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

[SueB]

40 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

What good was the the thing in episode 5 if it wasnt' followed up on.  AUMichael DID build his army - that was his grand plan in EP9. Ep5 was a clue it was still happening.  I still have no clue what the Djinn meant.   I think it's clear "You" meant he could see AUMichael in there. The scene in episode 7 didn't even rate a mention.  Dean wasn't even concerned that something happened. Which is the ONLY thing I fault Dean for.  Seriously, he should know 'wonky vision' is bad.  But he was too wrapped up in the Jack storyline to make a comment about it.  And AUMichael busted him on it in EP9. 

If that was Michael trying to crush Dean failed miserably. Well he ALMOST succeeded.  Dean DID get put into a 'happy spot' successfully.  If Sam and Cas hadn't come to dig him out - would he have realized what was going on? But yes, ultimately AUMichael's plan backfired SPECTACULARLY.  He didn't realize that The Righteous Man, The Firewall Between Light and Dark, the Former bearer of the Mark of Cain was mentally strong enough to house an Archangel and keep him on lockdown.  Even Crowley (who was a Dean fan-girl) wouldn't have guessed that one. 

Michael was easy to take out.  Ninja Sue kicked his ass in less than a minute.  Kaia got in a hit.  And it cut him.  That was not 'taking him out'.  That was him realizing her Spear was as powerful as he suspected.  It's a strategic move to test her defenses and then reattack when you have a better countermove.  Which he did.  And her Spear is out of the picture.  AUMichael wins that contest. It wasn't an immediate victory, but he thinks in eons, not minutes.  When Michael repossessed Dean Sam and Cas took him out in about two minutes.  Our Michael was dispatched by being lit on fire.  Perhaps AUMichael didn't think they would torch Dean's vessel.  He was wrong.  Now I'll grant you - the "AUBobby" handcuffs is a pretty weaksauce McGuffin but AUBobby did melt down angle blades in a Post-Apocalyptic world for bullets.  He was pretty smart. If he used angel blades and spellwork to make temporarily effective cuffs - good on him.  But it was a leap IMO.  In Dean's head he was locked up fairly easily.  See previous comments about underestimating "The Righteous Man, The Firewall....." Then when he got out he threw Dean way like an old shoe and was easily dispatched by Jack. That it was so easy, that he left Jack untouched with the blinding/pain,etc.. is why I'm suspicious.  It MAY be just like we saw.  And I'll be dissappointed to.  Right now, I'm suspicious.  

The only person who didn't really beat him was Dean.  He contained him for 5 epsiodes. I call that a pretty SOUND beating. 

Yes, he might have have had Michael say that Dean squirmed too much, but when Michael left it was because he chose too, not because Dean beat him.  In fact the only person who couldn't beat Michael was Dean. 

There was one  one on one confrontation that lasted 10 seconds.  I didn't really find 11-14 Dean centric at all.  Maybe 11 was somewhat but episode 12 was far more about how Dean's actions were affecting Sam and how much Dean was making Sam sad.  No one actually gave a damn about what Dean was feeling.  Sam refused to listen to what Dean was actually saying.  The episode branded him a weak quitter and had Sam punch him to make him behave.  Not to mention Cas being a massive hypocrite with the secret he's keeping.  I found that ep far more Sam centric then Dean.  It was Sam's POV when it should have been Dean. I agree with none of this, but it's all POV, no factual discussion as far as I can tell. 

Episode 13 Same thing.  it was more about Sam.  Sam go the closure, Dean got to once again bury everything. 

As a viewer I felt nothing during ep 12, and 13, and now 14.  There was zero payoff to this storyline for this Dean fan.   it's just another of Deans' traums'a that will be buried and ignored.  Because he had antibodies and there is always a reason why Dean never needs payoff.  Since Dean isnt' real, I do.

I stand by my claims of everything I said.  The writers couldn't wait to drop this story, and shoe horned in the absolute bare minimum.   There was basically one episode in the entire run and that all turned out to be a read herring. 

The writers failed miserably for the worst reason of all.  They didn't even try.  So no, my claims are not false. Your opinions are of course your opinions.  Your claims that MY statements were false is what I am responding to.  From my POV, my statements were accurate.  And there are specific events that can be identified to support my POV.  But it's STILL my POV.  Ultimately, I'm not remotely trying to change your mind.  But if you are going to quote me and claim my statements were untrue, I'm going to tell you why they were true from my POV.  

The writers failed Jensen in every way with how half assed this was.

responses in bold Any more dialog is just chewing over the same territory.  I'll leave it at this post.  I'm happy to disagree to disagree.  

Edited March 9, 2019 by SueB

[ILoveReading]

10 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

He took it from Dean, not from Kaia. Even realizing that Spear could hurt him, he is still an archangel, he could have simply snapped his fingers and broken her arms and legs at once, he still could have punched through her smug little face. I find it ridiculous that he retreated at all.  

Michael had zero reason to even engage in hand to hand combat.  He could have snapped his fingers and snapped Ninja Sue like a twig. 

Even after she stabbed him, it was ridiculous that Michael retreated.

Michael's army was as big a joke as he was and was very easily dispatched. 

Edited March 9, 2019 by ILoveReading

[SueB]

nevermind

Edited March 9, 2019 by SueB

[ILoveReading]

deleting since above post was deleted.

Edited March 9, 2019 by ILoveReading

[Bergamot]

On 3/8/2019 at 7:56 PM, tessathereaper said:

But there is no reason that Dean and Sam can't be allowed to be able to handle these things.  There are such things as power ups.  The show doesn't have to limit "killing an Archangle" to "only with an Archangel weapon wielded by an Archangel"(which wasn't true anyway). I mean you know no man was supposed to be able to kill the Witch King - only it turned out that a woman and a hobbit could - that's what prophecies are for, that's what magical weapons are for, which have been part of Supernatural since the first season.

There are plenty of ways to write the show so Dean and Sam CAN handle these challenges, but the show refuses to do so.  Because the writers are literally IMO the least imaginative, least creative, laziest, most passive aggressive writers in existence and are more interested in their "OCs" than in the main heroes of the show.  They can't even keep their damn canon straight between episodes, writers contradict stuff that was in their own episodes.  Dabb can't showrun for peanuts.

