

[Myrelle]

22 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

In other thoughts, did anybody think this episode gave a disintered finger to the previous retcon about how reapers are angels? I mean, back then they used to be parts of Cas` angel army and yada yada.

Here Michael even said, in his world, they looked up Death and enslaved the reapers. And Cas couldn`t see Violet. They have clearly be de-angeld and other-specified again. And it wasn`t done by throwing shade or anything, it was so matter of factly done in a "we don`t give a fuck about this nonsense from Season ...."  Hahahahaha. 

HA! and LOL!

I didn't notice that, but so it seems.

More kudos to Yockey for this. :-D  

[AwesomO4000]

Brought over from the "Dean Winchester..." thread:

5 hours ago, Myrelle said:

Jensen was the one who TV Guide named as the break out actor of this show in that first year, but yes, he wasn't given as many opportunities as JP to play any thing or anyone "other" than Dean in those first years because of this

I don't understand what you are saying here. If I'm remembering correctly, in the first three years, Jared and Jensen had approximately the same amount of times they either played anyone "other" or altered versions of themselves.

Jared - Season 1: "Asylum," "Bloody Mary." Season 2: "Born Under a Bad Sign," "Tall Tales," maybe "What Is..." Season 3: maybe "Bad Day at Black Rock" if you want to be generous in the definition.

Jensen: - Season 1: "Skin." Season 2: "Tall Tales," maybe "What Is..." and "In My Time of Dying." Season 3: "Dream a Little Dream..." maybe "Mystery Spot" if you want to be generous.

If we go by the strict definition of "other" rather than altered or influenced, then they had the same number of opportunities in the first 3 seasons unless I'm forgetting something. Jared played something otherish briefly in "Bloody Mary" and Meg in "Born Under a Bad Sign" and Jensen was a shapeshifter in "Skin" and a version of Demon Dean in "Dream a Little Dream of Me."

In season 4, neither played "other" technically, though they both played different versions of themselves in "It's a Terrible Life" and Dean played an altered version of himself in "Yellow Fever" and a figment of Sam's imagination in "When the Levee Breaks." In season 5, Dean played an entirely different version of Dean in "The End" and Sam played a teenager in "Swap Meat" and Lucifer in "The End" and "Swan Song."

I could be forgetting something though.

Edited to add: I forgot altered Dean in "Yellow Fever" and so added that to the list.

Edited January 21, 2019 by AwesomO4000

[gonzosgirrl]

39 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

and a version of Demon Dean in "Dream a Little Dream of Me."

That's kind of a stretch - one short scene doesn't really compare with Meg/Sam.

[AwesomO4000]

2 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

That's kind of a stretch - one short scene doesn't really compare with Meg/Sam.

I agree. It more compares to the short scene of Sam as Bloody Mary which I counted though it was even shorter than Dean as demon Dean. Dean being the shifter in "Skin" would more compare to Sam as demon Meg. It wasn't the entire episode, but it was for a good portion of it and it was multiple scenes and was fairly intimate and detailed with at least two characters.

[Myrelle]

19 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I don't understand what you are saying here. If I'm remembering correctly, in the first three years, Jared and Jensen had approximately the same amount of times they either played anyone "other" or altered versions of themselves.

Don't have much time, long day today, so I'll keep it short.

I was talking about playing completely different characters or "other" beings, not just altered versions of themselves. The only instances of JA/Dean playing "other" in that regard that I can recall from S1-7 were the shifters in S1 and S6; and those were both isolated segments of isolated episodes, not arc storylines that were played up in numerous episodes before and eventually delivered on via the actor actually being gifted with the opportunity to play that completely "other" role, at some point(s).

Edited January 22, 2019 by Myrelle

[AwesomO4000]

4 hours ago, Myrelle said:

I was talking about playing completely different characters or "other" beings, not just altered versions of themselves. The only instances of JA/Dean playing "other" in that regard that I can recall from S1-7 were the shifters in S1 and S6; and those were both isolated segments of isolated episodes, not arc storylines that were played up in numerous episodes before and eventually delivered on via the actor actually being gifted with the opportunity to play that completely "other" role, at some point(s).

(I have bolded main main points for the Too Long: Didn't Read among us. And with my posts, this is an understandable position, but sadly, I generally need the words to get my point across.)

I was going under the assumption that "early years" = the Kripke years (seasons 1-5) and so I focused on those. My apologies.

