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

Cambion · March 15, 2019

I lost count tonight, but I think I counted SEVENTEEN names with producer credits. O.o Maybe the problem is too many cooks, as well as not the right ones.

ILoveReading · March 15, 2019

I guess this is why they had to splice photos of Dean from other episodes into the promo. There was literally not a single relevant scene for him in this ep.

I'd say the kindest thing the writers could do would be to kill off Dean's character since they obviously have no clue what to do with him, and clearly have no interest in writing for him but under Dabb and Co, I don't see it being a heroic death.

Dean would trip over his shoelace, fall, hit his head and drown in a puddle or choke on whatever mouthful of food he's sloppily eating.

Edited March 15, 2019 by ILoveReading

OrigamiNightmare · March 15, 2019

On 3/12/2019 at 11:05 AM, ILoveReading said:

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).

Wow!

FlickChick · March 15, 2019

8 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

I guess this is why they had to splice photos of Dean from other episodes into the promo. There was literally not a single relevant scene for him in this ep.

I'd say the kindest thing the writers could do would be to kill off Dean's character since they obviously have no clue what to do with him, and clearly have no interest in writing for him but under Dabb and Co, I don't see it being a heroic death.

Dean would trip over his shoelace, fall, hit his head and drown in a puddle or choke on whatever mouthful of food he's sloppily eating.

This is why I'm hoping and praying that we get an announcement at "Upfronts" that next season is a shortened final season. And that somehow, someway, the boys have enough pull to get the ending that they both agreed should happen. No matter what it is that they talked about and decided on. This is THEIR SHOW, something that Dabb seems to have forgotten.

Aeryn13 · March 15, 2019

That would be great but unless someone pulls a Stephen Amell here, we`re deep inside hell and we`re not getting out.

FlickChick · March 15, 2019

3 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

That would be great but unless someone pulls a Stephen Amell here, we`re deep inside hell and we`re not getting out.

I'm hoping that "Stephen Amell" is Jensen informing them that he will not be renewing his contract. And that Jared is ready to bow out as well. In together - out together.

Edited March 15, 2019 by FlickChick

Res · March 16, 2019

2 hours ago, FlickChick said:

I'm hoping that "Stephen Amell" is Jensen informing them that he will not be renewing his contract. And that Jared is ready to bow out as well. In together - out together.

That would be AWESOME! Unfortunately, I think the opposite is happening. Jared is liking Sam's storyline so he's resigning therefore so is Jensen. In together - out together. And a lot of Dean fans who are sticking with the show are in HELL.

Edited March 16, 2019 by Res

gonzosgirrl · March 16, 2019

Thus is a link to a tumblr that gif'd the fight between Sam and Castiel in Peace of Mind. If you didn't read the subtitles, you could imagine a direct reenactment of Dean and Cas's fight in 10x22. Another one bites the dust.

http://aborddelimpala.tumblr.com/post/183492343218/itsokaysammy-14x15-peace-of-mind

catrox14 · March 16, 2019

1 hour ago, PinkChicken said:

basically. -this one has both (1/2 points for Castiel at least bringing Dean up when hes talking?)

http://princesscas.tumblr.com/post/183463115250/10x22-14x15-sorry-not-sorry

And Dabb wrote that episode and his assistant just lifted that and put it in her episode. even in that side by side with comparison, there is so much history of Dean getting to the point that he would take out Castiel in s10 and the context is so completely different. Yet if one only sees it on the surface level it will look the same but it's not. There was passion (not romantic) in the Prisoner because of Dean's awful situation and real fear that he would kill Cas.makes me wonder if Dabb actually wrote the Prisoner! So totally different.

gonzosgirrl · March 16, 2019

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

And Dabb wrote that episode and his assistant just lifted that and put it in her episode. even in that side by side with comparison, there is so much history of Dean getting to the point that he would take out Castiel in s10 and the context is so completely different. Yet if one only sees it on the surface level it will look the same but it's not. There was passion (not romantic) in the Prisoner because of Dean's awful situation and real fear that he would kill Cas.makes me wonder if Dabb actually wrote the Prisoner! So totally different.

This was my point in posting. They watered down an epic moment from Dean, and again gave it to Sam. It had all the emotional impact of a wet blanket for me, but on the surface, ie. the audience they seem to be writing to, it was an equally watershed event. I hate them for that. This season alone there have been too many, including Sam 'killing' Zachariah. I imagine before it's over, they'll time travel so Sam can sleep with Lisa. Maybe a threesome with Cassie if they let Dabb's flunky write again.

ahrtee · March 16, 2019

31 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

I imagine before it's over, they'll time travel so Sam can sleep with Lisa. Maybe a threesome with Cassie if they let Dabb's flunky write again.

No, Sam would never steal someone else's lover. He has deep, meaningful relationships. Only Soulless Sam had casual sex. They'd more likely have him return to his One True Love, Amelia...er, Madison, um, Sarah...or, um, what's her name? The blonde in the pilot? ☺️

catrox14 · March 16, 2019

1 hour ago, gonzosgirrl said:

This was my point in posting. They watered down an epic moment from Dean, and again gave it to Sam. It had all the emotional impact of a wet blanket for me, but on the surface, ie. the audience they seem to be writing to, it was an equally watershed event. I hate them for that. This season alone there have been too many, including Sam 'killing' Zachariah. I imagine before it's over, they'll time travel so Sam can sleep with Lisa. Maybe a threesome with Cassie if they let Dabb's flunky write again.

Sorry, if my post seemed to be in opposition to your comment. That wasn't my intention. I was basically agreeing with you and adding on. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

That would require that assistant writer having watched s1 through s3 other than whilst in the background cleaning...so we might avoid that! LOL

Edited March 16, 2019 by catrox14

catrox14 · March 16, 2019

27 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

No, Sam would never steal someone else's lover. He has deep, meaningful relationships. Only Soulless Sam had casual sex.

Sam did choose to stick with Amelia for awhile after her husband came back from being KIA....

ahrtee · March 16, 2019

1 minute ago, catrox14 said:

Sam did choose to stick with Amelia for awhile after her husband came back from being KIA....

That shows how deep and meaningful (and uncasual) the relationship was. But once he thought about it, he bowed out (even though apparently she'd rather have him than her husband)...

catrox14 · March 16, 2019

26 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

That shows how deep and meaningful (and uncasual) the relationship was. But once he thought about it, he bowed out (even though apparently she'd rather have him than her husband)...

My point was more that Sam's attachment to Amelia even after learning her husband was back, he still chose for a little while at least to stay with her. I didn't have the impression it was a day or so that he decided but that he stayed with her for at least a few more weeks, essentially until Amelia gave him an ultimatum.

Thus, for me, the current crop under Dabb (save Yockey) could easily throw in some way for Sam to be love with Cassie in an instant and then she dumps him fast...and it wouldn't be wildly outside of Sam's wheelhouse IMO. And would be another big thing for Dean that is redone and reduced via doing it for Sam.

As an aside, I would like for the show to take one iconic Sam moment and hand it to Dean, to have it reduced in the same way. Although, given Jensen's fantastic playing between what's on the page, he might elevate it further than intended HEH.

u

gonzosgirrl · March 16, 2019

2 hours ago, catrox14 said:

Sorry, if my post seemed to be in opposition to your comment. That wasn't my intention. I was basically agreeing with you and adding on. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

That would require that assistant writer having watched s1 through s3 other than whilst in the background cleaning...so we might avoid that! LOL

Eh, they could have it be a dream or a delusion, an AU, anything so long as they let him do something Dean has done.

FlickChick · March 16, 2019

5 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

This was my point in posting. They watered down an epic moment from Dean, and again gave it to Sam. It had all the emotional impact of a wet blanket for me, but on the surface, ie. the audience they seem to be writing to, it was an equally watershed event. I hate them for that. This season alone there have been too many, including Sam 'killing' Zachariah.