I tend to agree (and not just about Dabb!) I don't think the problem is that the Winchesters are no longer going against just lower-level demons like in the old days. For one thing, from the very first episode, the Winchesters were fighting against Lucifer and his plans for them, not to mention the plans the angels had put in motion. They just didn't know it at first. They didn't know that in fighting Meg, they were fighting Lucifer's daughter. Even when they were saving people and hunting things, they already were part of the bigger supernatural picture. I don't think they can "go back" to just hunting, because "just hunting" was never what their story was really about.

But also, in battling against any supernatural creatures, from vampires and werewolves, on up to demons and angels, the Winchesters have from the very beginning been fighting out of their league. They are human, not supernatural -- "mortals" as Cas referred to them in this last episode, in which he made a very clear distinction between human beings like Dean and Sam versus supernatural beings like Cas and Jack. The Winchesters can use magical weapons and supernatural allies, but they themselves are still human, still "mortal".

And I think that ultimately, what has enabled them in the end to prevail against their adversaries was not really any magical powers they managed to utilize. What gave them the edge were their very human qualities: their courage, their determination, their devotion to family, their ability to win friends and inspire loyalty, their willingness to sacrifice. That's why to me it seemed so wrong and false to have Jack declare, "I'm a Winchester!" Because he is not human, not mortal, and his victory over Michael was only possible because he is a supernatural creature of equal or greater power to an archangel.

So yes, the Winchesters were sidelined because they were out of their league against Michael. The thing is, though, that never mattered before. But now that the focus is on making Jack the center of the show, apparently now it does.

[catrox14]

On 2/16/2019 at 3:36 AM, AwesomO4000 said:

I mean, if you wanted things to be equal - which is what it sounds like you are saying - and Dean got a moment for you that met your exact standards of a finale big moment, then to be "equal," Sam would need about 3 or 4 finale participation kills/resolutions just to catch up,*** and Dean would have to have no role at all in at least two of them, and another doing his "part" off-screen somewhere. Plus another 3 or so recurring big bad solo kills.

For me, even if Dean did get those kills, Sam was still the focus, along with John. Dean was the person who was active in supporting the main arcs of John going missing and Sam being dragged back into the hunting life. Dean was the person who was showing us the story of Sam and John. And that has still remained the case even if Dean was said to be righteous man who had to fix what he broke and was ultimately never given that chance when it was given to Sam.

I see that same thing happening again only this time it's veering towards Jack, but I think ultimately, it will in Sam's court again. No spoilers there just my speculation based on the history thus far.

[AwesomO4000]

2 hours ago, catrox14 said:

For me, even if Dean did get those kills, Sam was still the focus, along with John. Dean was the person who was active in supporting the main arcs of John going missing and Sam being dragged back into the hunting life. Dean was the person who was showing us the story of Sam and John. And that has still remained the case even if Dean was said to be righteous man who had to fix what he broke and was ultimately never given that chance when it was given to Sam.

Sam had some focus in terms of Azazel, but he wasn't the only focus. Neither was John in my opinion. After Dean shot Azazel he even said "that was for our mom." In my opinion, it was also very personal to Dean, and Dean apparently thought so to. So I don't see it as Dean only supporting John's and Sam's storylines.

And Sam may have been "given" the resolution, but in my opinion, he was also given the majority of the blame, so it wasn't like Sam was just randomly given the save. He needed it to atone. Even in season 4, Castiel specifically told Dean that the blame wasn't on him, that it was fate. He later didn't do the same for Sam. Instead Castiel made the point that Sam didn't make the right choice when he had the chance - not fate at all - blaming him alone for Lucifer's rising. In my opinion, very different, and the narrative taking any blame Dean supposedly had for "breaking" anything and putting it on fate and Sam. It would have been different if Dean had continued to be associated in the narrative with the blame, but he wasn't. He was absolved and the blame transferred to Sam, meaning that Sam was the one who - in my opinion - needed the resolution.

The rest of the kills and resolutions, Dean was fixing the messes of others, usually Castiel and Sam. And with Amara, Dean was narratively again absolved of the wrong-doing (this time by Chuck), but he was given the resolution. So that time, Sam didn't get to fix what he broke. Dean did.

And I made a wrong calculation in that post you quoted which I later admitted. I forgot about season 12, where Sam had some solo make-up kills.

I also mentioned that to me, who gets the kills isn't really the point, and I wouldn't even really care. I more find it annoying that the narrative generally seems to make a point of having Sam screw up so badly, making him do out of character things to cause "drama," or making him wrong after Dean tells him what should be done or needs to be done and then having Sam not do it - and usually with bad consequences. If they wouldn't do that - and my hope for it not happening this season has already gone by the wayside with the death of all the AU hunters - I wouldn't care.

It's like the writers have Sam make a big fuss about Dean not treating him like the little brother, that Dean can depend on him etc., but then go out of their way to show that Sam "needs" to listen to Dean and can't be depended on, because obviously he can't make the right decision, ever, and should therefore just listen to his big brother. It's annoying. Make up your mind and stick with it. If Dean is supposedly right about (almost) everything... then just say that, turn this into House and I'll be on my way, because that isn't the show based on two brothers that are partners and equals that the early seasons seemed to be giving me. That's something else I'm not as interested in.

Quote

I see that same thing happening again only this time it's veering towards Jack, but I think ultimately, it will in Sam's court again. No spoilers there just my speculation based on the history thus far.

No, you're right, Dean didn't get to conclude it, but it wasn't his fault either. Technically again, he was fixing a mess that other people had more of a roll in creating than he did when he took Michael in. It really wasn't on Dean to "fix" anything here. He did what he could do to fix others' mistakes.

Edited March 10, 2019 by AwesomO4000

[catrox14]

17 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

t's like the writers have Sam make a big fuss about Dean not treating him like the little brother, that Dean can depend on him etc., but then go out of their way to show that Sam "needs" to listen to Dean and can't be depended on, because obviously he can't make the right decision, ever, and should therefore just listen to his big brother.

For me, that is all just part of the Hero's Journey.   Sam has to make mistakes to learn and grow. Dean needs to have something to do since he was already the Hero from the jump in that he spent years saving people, hunting things after Sam left for school. He didn't have that conundrum of not wanting to be a hunter, or at least not actively seeking to leave the life like Sam wanted. 