That being said, I did address a stricter definition of "other" equaling only different characters, and in the first 5 years, the main shift into Jared playing more "others" happened in season 5. In seasons 1-3, they both played 2 if you count Demon Dean. I guess if we aren't counting Demon Dean then there would only be one for Jensen - the shifter - but the second one for Jared really wasn't much of a scene, and I guess it could also be interpreted as a figment of Sam's imagination and maybe not even really the actual Bloody Mary, in which case that would both be 1. Jared as Meg and Jensen as the shifter.

And I  disagree with your saying that the "other" roles that Jensen played in the early years were not part of a story arc, because for me that's splitting some pretty fine hairs. Even if you don't include Demon Dean - which I'm not sure about, and which in my opinion was very much part of that story arc, because other characters had been talking it up for quite a while that that was what Dean was going to become - Dean being the shifter was also very much part of a story arc, in my opinion. It was referenced many times, because after that episode, Dean had to go on high alert, because he was known as a criminal due to what the shifter did. It brought Henricksen into the story, it was connected to "Nightshifter," and through Henricksen, it was referenced way into season 3 through to "Jus In Bello." In my opinion, that's a story arc.

In season 4 neither played "other" that I remember.

Season 5, Jared did get to play Lucifer, but actually in a way, Jensen sort of did also in season 7. It wasn't the real Lucifer, it was Lucifer in Sam's imagination, but it was Sam's interpretation of Lucifer and part of a mytharc, and if we're not including things like that, we're splitting hairs, in my opinion.

Dean's being a Khan worm in season 6 was short, but it was part of the mytharc. Not only was the Khan worm created by Eve - Who Dean later killed - a version of the Khan worm was brought back later in the series in season 9 (I think or was it 10 - it was one of those, I'm pretty sure.)

Jensen also got to play a leviathan along with Jared in season 7, and that was very much part of the mytharc.

So other than Leviathan Sam - which Jensen also played Leviathan Dean - and Meg for one episode (which while a great episode, in my opinion, wasn't really referenced much after that) and Lucifer (which technically was one scene in one episode and 3 or 4 in another), in my opinion, there weren't really any other roles in season 1-7 that Jared played that were that mytharc heavy. I'm not including Soulless Sam here, because if Demon Dean doesn't count, then I don't think Soulless Sam does either. (I also didn't include Vampire Dean... who wasn't really all that different from regular Dean anyway - missed opportunity there in my opinion, but probably just me.)

Besides, even if that was Jared's thing - that he got to play "other" more often - Jensen/Dean got his own thing during those early years, too. Whenever there was only one of the brothers involved in time travel or alternate dimension travel, it was usually Dean who got to do that. "Mystery Spot" was Sam focused and I guess you could say that maybe that wasn't real Dean in there for some of it, but for Dean there was "What Is..." , "In the Beginning" , "The End" , "Appointment in Samarra" , and "Time After Time..." I guess that I can't technically count the Faerie dimension, because we didn't see that, but Dean is the only one who went there also. And some of those were mytharc related episodes.

Jensen also got to play monsters more in the early seasons - even if it was often brief. In addition to a leviathan - which Sam also was one - Dean was a shifter, a Khan worm, and a vampire. He was also a spiritish entity, though that's not technically a monster.

So my main point is that even with your added contingencies, I still stand by my assessment that there really wasn't all that much difference in seasons 1-7 in terms of Jared and Jensen playing "other" characters*** which had an impact on the storyline. I still don't see a large discrepancy there.

*** With the caveat that Soulless Sam isn't really an "other" if demon versions also don't count.

[MysteryGuest]

It looked to me like there was writing on Dean's book, so I'm not sure I agree with the theory that he writes his own ending.  Based on his facial expression, which I found similar to when he was told he would "be the bomb" to take out Amara, whatever it says was upsetting to him.  He will do whatever is needed, but that doesn't mean seeing his own death spelled out like that isn't distressing.  And whether it's Sam who kills him, or some other variation on the theme, it's always going to involve the two of them in some way.  This is their show.  

[BabySpinach]

Looking back at the eps that Yockey has written, it's occurred to me that some of the writers have created their own little mini-versions of SPN within the larger show that contain certain themes and story elements specific only to their episodes. Yockey has written Advanced Thanatology 13.05, Various and Sundry Villains 13.12, Funeralia 13.19, Optimism 14.06, and Nihilism 14.10 (lol at those last two, I see what you did there). Aside from 14.06, all of these could be strung together into a mostly coherent mini-narrative on their own. His episodes tend to be richer in subtext, character work, and larger themes and often feature Death/reapers/fate/Dean's place in the cosmic order. And Billie's "see you again soon" in 13.19, for example, wasn't addressed until another Yockey episode, as if that facet of the mytharc were purely his. He's also likely the one responsible for restoring the reaper canon to its former glory.