When I saw that scene - Sam threatening to kill Cas lying on the floor, complete with the angel sword pounded by his head - I was enraged. To me, it was so much worse than the other stealing of Dean's special scenes/moments. That was one of the most dramatic scenes of the series - that Dean (with the MOC), would even consider violence/killing of his best friend. And what we witnessed in this week's episode was a cheap, disgusting imitation from a second (third?) rate writer.

DeeDee79 · March 16, 2019

24 minutes ago, FlickChick said:

When I saw that scene - Sam threatening to kill Cas lying on the floor, complete with the angel sword pounded by his head - I was enraged. To me, it was so much worse than the other stealing of Dean's special scenes/moments. That was one of the most dramatic scenes of the series - that Dean (with the MOC), would even consider violence/killing of his best friend. And what we witnessed in this week's episode was a cheap, disgusting imitation from a second (third?) rate writer.

This along with the lackluster writing for his character makes me believe even more that there's an anti-Dean agenda on SPN which was more than likely started by Dabb. His character has been shit on many times in previous seasons of course but it's become much more blatant during Dabb's era. I honestly wonder why Jensen still stays at this point; he could be enjoying a much more fulfilling career elsewhere IMO.

FlickChick · March 16, 2019

1 minute ago, DeeDee79 said:

This along with the lackluster writing for his character makes me believe even more that there's an anti-Dean agenda on SPN which was more than likely started by Dabb. His character has been shit on many times in previous seasons of course but it's become much more blatant during Dabb's era. I honestly wonder why Jensen still stays at this point; he could be enjoying a much more fulfilling career elsewhere IMO.

I agree 1000%. It started in S12 - Dabb's first full year of showrunning and has continued without interruption since. I also think Dabb did a bait and switch regarding the character of Michael in order to get Jensen to renew his contract. And we all know how that story played out. I keep thinking of "Regarding Dean" and the last scene with Dean riding the bull to "Broomstick Cowboy" which really is a song about moving on, leaving things in the past. To me what was left in the past was the iconic character of BAMF Dean Winchester, the best damn hunter in the world, who is my favorite fictional character of all time. How disgusting that a single showrunner has the power to do that. And how sad that Jensen is allowing it to happen.

DeeDee79 · March 16, 2019

28 minutes ago, FlickChick said:

I agree 1000%. It started in S12 - Dabb's first full year of showrunning and has continued without interruption since. I also think Dabb did a bait and switch regarding the character of Michael in order to get Jensen to renew his contract. And we all know how that story played out. I keep thinking of "Regarding Dean" and the last scene with Dean riding the bull to "Broomstick Cowboy" which really is a song about moving on, leaving things in the past. To me what was left in the past was the iconic character of BAMF Dean Winchester, the best damn hunter in the world, who is my favorite fictional character of all time. How disgusting that a single showrunner has the power to do that. And how sad that Jensen is allowing it to happen.

I absolutely agree. It also makes you think about how Dean was written in Dabb eps before he became showrunner and the realization that he's been doing this all along. More than likely Daniel Loflin was the one that evened things out to prevent the writing from completely trashing Dean's character.

Edited March 16, 2019 by DeeDee79

7kstar · March 17, 2019

6 hours ago, DeeDee79 said:

I absolutely agree. It also makes you think about how Dean was written in Dabb eps before he became showrunner and the realization that he's been doing this all along. More than likely Daniel Loflin was the one that evened things out to prevent the writing from completely trashing Dean's character.

Most of the writing with Dabb was done with Loflin in the beginning and I wonder if those strange lines that didn't make sense to Dean's character is Dabb?

Wasn't it Dabb that Jensen talked to saying "now I get why Dean needed his mother to be brought back" and Dabb's response was "what?"

Not a direct quote but if you're writing something and you don't have the ability to dissect your own stuff, perhaps that explains why Dabb has such hit and miss. I do wonder if he thinks he is telling a much better story than he is. Obviously, they do come up with some cool ideas, but the execution sucks.

Part of me wonders if Dabb is so blind to what he is putting on the page. He thinks he's doing these great stories and because he doesn't really dig deep about what he is doing, he's clueless about what others see.

I know that there have been times that I was so excited about an idea I didn't see the issues because it never crossed my mind.

I know that Jensen won't attack or sound negative because he was burned on another show due to the lead trying to destroy his character. But if he feels the writing is becoming weak for his character and that he doesn't really have anything to do, I would hope he would leave. But if he is still having fun and thinking it's not that much longer before the end, I'll stick with it for now.

Since I don't know what Jensen really thinks, could he believe that things are still good? He did have a few strong eps this season and he did have JDM back on as his dad.

I don't know when he signed his last contract and when he has to make up his mind about going on. I can see him thinking in a few years the twins will be older and if I go to a new show I will lose control of how much time off I can take...

I guess the issue is if Dabb leaves who would be the replacement and would it be any better? I'm almost afraid to see! JMV

Edited March 17, 2019 by 7kstar
left out words - oops

starfishka · March 17, 2019

4 hours ago, 7kstar said:

Wasn't it Dabb that Jensen talked to saying "now I get why Dean needed his mother to be brought back" and Dabb's response was "what?"

1

It was Berens.

SueB · March 17, 2019

12 hours ago, 7kstar said:

Wasn't it Dabb that Jensen talked to saying "now I get why Dean needed his mother to be brought back" and Dabb's response was "what?"

As starfishka said, it was Berens. But watch the JIBCON 2017 clip (start at 19:30 mark)

The common interpretation is that Berens was clueless and not 'messing' with Jensen. I'm disagree. I don't think he was messing with Jensen but I also think he wasn't prepared to take credit for realizing the forgiveness was the big issue at the end of S11. I think they brought Mary back just to resolve his grief (and JDM wasn't available) and sometime during the season figured out that they were going to create an on-going conflict with Mary/Dean and have it be resolved with this issue of forgiveness for the original deal. So it would have been a lie to say that scene was designed at the end of S11. Hence Beren's giving the fake 'yeah' on the grandness of that plan. But to say that ONLY Jensen figured it out or that Berens only came up with it right before 11.22 doesn't ring true either. I think if the writers (including Berens) are smart enough to write a "Dean forgives Mary" scene which was outstanding in execution AND dialog, they understood the importance of that scene. In short, maybe they didn't PLAN the forgiveness theme as the central issue for Dean when they brought Mary, but also I don't think they stumbled upon by mistake it when breaking the script for EP22. At a minimum, when they were setting up how to end the season (which is usually late January), they plotted the course for Mary's brainwashing and recovery by Dean (specifically Dean). And when they figured out how to resolve this relationship, forgiveness was the smart answer.

I make this point, not just to respond to @7kstar 's question but to point out that simple "Beren's said "What?" is a reductive fandom interpretation of the story Jensen told. Not an interpretation or oversimplification personally created by @7kstar but an example of a phenomenon that happens a lot. This theory that "Dabb hates Dean" is bolstered by oversimplifications of events in ways that support particular biases. I'm saying that fandom takes quotes and comments, INTERPRETS them, and the interpretation becomes the 'truth'. This happens in spades with Destiel subtext. And IMO this happens a great deal with writer comments. I have zero issue with people having an interpretation of what Jensen is saying and his comments regarding Berens. My issue is when an interpretation is propigated as truth because it's repeated.

And yes, it's MY interpretation that the writers are much more sophisticated and care a lot more about ALL the characters than others have interpreted. I understand I'm the cheese standing alone on this topic. I can live with that. I'm not trying to sway opinion but make an observation about how 'interpretation' becomes 'truth' which then is used to support 'theory'.

Which leads me to my comment in the "Peace of Mind" thread:

Quote

Note: I have thoughts on the writer's choices for Dean -- I'm taking that to BvJ.