IMO, Dabb will always circle back to Sam on his hero's journey and stalling it here and there by having Sam make mistakes to learn and grow although I'm not sure where Sam is headed now given it seems Dabb has done a short hand Hero's journey with  Jack now, which is why I still speculate that he's the real spinoff character if they go there. 

Dean at this point, well, short of a showdown between OG!Michael!Dean and Lucifer!Sam....I don't know what his role is besides what it's always been.  Maybe they'll surprise me, but I doubt it.

[rue721]

1 minute ago, catrox14 said:

Dean needs to have something to do since he was already the Hero from the jump in that he spent years saving people, hunting things after Sam left for school. He didn't have that conundrum of not wanting to be a hunter, or at least not actively seeking to leave the life like Sam wanted.

This is tertiary to your overall point (sorry about that, not trying to hijack) but I think that at the start, Dean may have already been a hunter, but he saw his dad as the hero and himself as the sidekick. So he's had to have a hero's journey, too.

The big difference IMO is that his journey has been primarily internal. I also think the show has been somewhat hit or miss on actually showing us Dean's internal journey, which I personally find frustrating. That was my main issue with Lebanon, which I am relatively bitter about as a missed-and-never-to-return opportunity for lots of character building/insight.

[Aeryn13]

31 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Sam had some focus in terms of Azazel, but he wasn't the only focus. Neither was John in my opinion. After Dean shot Azazel he even said "that was for our mom." In my opinion, it was also very personal to Dean, and Dean apparently thought so to. So I don't see it as Dean only supporting John's and Sam's storylines.

And Sam may have been "given" the resolution, but in my opinion, he was also given the majority of the blame, so it wasn't like Sam was just randomly given the save. He needed it to atone. Even in season 4, Castiel specifically told Dean that the blame wasn't on him, that it was fate. He later didn't do the same for Sam. Instead Castiel made the point that Sam didn't make the right choice when he had the chance - not fate at all - blaming him alone for Lucifer's rising. In my opinion, very different, and the narrative taking any blame Dean supposedly had for "breaking" anything and putting it on fate and Sam. It would have been different if Dean had continued to be associated in the narrative with the blame, but he wasn't. He was absolved and the blame transferred to Sam, meaning that Sam was the one who - in my opinion - needed the resolution.

The rest of the kills and resolutions, Dean was fixing the messes of others, usually Castiel and Sam. And with Amara, Dean was narratively again absolved of the wrong-doing (this time by Chuck), but he was given the resolution. So that time, Sam didn't get to fix what he broke. Dean did.

And I made a wrong calculation in that post you quoted which I later admitted. I forgot about season 12, where Sam had some solo make-up kills.

I also mentioned that to me, who gets the kills isn't really the point, and I wouldn't even really care. I more find it annoying that the narrative generally seems to make a point of having Sam screw up so badly, making him do out of character things to cause "drama," or making him wrong after Dean tells him what should be done or needs to be done and then having Sam not do it - and usually with bad consequences. If they wouldn't do that - and my hope for it not happening this season has already gone by the wayside with the death of all the AU hunters - I wouldn't care.

It's like the writers have Sam make a big fuss about Dean not treating him like the little brother, that Dean can depend on him etc., but then go out of their way to show that Sam "needs" to listen to Dean and can't be depended on, because obviously he can't make the right decision, ever, and should therefore just listen to his big brother. It's annoying. Make up your mind and stick with it. If Dean is supposedly right about (almost) everything... then just say that, turn this into House and I'll be on my way, because that isn't the show based on two brothers that are partners and equals that the early seasons seemed to be giving me. That's something else I'm not as interested in.

No, you're right, Dean didn't get to conclude it, but it wasn't his fault either. Technically again, he was fixing a mess that other people had more of a roll in creating than he did when he took Michael in. It really wasn't on Dean to "fix" anything here. He did what he could do to fix others' mistakes.

Dean said "yes" so how is Michael not on him? And he was the one who agreed to postpone the box idea. Again, ultimately in him. He was out on a hunt, risking injury and Michael getting out. Lo and behold. Now those nimrods are dead. Dean should have at least gotten a part in concluding it.

[AwesomO4000]

4 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

Dean said "yes" so how is Michael not on him?

Because Dean didn't say "yes" just because. He said "yes," because there was no other way to stop Lucifer, and Lucifer's being there wasn't his fault. (I don't remember whose fault it was, but it was at least partially either Sam's or Castiel's, I think.)

As for postponing going into the box, that was partially on Dean, but not entirely. It wasn't like Dean could get in the box and throw himself in the ocean... he needed to get someone to agree to help him. It was looking like Sam wasn't going to agree at that point. It more Sam's and Castiel's fault than it was Dean's... and they didn't have any part in stopping Michael either.

[AwesomO4000]

5 hours ago, catrox14 said:

IMO, Dabb will always circle back to Sam on his hero's journey and stalling it here and there by having Sam make mistakes to learn and grow

Except in my opinion, Sam is pretty much not really allowed to do so. That went out the window after season 7. Generally now when Sam makes a mistake, or is made to look awful in the guise of "learning" things, he isn't allowed to have a part in fixing his mistakes, and his "learning" doesn't last. In season 5, Sam was able to fix his mistakes, but since he was dragged backwards in season 8, he hasn't really been allowed to fix his mistakes since. Nothing concerning Benny, nothing concerning his actions in season 9, nothing concerning Amara, nothing this time with Lucifer getting out and Michael either. He got an assist with helping kill Lucifer, but Michael was already a problem because of Lucifer, and he had no role there.

And sadly, the "mistakes" that Dabb and Carver before him have Sam make often make little sense, seem out of character, or often both. Dabb example: Sam joining the BMoL. How the writers thought that that made any kind of sense, I won't ever understand. Because it didn't... it didn't even make sense within the episode itself. It was basically Sam not looking for Dean and abandoning Kevin all over again. And neither one of those actions was really explained as to why Sam did them in any way that didn't make Sam look awful... and he wasn't allowed to really make up for them either. Sure he lead the hunters into "battle" but he had to make a stupid speech and admit how wrong he was, but please help me do this anyway. And then he pretty much didn't play any larger role in the attack than anyone else did. So how is that learning anything? Not only that, but Sam shouldn't have been made to make that stupid decision in the first place. Sam knows better, and it wasn't even a "lesson" Sam needed to learn. (I was insulted by the implication that just because Sam wasn't a "leader" that he was somehow lazy and taking the "easy" path... pretty much trashing Sam's personality and role in the show up until that point, in my opinion.)