Speaking of which, Bucklemming are another, more tragic example. Most of the dumb reapers-as-angels retcon was featured in their episodes. Most of the Lucifer/Nick heavy eps are also theirs, which if strung together would create a fairly coherent Lucifer/Nick story (albeit a boring and repetitive one). And, for the cherry on top, there's almost always at least a dash of sexism and/or squick.

Robbie Thompson, especially near the end of his tenure on SPN, created his own friendly little fantasy version of the show in order to accommodate his pet, Charlie. Whenever she was around, there were magical lands for her to explore, droves of devoted LARPers at her feet, sexy but benign humanoid fairies, cartoony villains that she beat back with a samurai sword, etc. etc. The Oz episodes were the most egregious in that respect and jarred so strongly against the show's usual tone, turning it (temporarily) into some theme park fantasyland. It's fitting that the one time someone other than Thompson writes for Charlie, there's no cutesy non-reality bubble to shield her and she gets brutally murdered in a scenario that's stupid but at least congruent with what SPN usually is. 

It's a pretty interesting way to delegate writers and structure a season, and I'm not sure if any other shows exhibit this same phenomenon. If I had to pick a writer's mini-version of SPN, though, I'd take Yockey's in a heartbeat. He actually seems to care about maintaining continuity and developing character, themes, and the mythology of the show as a whole. Billie as the new Death, her reading room, and her relationship to fate and the natural order were the best additions to canon in a long time. We can now add "Chuck churning out AUs as drafts" to the list, which has again re-contextualized, expanded, and deepened the world of the show. I see it as a good sign that he was put in charge of the mid-season return, which tends to set up the rest of the season. And bonus, there's always at least one good Dean nugget in his episodes. 

Edited January 23, 2019 by BabySpinach

[Myrelle]

42 minutes ago, BabySpinach said:

Looking back at the eps that Yockey has written, it's occurred to me that some of the writers have created their own little mini-versions of SPN within the larger show that contain certain themes and story elements specific only to their episodes. Yockey has written Advanced Thanatology 13.05, Various and Sundry Villains 13.12, Funeralia 13.19, Optimism 14.06, and Nihilism 14.10. Aside from 14.06, all of these could be strung together into a mostly coherent mini-narrative on their own. His episodes tend to be richer in subtext, character work, and larger themes and often feature Death/reapers/fate/Dean's place in the cosmic order. And Billie's "see you again soon" in 13.19, for example, wasn't addressed until another Yockey episode, as if that facet of the mytharc is purely his. He's also probably the one responsible for restoring the reaper canon to its former glory.

Speaking of which, Bucklemming are another, more tragic example. Most of the dumb reapers-as-angels retcon was featured in their episodes. Most of the Lucifer/Nick heavy eps are also theirs, which if strung together would create a mostly coherent Nick/Lucifer story (albeit a boring and repetitive one). And, as the cherry on top, there's almost always at least a dash of sexism and/or squick for garnish.

Robbie Thompson, especially near the end of his tenure on SPN, created his own little friendly, fantasy version of the show in order to accommodate his pet, Charlie. Whenever she was around, there were magical lands for her to explore, droves of devoted LARPers, sexy but benign humanoid fairies, cartoony villains that she beat back with a samurai sword, etc. etc. The Oz episodes were the most egregious in that respect and jarred so strongly against the show's usual tone, turning it (temporarily) into some theme park fantasyland. It's fitting that the one time someone other than Thompson writes for Charlie, there's no cutesy non-reality bubble to shield her and she gets brutally murdered in a scenario that's stupid but at least congruent with what SPN usually is. 

It's a pretty interesting way to delegate writers and structure a season, and I'm not sure if any other shows exhibit this same phenomenon. If I had to pick a writer's mini-version of SPN, though, I'd take Yockey's in a heartbeat. He actually seems to care about maintaining continuity and developing character, themes, and the mythology of the show as a whole. Billie as the new Death, her reading room, and her relationship to fate and the natural order were the best additions to canon in a long time. We can now add "Chuck churning out AUs as drafts" to the list, which has again re-contextualized, expanded, and deepened the world of the show. I see it as a good sign that he was put in charge of the mid-season return, which tends to set up the rest of the season. And bonus, there's always at least one good Dean nugget in his episodes. 

This is a very thought-provoking post concerning the writing, Babyspinach, so kudos!