When I first watched the episode, I was pretty nonplussed about the "B" plot. Upon rewatch, I saw the whole B plot as Dean doing an excellent job of performing 'triage' on his family to see how they are recovering post AUMichael. And that Dean's leadership/communication skills are really much more sophisticated in this episode. First time through, I caught how Dean was letting Donnatello/Jack talk alone -- and I thought that was smart. Second time through, I'm seeing how the story was plotted in such a way that Dean never actually loses sight on his primary concern (how his family is recovering). He takes in each input and says VERY LITTLE. But in each case, he's letting things play out. He's giving them the affirmation they need and focuses on the most pressing issue -- does Jack have a soul. 2007 Dean would have countered Sam's thoughts (at the end of the episode) a few times mid-Sam-rant, rather than watch him come to the right answer. 2006-9 Dean would have insisted they stop and rest and Sam wouldn't have gone to Arkansas. 2010-11 Dean would have probably gone IN with Jack to actively engage on whether they were having antoher soulless moment -- he would be shaky on that working out. But 2019 Dean has a shit-ton more confidence in TFW 2,0 - even when they screw up. And, MOST IMPORTANTLY, he has confidence in not just his own judgement but his influence over the others. They love and trust him. He doesn't NEED to fight. Plus like everyone who matures, he realizes 'less is more' on some topics. SO, first pass I thought Dean's was just kind of floating. Second watch I see a much more deliberate approach towards things -- with comedic moments. And I think the writers didn't write the scene intending for Dean to be reactive. As the video shows, they trust J2 to understand tonally where things are going and where their characters head's are at. And if they TRY to put too much direction (i.e. Berens saying 'Dean cries') the writer gets a clapback (Jensen told Berens not to do that again) for getting into the actor's business. I think they wrote the scene showing a mature Dean having EXCELLENT Leadership/Parenting skills. And Jensen played it that way.

In short, I don't think they blew the writing for Dean in this episode at all. Yes, Dean was not the A plot. Welp, it's co-leads, not "Dean and the rest". And Sam's issues are much more tangible with having just finished burying the AUHunters. Dean's issues with having dealt with AUMichael are important and deserve unpacking but apparently AUMichael is dead -- and Dean's first priority (which is not only in character, but reasonable IMO) is to make sure the family is on a recovery path.

Wynne88 · March 17, 2019

15 minutes ago, SueB said:

In short, I don't think they blew the writing for Dean in this episode at all.

SueB, I really like the way you unpack this. To be honest, I'm not totally convinced the writing crew is up to that level of complexity, but I sincerely hope they are and that you nailed it.

Aeryn13 · March 17, 2019

Quote

In short, I don't think they blew the writing for Dean in this episode at all. Yes, Dean was not the A plot. Welp, it's co-leads, not "Dean and the rest". And Sam's issues are much more tangible with having just finished burying the AUHunters. Dean's issues with having dealt with AUMichael are important and deserve unpacking but apparently AUMichael is dead -- and Dean's first priority (which is not only in character, but reasonable IMO) is to make sure the family is on a recovery path.

It wasn`t the B-plot either. Jack was the B-plot, with Donatello being the main supporting player in that. Dean was the comedy relief with brief Sam-support at the end who really had nothing going on. And the snake comedy took something out of context by overplaying a "haha, Dean the coward" moment.

And since it was the direct aftermath after the Michael storyline where everyone (but maybe Cas) got to react, I`m predicting here and now that any Dean-related aftermath has been dropped completely. They kicked him out of his own plot in the most humiliating way and now, to add to the humiliation, he will have to play fifth fiddle to the new star, Jack.

Just like I`m sure that if absolutely nothing happens to address Dean`s feeling post-Michael, there will be one thousand and one metas on how this is really great writing and the best option.

Quote

Dean forgives Mary" scene which was outstanding in execution AND dialog, they understood the importance of that scene.

The overall dialogue and gist of the scene was about Sam, with the cut from Baby!Sam to Leader!Sam and I think that is what Berens had in mind when he wrote the episode. Dean got a side plot in it because well, he had to do something onscreen. That Jensen thought his side plot meant anything for Dean`s character likely made Berens go "buzzuh?"

Edited March 17, 2019 by Aeryn13

7kstar · March 17, 2019

5 minutes ago, SueB said:

In short, I don't think they blew the writing for Dean in this episode at all. Yes, Dean was not the A plot. Welp, it's co-leads, not "Dean and the rest". And Sam's issues are much more tangible with having just finished burying the AUHunters. Dean's issues with having dealt with AUMichael are important and deserve unpacking but apparently AUMichael is dead -- and Dean's first priority (which is not only in character, but reasonable IMO) is to make sure the family is on a recovery path.

I have zero issues with Dean not being in the A plot. I haven't rewatched and I don't have time right now. I will see if what you think can happen, will. But I would have rathered they didn't do the b plot and focused more on strengthening the A plot. I want them to succeed. I don't take pleasure in seeing it fail.

10 minutes ago, SueB said:

I make this point, not just to respond to @7kstar 's question but to point out that simple "Beren's said "What?" is a reductive fandom interpretation of the story Jensen told. Not an interpretation or oversimplification personally created by @7kstar but an example of a phenomenon that happens a lot. This theory that "Dabb hates Dean" is bolstered by oversimplifications of events in ways that support particular biases. I'm saying that fandom takes quotes and comments, INTERPRETS them, and the interpretation becomes the 'truth'.

When what you are seeing is causing you to not enjoy the show as much, and it is for me. I am only speaking for me.

I think it shows part of the problem when you can't tell how the writers are supporting both. I was a brother fan first. I relate to Dean more than Sam due to my childhood, period. I want to LOVE BOTH BROTHERS. I usually see something I like in every ep or I would have been gone already.

I had no problem with Cas and Sam. But there are points that we are complaining about which are very valid. I have no problem with reading another viewpoint. I teach debate and a good debate is entertaining. I look sometimes for someone that has another opinion to help me see something that I might be too biased to see otherwise. Sue B I don't think you are the only one that feels what you feel and sometimes you point out things that I wouldn't have seen otherwise. I don't believe that Jensen is in misery doing the show. I think he loves it still and is doing it because it's fun for him.

But they didn't deliver on the Michael/Dean as the big bad. I think when one of the writers said he wasn't the big bad, it was the truth but they didn't want it out there yet. We can disagree on this. Writers often don't get actors, period. I know because on another show I had conversations with the writer. So yes it is an oversimplification of what happened and yes I had the wrong writer. But I did ask it as a question not as if it was the truth.

But I'm tired of the misdirect that has been going on for several seasons. This will be Dean's big story and nope it really wasn't. Just stop telling us it will be his big story and you can avoid most of the issues. I don't expect a big story anymore, so what they did with Michael wasn't a big deal as it was par for the course. I'll stop now. Please don't think I'm bashing you because I'm not. I also believe you're expressing the opposite side pretty well.

ILoveReading · March 17, 2019

For me what it comes down to is as a Dean fan I'm tired of having to read meta, or look to fan fic or have to read between the lines or watch the episode multiple times to actually see what's going on with Dean.

I want to see it on screen and addressed and not in I'm suffering because Sam is kind of way.

I want to see Dean's issues mentioned, and addressed without the without Sam being brought into it.

At this point nothing else is acceptable. There are no excuses why Dean's trauma couldn't be mentioned. They managed to include Rowena of all characters. Her mental state came before Deans' and she wasn't even in the episode. If this writer can give us a throw away line about Rowena they can do the same for Dean.

I'm not disagreeing that Dean tends to put others first but at 14 seasons in when does Dean start to have self worth? When does he start to believe that his issues are just as important as Sam, or Jack's or Cas's. It's not selfish if Dean wants to mention his own trauma.

BuckLemming themselves says Dean has antibodies, and Yockey wrote that Thriving on trauma line. Its open to debate about what he meant, It's not up for debate with this writer because she tweeted this gem (this writer should stay away from twitter).

A kink is usually described as something someone gets pleasure from. So it seem to me this writer thinks Dean enjoys trauma. So no, I don't believe there was stuff hidden between the lines. These writers are as subtle as a sledge hammer if they wanted us to see Dean was struggling, they would have shown it.