Basically I'm tired of the writers having Sam doing stupid or crappy things just so they can forward their own personal plot points and agendas rather than having Sam do things that actually make sense for his character to do. And then after having him do these things, they give him little to no chance to make up for them. So long as they get the plot or result that they want, that's all that counts.

[rue721]

I think Sam had a pretty straightforward and traditional "hero's journey," in the Joseph Campbell sense, from S1-5. Then S6 and S7 were about Sam having completed that journey and needing to find his way back. If S1-5 were Sam's Iliad, S6-7 were his Odyssey. Which I thought ended up working pretty well. I liked the whole thing of Sam going stone cold because he couldn't deal with the pain of his torture in the Cage (aka, the Soulless arc) and then opening the door to dealing with that pain and going through the Hellucinations, and Sam and Dean ultimately becoming closer through the course of all that. But then in S8, the show basically did a "restart" of Sam's journey -- which I thought was bizarre and a terrible choice. And I think Sam's characterization has more or less just gotten foggier since then. Like the thing of him being willing to do bad things to try and save Dean from being a demon -- OK, it's in character, based on Sam's attempt to save Dean from Hell via demon blood in S4, but also kind of inscrutable and consequence-less as far as Sam's character development goes. And honestly, it's not so much that I think Sam keeps repeating the same stories (he is, but not really more than any of the other characters are IMO), it's more like his character just keeps getting less and less coherent and even losing his personality/uniqueness over time. At this point, it feels like he's a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy. I think of Sam in It's a Terrible Life, when Zachariah makes Sam and Dean imagine they're working in an office, and how in-character Sam's actions/decisions/reactions were all throughout, and how fun it was to see him still essentially being Sam Winchester within the totally different context of being a corporate drone -- and how colorless and generic and just absent-seeming all those things that made Sam "Sam" have become over time. It's like the life has drained out of him.

This is maybe idiosyncratic, but the part I most had trouble with is when Sam started with the taglines about the family. "We're the Winchesters!" and "We're Big Fat Heroes (TM)!" (or whatever that awful line is). Everything about that is so artificial and just...weird! Super weird! Nobody talks like that, and definitely not about themselves and their own #squad. Hahahaha. Anyway, when the writers started in on that stuff, I figured that they had totally just thrown up their hands in terms of trying to think of things from Sam's perspective as a character. Because that stuff is just SO embarrassing to say and...I mean, I know that Sam is meant to be kind of dorky and intense and in-his-own-head and all, but come on.

That said, I think that Jared's sometimes poor health probably imposes limitations on what demands/work he can take on, and that probably has a ripple effect on the production as a whole, and also on how Sam is written and acted. Not trying to cast aspersions, I think Jared is a strong actor and clearly works hard, just saying that I think that there could be a behind-the-scenes X-factor like that at play as well.

[AwesomO4000]

5 hours ago, rue721 said:

I think Sam had a pretty straightforward and traditional "hero's journey," in the Joseph Campbell sense, from S1-5. Then S6 and S7 were about Sam having completed that journey and needing to find his way back. If S1-5 were Sam's Iliad, S6-7 were his Odyssey. Which I thought ended up working pretty well. I liked the whole thing of Sam going stone cold because he couldn't deal with the pain of his torture in the Cage (aka, the Soulless arc) and then opening the door to dealing with that pain and going through the Hellucinations, and Sam and Dean ultimately becoming closer through the course of all that. But then in S8, the show basically did a "restart" of Sam's journey -- which I thought was bizarre and a terrible choice. And I think Sam's characterization has more or less just gotten foggier since then. Like the thing of him being willing to do bad things to try and save Dean from being a demon -- OK, it's in character, based on Sam's attempt to save Dean from Hell via demon blood in S4, but also kind of inscrutable and consequence-less as far as Sam's character development goes. And honestly, it's not so much that I think Sam keeps repeating the same stories (he is, but not really more than any of the other characters are IMO), it's more like his character just keeps getting less and less coherent and even losing his personality/uniqueness over time. At this point, it feels like he's a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy. I think of Sam in It's a Terrible Life, when Zachariah makes Sam and Dean imagine they're working in an office, and how in-character Sam's actions/decisions/reactions were all throughout, and how fun it was to see him still essentially being Sam Winchester within the totally different context of being a corporate drone -- and how colorless and generic and just absent-seeming all those things that made Sam "Sam" have become over time. It's like the life has drained out of him.

I completely agree. I felt similarly concerning Sam's characterization after season 7. I think at first it was that Carver really, really wanted to do the Amelia arc (why I have no earthly idea) and decided that he was going to do it whether or not it made sense, and once they messed with Sam's character for that (because even if I bought that Sam wouldn't look for Dean - or at least make sure he was actually dead - I don't think even a "restarted" Sam would abandon Kevin), they just kinda shrugged their shoulders and didn't even try to get it right any more.

That was where I gave up for a while. I came back, because the beginning of season 9 gave me some hope things would get interesting for Sam's character again and that the writers were really going to look into how Sam felt about having his autonomy taken away... but the writers wimped out and had Sam not keep his convictions and decide that the being who took him over was a "friend" and yeah, let's do the same thing with my brother, because I guess he was totally right about that. I should've thrown my hands up again there, but I ended up liking season 10 and I loved season 11. Unfortunately everything Sam learned in season 11 got thrown out the window again in season 12 when they had Sam join the British Men of Letters...

I'm now mostly watching for completion, but I don't really see the character of Sam that I really loved anymore. He more appears to be a pawn for the writers to shove into whatever mold or plot point they want to stuff him into whether he fits or not. I agree that a lot of the things that used to make Sam Sam have been left along the roadside along the way, partially in order to make him fit into those molds and plot points. And I mostly blame Carver for that since he was the one who started and accelerated the character destruction in my opinion.

Quote

That said, I think that Jared's sometimes poor health probably imposes limitations on what demands/work he can take on, and that probably has a ripple effect on the production as a whole, and also on how Sam is written and acted. Not trying to cast aspersions, I think Jared is a strong actor and clearly works hard, just saying that I think that there could be a behind-the-scenes X-factor like that at play as well.