Unfortunately, if it's true and holds for the other writers too, then we should probably brace ourselves for what's coming from Dabb and Berens and possibly Perez now also. :-/

Edited January 23, 2019 by Myrelle

[AwesomO4000]

1 hour ago, BabySpinach said:

Robbie Thompson, especially near the end of his tenure on SPN, created his own little friendly, fantasy version of the show in order to accommodate his pet, Charlie. Whenever she was around, there were magical lands for her to explore, droves of devoted LARPers, sexy but benign humanoid fairies, cartoony villains that she beat back with a samurai sword, etc. etc. The Oz episodes were the most egregious in that respect and jarred so strongly against the show's usual tone, turning it (temporarily) into some theme park fantasyland. It's fitting that the one time someone other than Thompson writes for Charlie, there's no cutesy non-reality bubble to shield her and she gets brutally murdered in a scenario that's stupid but at least congruent with what SPN usually is. 

It's too bad about his Charlie fascination, because in my opinion, Robbie Thompson's non-Charlie episodes were some of the best in that period of the show (and some make my top 25 of the show ever), and I miss his input very much. His non-Charlie episodes often featured Sam and Dean working together to solve the problem (even when they weren't physically together), and usually were fairly true to character for both brothers, in my opinion.

Non-Charlie Robbie Thompson episodes, many of them in my favorites for that season:

• Season 7: Slash Fiction and Time After Time... (loved both of these)
• Season 8 (not his best showing, but then again few were good showings in my opinion this season): Bitten (a rare total dog of an ep from him in my opinion) and Goodbye Stranger (Could have been good except for the egregious "our friend Meg" stuff - blergh ...Sam and Meg should not be friendly, imo, in any way shape or form: just no. ... and give it up with the Amelia stuff, please. I still don't like her or believe in this "great love.")
• Season 9: First Born (one of the few episodes I liked that season - actually probably the best of that season for me) and Metafiction
• Season 10: Fan Fiction (I liked it ::shrug::), Book of the Damned (good ep, imo,) and Angel Heart (meh)
• Season 11: Baby, Into the Mystic, Safe House, and Don't Call me Shurley - 4 of my top 5 episodes for that season, and all 3 of my top 3.

Yeah, I wish we could have Robbie Thompson back... just don't give him AU Charlie and I think he'd be fine.

[gonzosgirrl]

Great post, @BabySpinach There are times when I really wish TPTB could be forced to read a fan's post. This is one of them.

I could get behind a Yockey/Thompson team. I don't see him ever coming back though. I would love to see Yockey take the series to its completion.

Edited January 23, 2019 by gonzosgirrl
if I ever don't have to edit a post - send help, I've probably been posessed.

[FlickChick]

2 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Great post, @BabySpinach There are times when I really wish TPTB could be forced to read a fan's post. This is one of them.

I could get behind a Yockey/Thompson team. I don't see him ever coming back though. I would love to see Yockey take the series to its completion.

 

I agree about writers reading a fan's posts! Maybe some of them would learn something - especially the post you mentioned. I second and beyond a collaboration of Yockey/Thompson to finish out the series. I agree he probably won't be back - but I think he loved working on this show!

PS: Does anyone know if Yockey will be writing another episode this season?

Edited January 23, 2019 by FlickChick
Clarity & PS

[BabySpinach]

4 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

It's too bad about his Charlie fascination, because in my opinion, Robbie Thompson's non-Charlie episodes were some of the best in that period of the show (and some make my top 25 of the show ever), and I miss his input very much. His non-Charlie episodes often featured Sam and Dean working together to solve the problem (even when they weren't physically together), and usually were fairly true to character for both brothers, in my opinion.

Non-Charlie Robbie Thompson episodes, many of them in my favorites for that season:

• Season 7: Slash Fiction and Time After Time... (loved both of these)
• Season 8 (not his best showing, but then again few were good showings in my opinion this season): Bitten (a rare total dog of an ep from him in my opinion) and Goodbye Stranger (Could have been good except for the egregious "our friend Meg" stuff - blergh ...Sam and Meg should not be friendly, imo, in any way shape or form: just no. ... and give it up with the Amelia stuff, please. I still don't like her or believe in this "great love.")
• Season 9: First Born (one of the few episodes I liked that season - actually probably the best of that season for me) and Metafiction
• Season 10: Fan Fiction (I liked it ::shrug::), Book of the Damned (good ep, imo,) and Angel Heart (meh)
• Season 11: Baby, Into the Mystic, Safe House, and Don't Call me Shurley - 4 of my top 5 episodes for that season, and all 3 of my top 3.

Yeah, I wish we could have Robbie Thompson back... just don't give him AU Charlie and I think he'd be fine.

I agree. Non-Charlie Robbie Thompson used to be one of my favorites. It's really bizarre that his blind spot for his pet Sue so often dragged down his plotting and characterization as well. 