Usually Jensen can add layers to his performance, like when Dean went to hell. It was up to Jensen to add that little pause because the writers couldn't be bothered to remember. I just didn't see that this time. Jensen played the comedy well enough, but I thought his performce was a straight up what you see is what you get.

As for Berens, IMO, there is zero reason for him to continue to play Dumb when Jensen mentioned that scene to him. Because at this point it was done, over with and filmed. It seems to me if Berens had that in mind, he would have said something like, "Sorry I couldn't tell you before. I wanted Dean to be awkward around Mary and not completely understand why she was back. I loved your preformance because that is exactly what i had in mind."

According to Jensen himself, it sounded as if Berens had no idea what he was talking about. I just don't see a reason for Berens to pretend. Honestly if he did, and couldn't be bothered to actually mention this to Jensen it makes him as unprofessional as Dabb. It also shows the beginning of a pattern that when Jensen is looking for feedback the writers blow him off. So IMO, Id almost rather Berens had no clue what Jensen was talking about because if it was an act, it just furthers by belief that Beren's and Dabb really don't like or respect Jensen or Dean because they can't be bothered to clue him in.

Edited March 17, 2019 by ILoveReading

SueB · March 18, 2019

5 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

According to Jensen himself, it sounded as if Berens had no idea what he was talking about. I just don't see a reason for Berens to pretend. Honestly if he did, and couldn't be bothered to actually mention this to Jensen it makes him as unprofessional as Dabb. It also shows the beginning of a pattern that when Jensen is looking for feedback the writers blow him off.

I never said Beren’s pretended.

What I said:

”I don't think he was messing with Jensen but I also think he wasn't prepared to take credit for realizing the forgiveness was the big issue at the end of S11.”

Why Jensen didn’t peruse closure on the conversation is beyond me.

J2 are THE stars. THE reason the show is on. I think people are wildly mistaken if they think J2 is uncomfortable asking a writer a detailed question. Maybe he got called to set and it didn’t occur to him that he didn’t get a real answer until later. But they call the writers ALL the time. If Jensen wanted closure, he could have gotten it. But he didn’t. I see no reason to believe Berens blew him off or thinks he ‘above’ the stars.

which makes this statement:

”It also shows the beginning of a pattern...” another example of interpretation presented as objective information. Even if I bought the notion that Berens ‘blew off’ Jensen; two data points are not a pattern. Two data points can be completely orthogonal to the actual pattern. This is how opinion gets construed as a given.

I just do not understand why people constantly underestimate how influential Jensen is. He and Jared were unhappy with Sera Gamble. Gamble leaves early in her contract. J2 want Cas back — Misha Collins is not only back but a regular. J2 are unhappy with the S11 finale — it’s rewritten. J2 are interested in the 300th episode — Jensen personally pulls in JDM and WB pays for it; expanding the budget. Further J2 are involved in the story told in the 300. J2 want more time off —the seasons are now 20 episodes. The only time I recall that Jensen ‘lost a battle’ was when he tried to stop them from killing Charlie. He apparently DID take that on and Singer said no. And he’s expressed dissatisfaction with the duration of some plot lines but he’s also demonstrated the ability to call up LA and say ‘I need time off’ and they gave him extra time off (S9) for an episode.

Both Jensen and Jared are grown-ass men who make probably $4M a year on episodes alone. Jensen has a highly successful side business Jared’s got two bars he owns. They are capable men who are able to push an issue if they choose to.

I see no evidence they are remotely cowed by Dabb or Berens. If either wanted to get some answers, they could. Dabb/Berens blowing them off seriously would more likely put the show runner and writer in jeopardy than the stars.

Edited March 18, 2019 by SueB
Atrocious grammar & spelling - my iPhone is not my friend when posting

Wynne88 · March 18, 2019

2 hours ago, SueB said:

He and Jared were unhappy with Sera Gamble. Gamble leaves early in her contract.

Moving to Show Runners thread.

Wynne88 · March 18, 2019

Quote

He and Jared were unhappy with Sera Gamble. Gamble leaves early in her contract.

SueB, do you know why Jared and Jensen weren't happy with Sera Gamble? She wasn't my favorite either, but I'm curious.

Edited March 18, 2019 by Wynne88
Added SueB's quote

gonzosgirrl · March 18, 2019

I wish I was watching the same show you are @SueB. It sounds like a good one.

AwesomO4000 · March 18, 2019

15 minutes ago, Wynne88 said:

SueB, do you know why Jared and Jensen weren't happy with Sera Gamble?

I'm interested as well...

I'm also wondering that after season 8 and the - in my opinion - Amelia fiasco and cut-short purgatory arc if Jared and Jensen maybe looked more fondly in retrospect on Gamble. (Well, maybe more Jared than Jensen, because I think Sam's character - at least for me - fared much better under Gamble than he did under Carver's reign.)

7kstar · March 18, 2019

2 hours ago, SueB said:

Both Jensen and Jared are grown-ass men who make probably $4M a year on episodes alone. Jensen has a highly successful side business Jared’s got two bars he owns. They are capable men who are able to push an issue if they choose to.

I see no evidence they are remotely cowed by Dabb or Berens. If either wanted to get some answers, they could. Dabb/Berens blowing them off seriously would more likely put the show runner and writer in jeopardy than the stars.

I agree that both are doing fine acting wise. This is the stats from 2012:

Quote

At the same time, the average unemployment rate for actors, according to the Actor's Equity Association, hovers around 90 percent. Whereas being unemployed is a rather new phenomenon for most of the workforce, it is a way of life for actors.Jan 4, 2012

Any actor trying to make it in the business knows this, the lucky ones get a good salary and such. So they are both lucky.

@SueB this is a compliment, by the way, you remind me of a fanfiction writer that takes what she sees on the screen and spins it into the brother's having a strong relationship. She is starting to have to work at it and she is on season 10.

My one issue is that Jensen went to the writers and they said you got this. He said that the director helped him to figure out how to flesh his character. Now how you interpret that depends on how you see Dean's character as thriving or not. He's had some really good eps and going by a SHOWRUNNER that I respect, he said you usually have 3 or 4 great eps. Supernatural has done that. You get 3 or 4 so so eps. Yep, we've had that. And then you have the oops not so good, Bugs anyone. Yet I'm sure there is some fan that loved it.

I believe Jensen when he says he is enjoying working with his dysfunctional family - meaning the crew and actors. The day he really starts hating going to work is the day he will call it quits. I don't believe he is there. But he isn't excited about the storylines. He isn't really talking about anything and when he's excited he does. The only real criticism I've heard from him was the stupid wire fight from last years final. He's still joking around during the cons.

I wish I had felt what you saw. I would love to back you up. But I didn't see it or feel it. I will see what happens next because if they are doing what you say, then it should be apparent. If it isn't then they have failed at their job. If the average person doesn't see it, then it isn't happening. So that's the best I can do.

But do I feel sorry for either of the Leads, nope. Am I saying they should leave, no as I can't speak for their dreams and desires. I only wish I could have had my dreams come true, but I found the obstacles to acting being too much for me. So instead I teach it.

SueB · March 18, 2019

33 minutes ago, Wynne88 said:

SueB, do you know why Jared and Jensen weren't happy with Sera Gamble? She wasn't my favorite either, but I'm curious.

As I understand it:

Put Baby on lockdown, killed off Cas, and killed off Bobby (not positive on this one). Leaving J2 to carry them entire load of the show by mid S7. In January of S7, Gamble was still ‘in charge’ but Carver was hired to replace her the next year. So at Carver’s insistence, Cas was back before the end of S7. Baby was back in the finale (which may or may not have been Carver).

I think they liked Sera but I distinctly recall both J’s making a comment about binge watchers being ‘patient’ with the show during S7.

ahrtee · March 18, 2019

8 hours ago, SueB said:

to point out that simple "Beren's said "What?" is a reductive fandom interpretation of the story Jensen told. Not an interpretation or oversimplification personally created by @7kstar but an example of a phenomenon that happens a lot. This theory that "Dabb hates Dean" is bolstered by oversimplifications of events in ways that support particular biases. I'm saying that fandom takes quotes and comments, INTERPRETS them, and the interpretation becomes the 'truth'.