I don't know. Maybe. Somehow though it wouldn't explain for me what really started the problem - which for me started in the very first episode of season 8. It was at that point that the writers seemed to me to decide "ehn who cares about the characters' journeys and characterizations, or the plot set up, or canon... we'll just do whatever the hell we want." Unfortunately what they decided they wanted to do, I found both boring and annoying. For both Sam and Dean. I think they used the likeable character trait budget up on Benny. (Don't get me started again.)

Maybe Jared just doesn't have the will to want to fight the writers any more on these kinds of things... or he buys the "it's gonna be great" that likely comes with the plot pitch... until Sam's characterization gets thrown under the bus in some way or another.

The BMoL thing is where I pretty much gave up on hoping for anything better. I knew what was coming as soon as that happened, because who couldn't know, meaning Sam - supposedly smart - got turned stupid again for plot purposes. *sigh* And having Sam claim that he's a blind "follower" who does that because it's easier (yup that's Sam, always doing things the easy way *sarcasm*)... makes it seem like the writers don't know or understand Sam's character at all.

Edited March 11, 2019 by AwesomO4000

[ukgirl71]

Just a random thought on a cold Monday, but does anyone think J2 fight the writers on anything these days, or nod, smile and take their directions and pay cheques? 

[DeeDee79]

1 hour ago, ukgirl71 said:

nod, smile and take their directions and pay cheques? 

IMO this is what seems to be happening. It's the only excuse I have to cling to in order to rationalize the awfulness lately.

[gonzosgirrl]

Jensen seemed pretty PO'd and vocal about his dislike over the marionette fight - maybe that was a turning point for him. I don't really see what Jared would have to complain about, but that's a post for another thread.

HA!! Edited because this in the thread for it. Jared has nothing to complain about from this regime, IMO. The guy got to yell at demons to make them go away, ffs. His big 'insult' in 300 was being an uber-successful, if emotionally stunted lawyer. He got all the attention for his scenes in Prophet and Loss, is continually written as the strong, smart, classy one and the Michael arc was at least as much about him as it was about Jensen. So yeah, no.

Edited March 11, 2019 by gonzosgirrl

[ILoveReading]

This show really has no clue what to do with Dean or desire to actually write for him.  It becomes more and more obvious every ep.

He's either dumb comic relief how has to have every word over two syllables defined for him or he's filler and busy work.

Edited March 11, 2019 by ILoveReading

[Myrelle]

2 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

This show really has no clue what to do with Dean or desire to actually write for him.  It becomes more and more obvious every ep.

He's either dumb comic relief how has to have every word over two syllables defined for him or he's filler and busy work.

Don't forget strictly and only support player for all the other characters on this show as soon as the tease of anything better and more for the character can be done away with(and via as little writing effort as they can muster)by any given showrunner(barring Carver, at the end of his tenure) on this show.

And that, more than anything else,  is what's made this show become so boring and predictable to this fan at this point in time. 

Dabb has just taken it to new lows in that regard, AFAIC.

Edited March 11, 2019 by Myrelle
Revision

[AwesomO4000]

4 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Jared has nothing to complain about from this regime, IMO.

Considering that Dabb made his character sign up with the group that tortured him and was obviously evil - but Sam was supposedly too stupid to see it - and then of course they are evil, so that Sam is wrong. Again. As always - I'm pretty sure he would have plenty to complain about. Jared as far as I know doesn't even like the "leader Sam" storyline. And I can see why, because it not only doesn't fit with Sam's characterization - which I think Jared thinks so, too - it trashed his previous characterization. Not that the leadership storyline was actually showing Sam as a good leader anyway. It generally just managed to show Sam messing up (the end of season 13) and "leading" because he couldn't deal with Dean being gone, usually while making questionable decisions.

Now with the death of the AU hunters which pretty much kills the stupid "leadership" storyline, while at the same time making sure that the majority of the blame for the AU hunters' deaths will be on Sam - the "I told you so" setting that up - we've once again got innocent lives put almost solely on Sam's hands. This is just the dozenth or so iteration since season 8, probably 4th or 5th or so since Dabb took over, of "Sam doesn't listen to Dean, who is right - as usual - and so bad things happen."

If things are going the way it appears, Jack will go bad, and we'll have another "Dean was right" to add to the list.

Quote

His big 'insult' in 300 was being an uber-successful, if emotionally stunted lawyer.

In my opinion, that was fairly insulting. It seemed to be saying that without Dean to guide him and "show him the way," that Sam was nothing but an unfeeling jerk while Dean was still the hero "saving people, hunting things."

Edited March 11, 2019 by AwesomO4000

[Aeryn13]

Sam is now the consummate hunter. He finds the cases, knows the lore, comes up with the solution and does the physical work. Dean? He is a gross eater, gets lectured, gets lore and words explained to him, never comes up with a solution or makes even the simplest connections and gets knocked out first (or second if for some weird reason Cas is there). 

More episodes of a Season are standalone than mytharc (not that Dean mytharcs get good writing or pay-offs, as we have seen) which means in the majority of the episodes now Dean isn`t portrayed particularly well. And in the mytharc episodes? Quite frankly, not much better.  

[AwesomO4000]

1 hour ago, Aeryn13 said:

Sam is now the consummate hunter. He finds the cases, knows the lore, comes up with the solution and does the physical work.

In the last episode, it took exactly one hit for Sam to be knocked down... on two different occasions I believe. At least Dean got some hits in before he got his head bashed. Dean also did the majority of the fighting with Michael while Sam couldn't even keep from losing the one thing he was sent to get... oh and losing Jack also, because he couldn't watch his damn back. Sam doesn't pick locks anymore, because Jack apparently could pick that up form the internet.

Last season, Sam couldn't even protect one person from vampires. Dean managed to protect his charge and save her - twice. Oh, and then Sam got himself killed. I'm just not seeing the "consummate hunter skills" being portrayed that you are. I see Sam as being shown as more incompetent all the time.

Quote

never comes up with a solution or makes even the simplest connections

I disagree here. Dean was the one who came up with locking Michael up, and was the one who convinced Michael that the two of them together were the only way to stop Lucifer, so that they could stop Lucifer. Dean also figured out the case in "Nightmare Logic," so for me "never" dosen't apply.

Edited March 11, 2019 by AwesomO4000

[ILoveReading]

I was debating which thread to put this in, and decided it was best because it talks about the writing as a whole. I found this post on Tumblr and it sums up Dabb's show running much better than I ever could.