Aww man, I still adore Baby 11.04. It wasn't a "landmark" episode like the 100th or 200th, but it so effectively captured the (old) spirit of the show: gritty violence, rough edges, gore, humor, the brotherly dynamic, the aesthetic of open-road life. (But what really made it stand out, IMO, was the absence of ambient music. Without an overblown orchestral score blaring in the background, the atmosphere was more authentic and the action was tense, claustrophobic, and bone-crunching, to the extent that I was kind of cringing with every blow.) 

And I never would have believed that the writer of Baby, First Born, and Don't Call me Shurley was the same person behind hot garbage like Slumber Party.

Edited January 24, 2019 by BabySpinach

[DeeDee79]

1 hour ago, BabySpinach said:

And I never would have believed that the writer of Baby, First Born, and Don't Call me Shurley was the same person behind hot garbage like Slumber Party.

Just like my amazement at the fact the one of the writers of Inside Man & The Prisoner ( two of my favs ) was Andrew Dabb. 

[ILoveReading]

12 hours ago, BabySpinach said:

And I never would have believed that the writer of Baby, First Born, and Don't Call me Shurley was the same person behind hot garbage like Slumber Party.

Or that Beren's was behind The Executioner's Song.

I haven't really liked any of his episodes since then.

[SueB]

I've asked him(in person) multiple times, Robbie LOVE Supernatural but he's 'moved on with life'.  I'd hazard a guess they might get him back for a special event, but Robbie is burning it up in the comics book genre.  Spiderman vs Deadpool was a hilarious series.  His character 'Silk' has done very well.  I don't know his entire CV but he's got at least a dozen publications under his belt. 

Personally I think Berens and Thompson are the best team.  Dabb is good for mythology but his 'long game' is clearly difficult for many to enjoy.  Personally I like it but I know many do not. I do give 100% credit to Dabb for reigning in B-L and making their episodes MUCH better.  

[ILoveReading]

I think there was bad blood between Thompson and Supernatural when he left.  It always came across to me that killing Charlies was crossed a line for him and he left because of it.  There was a writers panel where his remarks were less than complimentary. 

So its probably more like Mark Sheppard, in that he wouldn't come back even if they offered him a chance. 

IMO, its why we never saw Charlie until she became an AU version.  If they brought Charlie back they'd have had to pay Thompson a fee.

[gonzosgirrl]

11 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

IMO, its why we never saw Charlie until she became an AU version.  If they brought Charlie back they'd have had to pay Thompson a fee.

Why would they have to pay him? I mean, yes, he created the character, but while in the employ of the show. Is that really how it works?

Sorry, @SueB, I just can't see any long game from Dabb. IMO, the few dots that have been have been by seat-of-the-pants writing at the last minute. IMO, the only long game he has ever been interested in is getting a spin-off of his own.

[Myrelle]

2 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

Or that Beren's was behind The Executioner's Song.

I haven't really liked any of his episodes since then.

And the Werther Box. 

Thompson was never all that to me-even his best efforts were only half good at best to me. I don't need or want him back, tbh.

And IMO, Dabb sees Dean as a killer first and foremost, just like B-L, but I think that both he and Berens have come to view the character predominantly as a bully, too, who's just weak at his center and constantly tries to impose his wrong-headed will on others. 

At least, B-L still view the character as "strong"(for now, anyway).

But Berens is the real head-scratcher to me because I think that both The Executioners' Song and The Werther Box were stellar episodes and two of the best of the entire series, tbh, because all the elements that make up a good episode were in there, including the writing, and every single scene was enjoyable in them for this fan.

I kind of wonder if Dabb and he decided to form a coalition of sorts, at some point, with Dabb taking the lead, of course, since he was the showrunner. And the Wayward stuff is what came out of it and any allegiance to Supernatural went out the window when they both became involved in getting their spin-off picked up. And after it was shot down, things just went from bad to worse as far as their writing for Supernatural is concerned.

[ILoveReading]

13 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

hy would they have to pay him? I mean, yes, he created the character, but while in the employ of the show. Is that really how it works?

That's what someone told me, that if a writers creates a character they get an appearance fee.  So when Pamela showed up, Kripke (I think he write the ep she was first in) would have gotten a fee for her character.  Or Yockey would get a fee whenever we see the Bains twins.  The person that told me was usually reliable with tv info, so I took her at her word. 

I'm also one that found Thompson overrated.  Don't Call me Shirley came across as more as Thompson trying to air his grievances about writing.  I found it very self indulgent rather than a good episode.