I'm pretty sure you didn't mean to say things this way, but in the context this is placed, it seems to me that it's suggesting that "fandom" (which is a pretty broad group) doesn't make our own interpretations and opinions based on what we see and hear and read ourselves--in tweets, con videos and direct quotes--but (deliberately or not) we're just taking what others have written/said and building on their biases? That also seems to imply that those who feel the same way about a particular comment, action or event are being influenced by other opinions and therefore are wrong (or at least, wrong-headed). Again, I'm sure it wasn't intended that way and so would appreciate some clarification. ETA: not intending to be snarky, just pointing out something that bothered me.

Personally, I don't remember anyone--in this forum at least-- declaring their interpretations to be "truth," just their own opinions.

(Sorry if the grammar is a little wonky. I'm having trouble with collective nouns today.)

Edited March 18, 2019 by ahrtee

Wynne88 · March 18, 2019

Makes sense. Thanks.

SueB · March 18, 2019

53 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

I'm pretty sure you didn't mean to say things this way, but in the context this is placed, it seems to me that it's suggesting that "fandom" (which is a pretty broad group) doesn't make our own interpretations and opinions based on what we see and hear and read ourselves--in tweets, con videos and direct quotes--but (deliberately or not) we're just taking what others have written/said and building on their biases? That also seems to imply that those who feel the same way about a particular comment, action or event are being influenced by other opinions and therefore are wrong (or at least, wrong-headed). Again, I'm sure it wasn't intended that way and so would appreciate some clarification. ETA: not intending to be snarky, just pointing out something that bothered me.

Personally, I don't remember anyone--in this forum at least-- declaring their interpretations to be "truth," just their own opinions.

(Sorry if the grammar is a little wonky. I'm having trouble with collective nouns today.)

Not at all. I think I’ve said multiple times that everyone makes their own interpretation about the show (in front of the camera and behind the scenes).

And of course no one baldly says “my opinion is truth”. Simultaneously, most people don’t put “IMO” in front of every single statement made, even if it’s opinion. That would be tedious.

Finally, I think I’ve also been super consistent - opinion is not ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ — regardless of how that opinion was formed — it’s still opinion. It was never my intent to suggest a particular opinion, is wrong.

Hopefully that clarifies my remark.

Lemuria · March 18, 2019

On 3/17/2019 at 2:52 PM, SueB said:

When I first watched the episode, I was pretty nonplussed about the "B" plot. Upon rewatch, I saw the whole B plot as Dean doing an excellent job of performing 'triage' on his family to see how they are recovering post AUMichael. And that Dean's leadership/communication skills are really much more sophisticated in this episode. First time through, I caught how Dean was letting Donnatello/Jack talk alone -- and I thought that was smart. Second time through, I'm seeing how the story was plotted in such a way that Dean never actually loses sight on his primary concern (how his family is recovering). He takes in each input and says VERY LITTLE. But in each case, he's letting things play out. He's giving them the affirmation they need and focuses on the most pressing issue -- does Jack have a soul. 2007 Dean would have countered Sam's thoughts (at the end of the episode) a few times mid-Sam-rant, rather than watch him come to the right answer. 2006-9 Dean would have insisted they stop and rest and Sam wouldn't have gone to Arkansas. 2010-11 Dean would have probably gone IN with Jack to actively engage on whether they were having antoher soulless moment -- he would be shaky on that working out. But 2019 Dean has a shit-ton more confidence in TFW 2,0 - even when they screw up. And, MOST IMPORTANTLY, he has confidence in not just his own judgement but his influence over the others. They love and trust him. He doesn't NEED to fight. Plus like everyone who matures, he realizes 'less is more' on some topics. SO, first pass I thought Dean's was just kind of floating. Second watch I see a much more deliberate approach towards things -- with comedic moments. And I think the writers didn't write the scene intending for Dean to be reactive. As the video shows, they trust J2 to understand tonally where things are going and where their characters head's are at. And if they TRY to put too much direction (i.e. Berens saying 'Dean cries') the writer gets a clapback (Jensen told Berens not to do that again) for getting into the actor's business. I think they wrote the scene showing a mature Dean having EXCELLENT Leadership/Parenting skills. And Jensen played it that way.

SueB, I appreciate the thought you put into this. Unfortunately, my reaction to the point you're making here is sort of the same as my response to people who claim they didn't vote in a particular election as a "protest vote" is that it's impossible for anyone who isn't the voter in question to distinguish between a "protest" non-vote and an "I'm-too-lazy-and/or-indifferent-to-go-vote" vote. As far as the election is concerned, they are just both not there.

It's the same here for me: Dean being presumably "mature" and standing back to (to quote Dabb) let the others breathe is indistinguishable from Dean being sidelined. If I may quote William of Occam and his famous shaving equipment: "The simplest explanation that explains all of the facts is probably the correct one.”

Here, the simplest explanation unfortunately is that they pushed Dean to the side and the writer was not interested in working at actually giving him anything to do except looking foolish--I can't tell you how much I hated Cas' annoyance and insulting comment about "Then you can sleep until the cows come home". Way to ignore how Dean might really be feeling about a situation that you helped cause--which seems to be consistent with how she views the character (based on this ep and her prior tweet). I just cannot see the general audience putting as much time and effort as you have in trying to find an explanation that doesn't make the writer look bad in regard to her handling of Dean. (It's not even as if anyone in the ep acknowledge Dean's great parenting skills.)

On 3/17/2019 at 2:52 PM, SueB said:

And Sam's issues are much more tangible with having just finished burying the AUHunters. Dean's issues with having dealt with AUMichael are important and deserve unpacking but apparently AUMichael is dead -- and Dean's first priority (which is not only in character, but reasonable IMO) is to make sure the family is on a recovery path.

First, why are Sam's issues more tangible? Are we assuming that Dean just walked away and did not help in burning the dead hunters? Are we to assume that Dean did not feel any guilt about what happened to them, even though the responsibility for it falls mainly on Sam and Cas?

Second, and more importantly, why is it reasonable that Dean's first priority is, and should be (if it's "reasonable"), getting his family on the road to recovery? Why is it never their first (or second. Or third. Or...well, you see where this is going) priority to make sure that Dean is on the road to recovery? Enough of Dean coming in last in the scheme of things.

Coming after the most absurd and unheroic resolution to the Dean/Michael story--hey, no getting to jump into the Cage (or the Ma'lek box) for Dean--this episode pretending that Dean is invisible and/or not important enough for anyone to care how he's coping, well, I think that speaks plainly and clearly enough. JMO.

Edited March 18, 2019 by Lemuria

SueB · March 18, 2019

3 hours ago, Lemuria said:

SueB, I appreciate the thought you put into this. Unfortunately, my reaction to the point you're making here is sort of the same as my response to people who claim they didn't vote in a particular election as a "protest vote" is that it's impossible for anyone who isn't the voter in question to distinguish between a "protest" non-vote and an "I'm-to-lazy-and/or-indifferent-to-go-vote" vote. As far as the election is concerned, they are just both not there.

It's the same here for me: Dean being presumably "mature" and standing back to (to quote Dabb) let the others breathe is indistinguishable from Dean being sidelined. If I may quote William of Occam and his famous shaving equipment: "The simplest explanation that explains all of the facts is probably the correct one.

Here, the simplest explanation unfortunately is that they pushed Dean to the side and the writer was not interested in working at actually giving him anything to do except looked foolish--I can't tell you how much I hated Cas' annoyance and insulting comment about "Then you can sleep until the cows come home". Way to ignore how Dean might really be feeling about a situation that you helped cause--which seems to be consistent with how she views the character (based on this ep and her prior tweet). I just cannot see the general audience putting as much time and effort as you have in trying to find an explanation that doesn't make the writer look bad in regard to her handling of Dean. (It's not even as if anyone in the ep acknowledge Dean's great parenting skills.)