Quote

I totally am.  Though I did actually see, like, two people in amid everybody else celebrating that bafflingly actually liked Maggie.  My mind boggles. 

Yeah, the way Dabb did the AU!hunters is pretty emblematic to me of how he just doesn’t seem to have any real ability to fully tell a story as a showrunner.  Like a lot of other things he’s introduced, they genuinely had the potential to be interesting.  Both in terms of exploring their backstories & AU!world and in exploring how they impacted the Winchesters & their world.  Except he gave us none of that.  All of their settling in, all of their coming to work with Sam as hunters for reasons, actually existing as people and not props?  Laughably nonexistent or happened off-screen.  Then they didn’t play any part in Jack’s silly illness story arc even though they really should have been there giving a shit after the way he saved their asses.  The amazing disappearing reappearing “hunters”!

If a story arc was a painting, Dabb & co. effectively made a few random scribbles that didn’t even connect into a coherent sketch.  Then they wandered off and left it discarded in the background, somehow assuming it would magically fill itself in while they did the same thing to three or four other storylines.  With this latest episode, it was picked back up and presented as complete to us with their deaths and we’re expected to care.  Somehow. 

Basically every arc story they’ve attempted since he took over fully has come off to me like something created by someone with a really unfortunate mix of a toddler’s lack of object permanence and ADHD. 

Bolding mine.  This is how I feel about everything since Dabb took over.  He has a shallow, superficial, of all the characters, at best.  Everything is in fits and starts, very little connects, each writer seems to have their own agenda, there seems to be no communication.  There is esentially no leader taking charge. 

The Michael storyline followed the same path.   It appeared and disappeared with no real development or a chance to breath.  Every time something happened tha tmight creation tension or specuation, Dabb couldn't wait to spoil it. 

Very few of the new characters make an impact.  I still see people saying they have to remind who Maggie was. 

http://eisforeidolon.tumblr.com/post/183391027666/are-you-also-laughing-at-how-the-whole-fandom

[7kstar]

On 1/31/2019 at 1:26 AM, BabySpinach said:

I almost wish that the show no longer had occasional flashes of brilliance like Nihilism. It's vexing to me that SPN STILL has the potential to be so engaging, funny, creative, and badass, because it just confirms that I'll never truly be free of my investment until it actually ends. It would have been so much easier for me to wrap my head around an over-aged, relentlessly mediocre genre show that could never again recreate its glory days, one that I would've gradually weaned myself off of to find greener pastures elsewhere. But alas, I'll likely be here till the bitter end. Jensen/Dean (and Yockey), it's all your fault! 

The occasional great episode also contrasts frustratingly with the much higher amount of meh-to-shitty ones. The writers could be doing so much better, as demonstrated gorgeously in 14.10, yet they choose to mostly squander these wonderful worlds and characters instead. No other show has jerked me around so much over the years, but no other single-continuity/same leads genre show has lasted this long, either.

1

It's why I couldn't leave this season but most likely won't be sticking like glue next season.  I didn't really watch 6 & 7 seasons.  I watched some, but there are eps I never watched.  8 brought me back in but I'm leaning more out than in, these days.  When they do it right, they blow your mind away.  But I'm finding it harder to wait for the brilliant ep, that might or not happen. 

It is frustrating because if they took what they had and developed it better, the whole storytelling could be so much more...

It feels cheap and if they just take their fans for granted.  It's not that I mind bringing in new characters.  MASH did it well.  So I could care about Jack.  Mary could have had the issue of I want to hunt, long for my little boys and if I got to know my grown ass boys what will that do.  It didn't mean major changes but if they planned Mary leaving better and even did a better management of her being gone from the ep, it wouldn't have been so abrupt and disappointing for me.

I think my most bitter disappointment is the potential that was never explored but should have been.

[7kstar]

Frankly, to some degree everyone is right.  Dean is shown to look stupid.  Then Sam takes his turn. 

The writing is more for the newer characters but I'm not sure it's done all that well either.  So that leaves several unsatisfied with the overall product and some happy?  These days I find more satisfying in fanfic than I do in the eps I watch. 

It feels like we will get 3 or 4 good eps out of a season.  I just wish I could figure out ahead of time which ones those would be.  Sometimes I look forward to an ep only to be bitterly disappointed and others dread, to find it was a good one, who knew.

[juppschmitz]

10 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

(or second if for some weird reason Cas is there)

😂😂😂👍

[Aeryn13]

10 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

In the last episode, it took exactly one hit for Sam to be knocked down... on two different occasions I believe. At least Dean got some hits in before he got his head bashed. Dean also did the majority of the fighting with Michael while Sam couldn't even keep from losing the one thing he was sent to get... oh and losing Jack also, because he couldn't watch his damn back. Sam doesn't pick locks anymore, because Jack apparently could pick that up form the internet.

Last season, Sam couldn't even protect one person from vampires. Dean managed to protect his charge and save her - twice. Oh, and then Sam got himself killed. I'm just not seeing the "consummate hunter skills" being portrayed that you are. I see Sam as being shown as more incompetent all the time.

I disagree here. Dean was the one who came up with locking Michael up, and was the one who convinced Michael that the two of them together were the only way to stop Lucifer, so that they could stop Lucifer. Dean also figured out the case in "Nightmare Logic," so for me "never" dosen't apply.

So once or twice per twenty episodes?  That's not a good ratio. Meanwhile he gets "doesn't know things" or "gross eating comedy relief" in roughly every other episode. 

[ILoveReading]

http://eisforeidolon.tumblr.com/post/182537359716/samanddeanunited-when-a-writer-assistant-who-is

I saw this on Tumblr .   No wonder if feels like like the writers have zero respect for canon.  they don't.  This is Dabb's assistant telling someone to watch the early seasons as back ground noise while cleaning.  (not sure why this is posting twice).

Edited March 12, 2019 by ILoveReading

[Myrelle]

Holy crap.

Kim Manners  is probably spinning in his grave right about now.

[gonzosgirrl]

Holy crap, indeed. No wonder she's Dabb's assistant.

RIP Supernatural.

ETA: I would love for someone to read that Tweet out to Jensen and Jared at a con and ask if they can guess who wrote it. Jensen said in this most recent panel that Andrew 'does what he wants', so maybe it wouldn't be so surprising for them to know that his right hand person regards the show in this way.