First, why are Sam's issues more tangible? Are we assuming that Dean just walked away and did not help in burning the dead hunters? Are we to assume that Dean did not feel any guilt about what happened to them, even though the responsibility for it falls mainly on Sam and Cas?

Second, and more importantly, why is it reasonable that Dean's first priority is, and should be (if it's "reasonable"), getting his family on the road to recovery? Why is it never their first (or second. Or third. Or...well, you see where this is going) priority to make sure that Dean is on the road to recovery? Enough of Dean coming in last in the scheme of things.

Coming after the most absurd and unheroic resolution to the Dean/Michael story--hey, no getting to jump into the Cage (or the Ma'lek box) for Dean--this episode pretending that Dean is invisible and/or not important enough for anyone to care how he's coping, well, I think that speaks plainly and clearly enough. JMO.

You look at the story and see 'sidelined' -- I look at the story and see 'maturation'. I'm not claiming my opinion is fact. I get you see things differently. We're in BvJ, I won't debate your opinion.

But you asked a could of questions, so I'll answer those.

1) Sam's issues are more 'tangible' rationale:
- The burden of leadership for the AUHunters and the outcome rests on Sam, not Dean. Sam is the one who chose to make the bunker AUHunter HQ. It wasn't that way immeidately after they got back. This was something that happened after Dean said 'yes'. So their prescence in the bunker is on Sam. It's not that Dean doesn't care that they died (see next bullet) but they were Sam's team. And it's not like Sam didn't know they COULD die - but they didn't die hunting, they died because AUMichael got free. And again, that burden lies more on Sam and Cas than Dean. It doesn't matter HOW much Dean tries to put AUMichael's escape on himself, Sam feels that burden. And the show reminded us of that Dean was giving Sam & Cas time - Dean was ready for Box/Ocean/Done. Finally, Sam's biggest fear as a leader would be to lose his team. He did.
- Dean's undoubtedly sad and feeling guilty about the AUhunters (it is not IN Dean to feel guiltless about anyone who AUMichael killed). But Billies book was 7 Billion dead unless he got into the box. They lost 7 hunters. Dean's major fear of planet-wide distruction did NOT come true. Dean WILL have dark moments about the AUHunters but his natural first reaction would be one of relief that Billie was wrong. I thought I explained it but apparently not well. Here's an analogy: Ever do that thing where you push both arms against a door jam with intense pressure and then suddenly let go? Your arms rise. Dean's enormous pressure was lifted and he's probably (at least temporarily) in a good spot RELATIVELY speaking to where he was before. Sam was terrified of losing Dean but he was not remotely under the same burder.
- Dean's major issue was with Michael. He's gone poof. Sam, while relieved Dean is okay, had to turn around and burn the bodies of his team. He needed to pick up the slack on the cases they were working. It's just more a more tangible aftermath in the near term. Long term is a different story.

2) Why are Dean's priorities 'reasonable':
- COULD Dean's priority have been looking to his own emotional recovery first? Sure. But that's not Dean Winchester. Dean's language of love is 'acts of service'. [I don't mean that in a romantic way.] But with Sam hurting as much as he was, with Jack being in a potentially sketchy place -- Dean's first NEED is to take care of the people he loves. It's not selfish to look after your own issues - but as I stated above - Dean's more likely feeling relief right now than horror at the final outcome. He'll get around to survivor's guilt eventually, but if he wants to first make sure not Sam is no longer actively spining and Jack isn't evil, that's not unrealistic. Because a spinning Sam doesn't get enough rest, can get sloppy on a hunt and get himself killed. A soulless Jack could start killing people. Dean won't take time for reflection if those 'threats' are out there against his family. I'm okay with Dean having these priorities. He's not damaging himself to take care of his family. He's not shoving his issues down. He's working things in HIS priority order based on what he thinks is his sense of urgency. Like many others, we have a saying at work: take on the alligator currently chewing on your leg, THEN deal with the one three feet away.
- Now a different writing choice could have been made. Dean's initial panic when he lost Michael could have continued. He could have internalized guilt at the 7 dead. But I sort of equate those folks to the same level of damage that happened in Jus In Bello. There's guilt, there's anger, there's horror. But Dean's seen a LOT worse. Personally I think it would have be out of character for Dean's panic to continue with the damage being relatively limited.

Note: I thought Cas was quoting Dean about 'sleeping til the cows came home' (as in, this is something Dean said in the car before they entered the bunker ... before the episode started). And honestly, I think Cas is so wound up about Jack he can barely see straight himself. If Dean seems fine, Cas will let that lay. Cas notably didn't let it lay in just the previous episode. So... I see Cas asking why Dean wasn't already in bed as not an insult but more routine banter.

Short Short answers on my perspective of "tangilble" and "reasonable":
1) Sam feels responsible for the 7 deaths, Dean is relieve he didn't personally kill 7Billion.
2) Sam's grief potentially making him sloppy/dead, Jack's potentially soullessness making him evil - these are more urgent issues to Dean because Dean is feeling pretty functional right now (although tired & hungry).

Edited March 18, 2019 by SueB
I need spell checker like air.

gonzosgirrl · March 19, 2019

All I'm seeing is, Dean is secondary, if that, and everyone else's needs are more important. That is de rigueur for this series, but doind it so blatantly and completely in the week following HIS possession is egregious, even for Dabbernatural. No amount of rationalizing will make that okay for me.

ahrtee · March 19, 2019

1 hour ago, SueB said:

You look at the story and see 'sidelined' -- I look at the story and see 'maturation'. I'm not claiming my opinion is fact. I get you see things differently. We're in BvJ, I won't debate your opinion.

Short Short answers on my perspective of "tangilble" and "reasonable":
1) Sam feels responsible for the 7 deaths, Dean is relieve he didn't personally kill 7Billion.
2) Sam's grief potentially making him sloppy/dead, Jack's potentially soullessness making him evil - these are more urgent issues to Dean because Dean is feeling pretty functional right now (although tired & hungry).

As @gonzosgirrl said, this is rationalization for something not shown. I'm honestly happy that you are enjoying this story, and I wish I could feel the same; but the fact is that nothing that you mentioned was addressed, shown or even hinted at in the show itself. Everything you say is based on your interpretation of how you think Dean is feeling and reacting. And while I may agree with you on Dean's character, it's more than frustrating not to have any validation or canon proof that that really is what the writers were intending. If they went to all the trouble of showing how Sam/Cas/Jack were feeling, why should they ignore Dean? I don't believe that they trust the Deanfans to understand where they're coming from, because that would be kind of insulting to the Sam/Cas/Jack fans if they felt they have to spell it out for them.

Jensen can express shades of emotion with just a look, but they didn't even give him that. I could have accepted traumatized but trying to carry on, worried about the others, or even pushing everything back to deal with later, but we got nothing, all the way through the entire episode.

So I appreciate your way of looking at things, and truly wish I had faith enough in the writers to believe they have more in mind than WYSIWYG, but I'm afraid I don't.

Edited March 19, 2019 by ahrtee
Clarifying.

Myrelle · March 19, 2019

4 hours ago, Lemuria said:

SueB, I appreciate the thought you put into this. Unfortunately, my reaction to the point you're making here is sort of the same as my response to people who claim they didn't vote in a particular election as a "protest vote" is that it's impossible for anyone who isn't the voter in question to distinguish between a "protest" non-vote and an "I'm-too-lazy-and/or-indifferent-to-go-vote" vote. As far as the election is concerned, they are just both not there.

It's the same here for me: Dean being presumably "mature" and standing back to (to quote Dabb) let the others breathe is indistinguishable from Dean being sidelined. If I may quote William of Occam and his famous shaving equipment: "The simplest explanation that explains all of the facts is probably the correct one.”

Here, the simplest explanation unfortunately is that they pushed Dean to the side and the writer was not interested in working at actually giving him anything to do except looking foolish--I can't tell you how much I hated Cas' annoyance and insulting comment about "Then you can sleep until the cows come home". Way to ignore how Dean might really be feeling about a situation that you helped cause--which seems to be consistent with how she views the character (based on this ep and her prior tweet). I just cannot see the general audience putting as much time and effort as you have in trying to find an explanation that doesn't make the writer look bad in regard to her handling of Dean. (It's not even as if anyone in the ep acknowledge Dean's great parenting skills.)

First, why are Sam's issues more tangible? Are we assuming that Dean just walked away and did not help in burning the dead hunters? Are we to assume that Dean did not feel any guilt about what happened to them, even though the responsibility for it falls mainly on Sam and Cas?

Second, and more importantly, why is it reasonable that Dean's first priority is, and should be (if it's "reasonable"), getting his family on the road to recovery? Why is it never their first (or second. Or third. Or...well, you see where this is going) priority to make sure that Dean is on the road to recovery? Enough of Dean coming in last in the scheme of things.

Coming after the most absurd and unheroic resolution to the Dean/Michael story--hey, no getting to jump into the Cage (or the Ma'lek box) for Dean--this episode pretending that Dean is invisible and/or not important enough for anyone to care how he's coping, well, I think that speaks plainly and clearly enough. JMO.

Wow.

This.

So much.

This post stands on it's own forever and always, IMO.

Kudos, LEMORIA.

And it's why I SO! want to see Jensen in something else and with other writers.

But I also understand why he would want to stay. He's very, very comfortable and $ talks and that's a very powerful combination.

But I think that Bacchus, this year, should have told Jensen something, too.

He should have the flexibility to be able to do things outside of SPN at this point, especially if he gives them enough notice.

Edited March 19, 2019 by Myrelle
Revision

Myrelle · March 19, 2019

45 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

All I'm seeing is, Dean is secondary, if that, and everyone else's needs are more important. That is de rigueur for this series, but doind it so blatantly and completely in the week following HIS possession is egregious, even for Dabbernatural. No amount of rationalizing will make that okay for me.

IA.

And then some.

Casseiopeia · March 19, 2019

We just had an episode where a snake had the most tragic story....they might have well just dug Garth out of the trunk and let him drive Jack around. Jensen could have taken the entire week off then.

tessathereaper · March 19, 2019

5 hours ago, Lemuria said:

not interested in working at actually giving him anything to do except looking foolish--I can't tell you how much I hated Cas' annoyance and insulting comment about "Then you can sleep until the cows come home". Way to ignore how Dean might really be feeling about a situation that you helped cause--which seems to be consistent with how she views the character (based on this ep and her prior tweet). I just cannot see the general audience putting as much time and effort as you have in trying to find an explanation that doesn't make the writer look bad in regard to her handling of Dean. (It's not even as if anyone in the ep acknowledge Dean's great parenting skills.)

First, why are Sam's issues more tangible? Are we assuming that Dean just walked away and did not help in burning the dead hunters? Are we to assume that Dean did not feel any guilt about what happened to them, even though the responsibility for it falls mainly on Sam and Cas?

Second, and more importantly, why is it reasonable that Dean's first priority is, and should be (if it's "reasonable"), getting his family on the road to recovery? Why is it never their first (or second. Or third. Or...well, you see where this is going) priority to make sure that Dean is on the road to recovery? Enough of Dean coming in last in the scheme of things.

Coming after the most absurd and unheroic resolution to the Dean/Michael story--hey, no getting to jump into the Cage (or the Ma'lek box) for Dean--this episode pretending that Dean is invisible and/or not important enough for anyone to care how he's coping, well, I think that speaks plainly and clearly enough. JMO.

1 hour ago, gonzosgirrl said:

All I'm seeing is, Dean is secondary, if that, and everyone else's needs are more important. That is de rigueur for this series, but doind it so blatantly and completely in the week following HIS possession is egregious, even for Dabbernatural. No amount of rationalizing will make that okay for me.

34 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

As @gonzosgirrl said, this is rationalization for something not shown. I'm honestly happy that you are enjoying this story, and I wish I could feel the same; but the fact is that nothing that you mentioned was addressed, shown or even hinted at in the show itself. Everything you say is based on your interpretation of how you think Dean is feeling and reacting. And while I may agree with you on Dean's character, it's more than frustrating not to have any validation or canon proof that that really is what the writers were intending. If they went to all the trouble of showing how Sam/Cas/Jack were feeling, why should they ignore Dean? I don't believe that they trust the Deanfans to understand where they're coming from, because that would be kind of insulting to the Sam/Cas/Jack fans if they felt they have to spell it out for them.

Jensen can express shades of emotion with just a look, but they didn't even give him that. I could have accepted traumatized but trying to carry on, worried about the others, or even pushing everything back to deal with later, but we got nothing, all the way through the entire episode.

So I appreciate your way of looking at things, and truly wish I had faith enough in the writers to believe they have more in mind than WYSIWYG, but I'm afraid I don't.

There is no reason to have faith in the writers, imo, they haven't earned it. I mean, never mind how they write the show which hast gotten worse and worse IMO(hell they are proud of not watching the past episodes of their own show), just look at how they express themselves in interviews and on twitter? We KNOW how they think and they clearly do not think of Dean has being worth a look into.

No he needs to go stand in a corner/get off the screen so other characters(including the other lead character who has always gotten just as much screen time and IMO even more plotline than Dean has) can have "breathing room". Dean has a "trauma kink", Dean has "immunity". etc, etc AKA all excuses for why they don't feel Dean has real feelings(...er in a fictional sense:)) which deserve respect and why they don't have write him as anything but stupid comic relief who even the other characters don't seem to think has genuine feelings(Cas' "you can sleep til the cows come home" comment), and the 5th wheel character in their stories to prop up and chauffeur whoever needs it that week in the B or C storyline. And this happens the episode after his "major storyline"(which was mostly relegated to nothingness) ended with a big, empty whimper.

There always, always seems to be some excuse for why Dean's trauma, Dean's feelings, Dean's emotions, Dean's storylines don't need to come first, don't need to be explained, don't need to be acknowledged overtly on screen. I've literally been hearing this since like Season 3 and there is just zero excuse for it anymore, IMO. Why is there always time for everyone else's trauma/emotions/feelings/storylines?

Edited March 19, 2019 by tessathereaper

tessathereaper · March 19, 2019

22 hours ago, SueB said:

As I understand it:

Put Baby on lockdown, killed off Cas, and killed off Bobby (not positive on this one). Leaving J2 to carry them entire load of the show by mid S7. In January of S7, Gamble was still ‘in charge’ but Carver was hired to replace her the next year. So at Carver’s insistence, Cas was back before the end of S7. Baby was back in the finale (which may or may not have been Carver).

I think they liked Sera but I distinctly recall both J’s making a comment about binge watchers being ‘patient’ with the show during S7.

As I recall they actually brought Singer back in to co-run the show mid-Season 6, though it was more in a financial/logistical capacity(she kept running over budget and not giving the BTS workers enough time to do their jobs - a lot of what they do means they need to know a decent amount ahead of time in order to scout locations, make costumes, gets certain types of props, she'd make changes last minute, etc)

Cambion · March 19, 2019

2

5 hours ago, Lemuria said:

Here, the simplest explanation unfortunately is that they pushed Dean to the side and the writer was not interested in working at actually giving him anything to do except looking foolish--I can't tell you how much I hated Cas' annoyance and insulting comment about "Then you can sleep until the cows come home". Way to ignore how Dean might really be feeling about a situation that you helped cause--which seems to be consistent with how she views the character (based on this ep and her prior tweet). I just cannot see the general audience putting as much time and effort as you have in trying to find an explanation that doesn't make the writer look bad in regard to her handling of Dean. (It's not even as if anyone in the ep acknowledge Dean's great parenting skills.)