Edited March 12, 2019 by gonzosgirrl

[Res]

4 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Holy crap, indeed. No wonder she's Dabb's assistant.

RIP Supernatural.

ETA: I would love for someone to read that Tweet out to Jensen and Jared at a con and ask if they can guess who wrote it. Jensen said in this most recent panel that Andrew 'does what he wants', so maybe it wouldn't be so surprising for them to know that his right hand person regards the show in this way.

With that in mind, there's no way they can actually protect their characters from the writers.

[FlickChick]

4 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Holy crap, indeed. No wonder she's Dabb's assistant.

RIP Supernatural.

ETA: I would love for someone to read that Tweet out to Jensen and Jared at a con and ask if they can guess who wrote it. Jensen said in this most recent panel that Andrew 'does what he wants', so maybe it wouldn't be so surprising for them to know that his right hand person regards the show in this way.

With this in mind, I believe they should ask for and get a producer's title. Then maybe they would have more input and not just have to "do what ever he wants".

21 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

Basically every arc story they’ve attempted since he took over fully has come off to me like something created by someone with a really unfortunate mix of a toddler’s lack of object permanence and ADHD.

Also, I do believe Dabb has ADHD, one symptom of which is lack of focus. I think that (and other traits) describes him to a "T".

[ukgirl71]

Good grief, how appalling disrespectful is she?  The writers who came before her and her idiot boss made it easier for them by establishing such fabulous characters, canon and storylines in the first five seasons (and yes, they still managed to **** it up despite such firm foundations).

[Myrelle]

21 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Holy crap, indeed. No wonder she's Dabb's assistant.

RIP Supernatural.

ETA: I would love for someone to read that Tweet out to Jensen and Jared at a con and ask if they can guess who wrote it. Jensen said in this most recent panel that Andrew 'does what he wants', so maybe it wouldn't be so surprising for them to know that his right hand person regards the show in this way.

Did Jensen say that in a serious manner? 

Was it in answer to a question about how much input they have or some such thing?

I can't watch the whole panel(no time; nor do I really want to, tbh).

Or maybe you could just tell me the minute mark?...

Edited March 13, 2019 by Myrelle
Added a question

[gonzosgirrl]

3 hours ago, Myrelle said:

Did Jensen say that in a serious manner? 

Was it in answer to a question about how much input they have or some such thing?

I can't watch the whole panel(no time; nor do I really want to, tbh).

Or maybe you could just tell me the minute mark?...

It's the afternoon panel. The question begins around 41 minutes in, about which character/actor would be the hardest to lose. etA: In *my* opinion, Jensen doesn't seem to have any expectation at all that Andrew would listen to him, regardless of what he (Andrew) said.

Edited March 13, 2019 by gonzosgirrl

[Myrelle]

Just now, gonzosgirrl said:

It's the afternoon panel. The question begins around 41 minutes in, about which character/actor would be the hardest to lose.

Thanks!

I did find it and left a comment in the spoiler thread about it.

[gonzosgirrl]

6 minutes ago, Myrelle said:

Thanks!

I did find it and left a comment in the spoiler thread about it.

Ha! Okay, I hadn't made it that far yet. 🙂

ETA: Oh, now that I see your post, I think I misunderstood what you were asking, too. lol, I'm batting a thousand.

Edited March 13, 2019 by gonzosgirrl

[Myrelle]

8 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Ha! Okay, I hadn't made it that far yet. 🙂

ETA: Oh, now that I see your post, I think I misunderstood what you were asking, too. lol, I'm batting a thousand.

No, you did not misunderstand. 

I went off on a tangent and came back to add that I also found it interesting that he said that Andrew does whatever he wants after he(Jensen) said that he'd made a list of actors who he would like to see brought back in S15 after Andrew had asked them for their input on that, adding that he wasn't sure if it  would matter or not, right before stating that Andrew "does what he wants".

So yeah, I'm  going to agree with Flick Chick wholeheartedly now and say that producer rights and credit should be on their next list of requests if they're considering re-signing again after their current contracts are up(and if they still care about the overall quality of the writing on the show-and especially if they're aware of comments like the one above coming out of the showrunner's office)-which would likely be next year if they're still signing two year contracts.

[Myrelle]

20 hours ago, FlickChick said:

With this in mind, I believe they should ask for and get a producer's title. Then maybe they would have more input and not just have to "do what ever he wants".

Also, I do believe Dabb has ADHD, one symptom of which is lack of focus. I think that (and other traits) describes him to a "T".

Huh.

I honestly think that lack of focus might be THE biggest problem in the writers' room since Dabb took over, so whether he has it or not, someone BTS should consider that thought-unless they're all just hunky-dory with what we've gotten and been given under Dabb-again, including his assistant's comments above. 

6 hours ago, ukgirl71 said:

Good grief, how appalling disrespectful is she?  The writers who came before her and her idiot boss made it easier for them by establishing such fabulous characters, canon and storylines in the first five seasons (and yes, they still managed to **** it up despite such firm foundations).

I could not agree more.

[OrigamiNightmare]

Hi,

I'm wondering if you guys can help me out a bit. I'm writing a paper for one of my college classes on the discourse of family within the show. And do you find the show more character driven or plot driven? I sort of think it could be either. With the first five seasons I felt like the show had a pretty good balance with each character getting their moments in the sun or relevant storylines. I think in later seasons it became about one brother or the other, I felt like in later seasons the storylines alternated, but that there was no balance between the brothers and their plot lines ... and I really dislike Nought Sue, as some have called him. I don't think he adds anything to the story. I mean I guess he's now "the son" so hypothectically that means Sam and Dean have grown enough to be "parents" but the whole dynamic just isn't working for me.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

And do you find the show more character driven or plot driven? 

It`s too low on story to be plot driven. They barely manage one story at a time. The ratio is still more standalone vs. mytharc episodes per Season, making it a weird mix between anthology/procedural and overarc-ing show. But it is definitely more character-driven IMO.   

[catrox14]

IMO, it's plot driven now for the most part which is why characterization goes out the window. And then at the last minute they try to shove in bullet point characterization to salve the holes that the plot drives through character.

[Myrelle]

17 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

IMO, it's plot driven now for the most part which is why characterization goes out the window. And then at the last minute they try to shove in bullet point characterization to salve the holes that the plot drives through character.

I could go with this except to add that plots also come and go like the wind. Here one day and gone the next with usually the most interesting ones being very under-developed or in some cases introduced and only mentioned again when it's brought to the attention of the showrunner that they were indeed introduced at one time.

[rue721]

I think it's plot driven, because the main characters are usually reacting to events caused by other characters/forces. If the show were character-driven, then I think the plot would stem from their own needs or desires or personalities.

Like for example, in a Monster of the Week episode, some monster kills someone and then the Winchesters are on the case -- the case isn't growing out of their needs as characters, it's a plot machination. Or for example, Yellow Eyes makes deals/murders/schemes and then the Winchesters react to it.

[SueB]

7 hours ago, OrigamiNightmare said:

Hi,

I'm wondering if you guys can help me out a bit. I'm writing a paper for one of my college classes on the discourse of family within the show. And do you find the show more character driven or plot driven? I sort of think it could be either. With the first five seasons I felt like the show had a pretty good balance with each character getting their moments in the sun or relevant storylines. I think in later seasons it became about one brother or the other, I felt like in later seasons the storylines alternated, but that there was no balance between the brothers and their plot lines ... and I really dislike Nought Sue, as some have called him. I don't think he adds anything to the story. I mean I guess he's now "the son" so hypothectically that means Sam and Dean have grown enough to be "parents" but the whole dynamic just isn't working for me.

Character driven.  It's about the family.

[AwesomO4000]

9 hours ago, OrigamiNightmare said:

Hi,

I'm wondering if you guys can help me out a bit. I'm writing a paper for one of my college classes on the discourse of family within the show. And do you find the show more character driven or plot driven? I sort of think it could be either. With the first five seasons I felt like the show had a pretty good balance with each character getting their moments in the sun or relevant storylines. I think in later seasons it became about one brother or the other, I felt like in later seasons the storylines alternated, but that there was no balance between the brothers and their plot lines ... and I really dislike Nought Sue, as some have called him. I don't think he adds anything to the story. I mean I guess he's now "the son" so hypothectically that means Sam and Dean have grown enough to be "parents" but the whole dynamic just isn't working for me.

For me, the show was character driven through season 7... bu­­t starting in season 8, it became plot driven. And for me, it wasn't a subtle or slow change. As I was watching the first episode of season 8, I was saying to the television "who are these people?" Sam, especially, I didn't recognize. After the second episode of season 8, I stopped watching for a while.*** I came back, but things for me were never as character-driven as they were before, with many plots relying on the characters doing things that didn't make sense for me character-wise in order to make the plot go where they wanted it to.

There have been seasons and moments when they got it back for a while, but it doesn't generally last, in my opinion.

*** I eventually went back and watched most of the episodes I had missed, but that didn't really fill in any blanks or make anything make sense in terms of characterization... the explanation for a character's behavior was sometimes almost literally *shrug* or "just because." Terrible, in my opinion. The show spent seven years establishing characterization, and then threw it out the window when it got in the way of the story they wanted to tell - which might've been more forgivable if it at least had been a good story... it wasn't, in my opinion. Definitely not worth the character destruction.

[juppschmitz]

I think at this stage it's driven by the ego of the current "Andrew does what he wants" showrunner. And his bank account.

There is certainly no artistic ambition whatsoever. 

Edited March 14, 2019 by juppschmitz

[OrigamiNightmare]

16 hours ago, Myrelle said:

I could go with this except to add that plots also come and go like the wind. Here one day and gone the next with usually the most interesting ones being very under-developed or in some cases introduced and only mentioned again when it's brought to the attention of the showrunner that they were indeed introduced at one time.

I feel like the overarching storyline for a season has tiny plodding moments squeezed between monster of the week episodes. Then in the last 3 or 4 episodes, they cram everything in. I'm trying to break down the overarching storyline in season 11 into the classic three-act structure, but it's hard to do because so much of it is just squished into the last 3 or 4 episodes. What I really want to do is discuss the balance of family in seasons 1-5, but I can't really cover anything before 2013. So, I chose season 11 because it kind of ties back into seasons 1-5 and I can reference them. I'm definitely trying to cover each brother's individual storylines. But in season 11 I feel like the brotherly connection wasn't really a focus, it was all about the family relationship between Amara, God, and Lucifer. I also feel like Sam really didn't have much to do in season 11. Again, I feel like nothing important happened until the last few episodes of the season. It's a strange phenomenon in later seasons and I feel like it's poor writing.

[OrigamiNightmare]

16 hours ago, rue721 said:

I think it's plot driven, because the main characters are usually reacting to events caused by other characters/forces. If the show were character-driven, then I think the plot would stem from their own needs or desires or personalities.

Like for example, in a Monster of the Week episode, some monster kills someone and then the Winchesters are on the case -- the case isn't growing out of their needs as characters, it's a plot machination. Or for example, Yellow Eyes makes deals/murders/schemes and then the Winchesters react to it.

When you describe it like that, it's totally true lol. I guess I think in earlier seasons maybe then it was more character based because both brother's got to transform and grow throughout their individual and combined storylines. And again I feel like in those early seasons the plotting and storylines were a lot tighter and more defined. And that neither brother got screwed over or was marginalized, they just both had combined and individual storylines that the characters followed, and were ultimately transformed by. But I can cover anything that happened after 2013 (the start of the neo-network era). So, season 8 and beyond. I said I'd focus on season 11, "fan fiction" and "Lebanon" but I've been using those as vehicles to discuss all the different family relationships in the show and the "SPN Family fanbase". But I don't think we really got much insight into either brother or their relationship in season 11 ... I just watched, and the only thing that sticks out in my mind is "Don't call me shurely" (I do like the meta episodes, and I'm using them as vehicles to discuss the fandom, and it's factions".

[OrigamiNightmare]

23 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

It`s too low on story to be plot driven. They barely manage one story at a time. The ratio is still more standalone vs. mytharc episodes per Season, making it a weird mix between anthology/procedural and overarc-ing show. But it is definitely more character-driven IMO.   

I kinda do think you're right about it being low on story. Often times a whole lotta nothing happens/monster of the week stuff, tiny bits of an actual overarching storyline (the mark, the darkness, etc) more monster of the week, then smoosh in a bunch of stuff at the end. And maybe there's a fake-out in there for good measure. Or, the big bad turns out not to be the big bad ie Eve and Michael.