Actually, whether intended by the writer or not, I think this scene is more an indictment of Cas than anything else. He's returned - at least at that moment - to his original dick with wings self. And it just shows that he's self-absorbed. Ditto for Sam, on the self-absorbed front, but I willingly give Sam a pass on that because he lost people and that's going to give him a good reason to avoid thinking about how this outcome with Michael is down to him coercing Dean.

5 hours ago, Lemuria said:

Second, and more importantly, why is it reasonable that Dean's first priority is, and should be (if it's "reasonable"), getting his family on the road to recovery? Why is it never their first (or second. Or third. Or...well, you see where this is going) priority to make sure that Dean is on the road to recovery? Enough of Dean coming in last in the scheme of things.

Coming after the most absurd and unheroic resolution to the Dean/Michael story--hey, no getting to jump into the Cage (or the Ma'lek box) for Dean--this episode pretending that Dean is invisible and/or not important enough for anyone to care how he's coping, well, I think that speaks plainly and clearly enough. JMO.

And as far as this ... Dean NEVER worries about himself first. Until he is satisfied that everyone around him is okay he suppresses everything. He'll bottle it up, we'll see everyone else get resolved, then we just might see what's going on inside him. I mean, yeah, sounds like this is a case of the writers accidentally writing something IN character for him -- or not -- who knows. But even a monkey prodding a keyboard will occasionally type a real word.

tessathereaper · March 19, 2019

On 3/16/2019 at 12:07 AM, SueB said:

I think Sam’s leadership journey is just beginning. Yes, he made obvious rookie mistakes — trying to substitute tech for experience (for example). Once they had the ‘buddy’ rule, I felt Sam had a good system for the AUHunters. He was balancing his life/responsibilities and they were making a difference. Win/win. But they were obviously there as narrative chum ripe for tragedy. And so now Sam is going to have to work through this. He inspired Maggie, he inspired others. I hope Sam doesn’t give up. I think long term he has the right idea - organize the hunters to help each other.

Dean is still the unambiguous leader of TFW 2.0. Leadership comes naturally to him. He has referent authority based on his track record. But he’s never really been sparked by the idea of an organized group. He’s content to let Sam work that. And he’s smart enough to know that it’s a good idea.

So, I fully expect that eventually Sam will work through this and continue his efforts.

In short, Sam has made mistakes but he’s NOT a failure*. He has inspired loyalty. He’s inspired people to save others. They could have all floated away by now. I expect they will rebuild.

*And Cas is also NOT a failure but he was burned too badly to try again anytime soon IMO. I’d love to see him take leadership of Heaven one day. But not until the series is over.

I do agree with you that the final damage caused by AUMichael falls heavily on Sam and Cas. They were not actively working options. They were resisting Dean’s solution. When Dean got knocked out they should have store him inside the box or at least cuffed him. But I think they feel that guilt. I will be happier if they wrestle with it more openly.

Sam was terrible, he wasn't believable at all. He had no feeling of authority. I agree with the person who said he came across as middle management at best and not particularly good middle management.

They never explained why the hell the AU hunters were following "Chief" in the first place, never mind with such loyalty. They said he was a leader, they tried to have other characters prop him up as a leader("oh you were born to do this"), but what they showed of him as a leader, IMO was a failure. Just saying a thing is(sort of like the underwear gnomes 1. Steal Underwear 2. ????? 3. Profit LOL in this case it's 1. We say Sam is a leader 2. ???? 3. Sam is thus a leader) without anything behind it to support doesn't make it real, it just makes it bad writing and characterization. It can work in maybe Season 1 of a show when the characters and their pasts are brand new, but not in Season 14 where you know them, their backgrounds and heck in this case we've seen them grow since they were in their early and mid 20s. And in no way shape or form was Sam growing into a leader.

They don't need some "hunter army" and IMO I don't agree that Dean never cottoned to the idea, he neither cottoned on or off the idea because he was never given the option in the sense of this very obvious ploy on Dabb's part, but whenever there was a group, until Dabbnatural, whether it was a group of hunters or a group of strangers who happened to be caught up in some supernatural situation, whether they were young or whether they were old, of any sort of various sizes, Dean lead it and he did it naturally and he did it that even when he was far younger than Sam is now.

He also generally did it under far more trying circumstances(as in everyone didn't just fall into place calling him "Chief" and being super loyal, he generally had to do something to earn their respect in some way).

Dean didn't show any aversion to doing that, that's IMO re-writing history, in fact he was...wait for it.... a NATURAL at it. If there was group, he naturally became the leader of it. So there was no suggestion he was averse to the idea of being a leader to a group of people.

AwesomO4000 · March 19, 2019

6 hours ago, Lemuria said:

It's the same here for me: Dean being presumably "mature" and standing back to (to quote Dabb) let the others breathe is indistinguishable from Dean being sidelined. 1) If I may quote William of Occam and his famous shaving equipment: "The simplest explanation that explains all of the facts is probably the correct one.”

Here, the simplest explanation unfortunately is that they pushed Dean to the side and the writer was not interested in working at actually giving him anything to do except looking foolish--I can't tell you how much I hated Cas' annoyance and insulting comment about "Then you can sleep until the cows come home". Way to ignore how Dean might really be feeling about a situation that you helped cause--which seems to be consistent with how she views the character (based on this ep and her prior tweet). I just cannot see the general audience putting as much time and effort as you have in trying to find an explanation that doesn't make the writer look bad in regard to her handling of Dean. 2) (It's not even as if anyone in the ep acknowledge Dean's great parenting skills.)

3) First, why are Sam's issues more tangible? Are we assuming that Dean just walked away and did not help in burning the dead hunters? Are we to assume that Dean did not feel any guilt about what happened to them, even though the responsibility for it falls mainly on Sam and Cas?

1) and 3) I somewhat agree with the simplest explanation part, but I disagree on what that simplest explanation is. For me, the writers aren't "ignoring" Dean's reaction because they don't think Dean is important, or they don't think that Dean has any feelings on the issue. I think the writers are focusing on Sam's issues, because, as you said "even though the responsibility for it falls on Sam and Castiel." Bingo. The simplest thing to do then? Focus on how Sam feels guilty, because the show agrees that Sam has more responsibility for what happened. So why make things more complicated and not simple by also focusing on some guilt that Dean might feel for something that the writers feel isn't really Dean's fault? That would complicate things... and likely earn them a "why does Dean's have to feel guilty? This isn't even his fault." How to avoid that? Make it simple. Show Sam feeling guilty, because the writers think Sam has reason to feel guilty. That's my "simplest explanation," and considering that my simplest explanation is different than others' simplest explanation is a pretty good argument that either there isn't necessarily a simple explanation or that if there is one, we don't necessarily know which "simplest explanation" is the one the writers were going for. Otherwise everyone would have come to the same simplest conclusion.

2) For me, that's what the "Jack looks up to you" stuff was all about. Actually in my opinion, it looks more like the writers think that the Dean/Jack relationship is the more important one. Jack went from being associated with Sam to looking up to Dean first and foremost.

Quote

Second, and more importantly, why is it reasonable that Dean's first priority is, and should be (if it's "reasonable"), getting his family on the road to recovery? Why is it never their first (or second. Or third. Or...well, you see where this is going) priority to make sure that Dean is on the road to recovery? Enough of Dean coming in last in the scheme of things.

In my opinion, I don't see much leeway for how Sam and Castiel could show Dean their concern and/or make him a priority in a way that is both acceptable and in character. Generally when Sam tries to help Dean, he's accused of "pushing" rather than helping ...Or projecting his feelings onto Dean or some other supposedly selfish thing. He's often accused of not just letting Dean deal with things in his own time and asking for help if he needs it. Sam and Castiel already know how Dean feels about this - "I told you..." - In my opinion, either of them asking Dean if he's alright could very well be interpreted as falling into inferring that Dean would have a reason to feel guilty about what happened... not something Sam or Castiel would want to do, in my opinion. Better to let Dean let them know if he wants to talk, share his feelings, etc.

I also disagree that Dean is never Sam's first priority. It's just that often when Dean is Sam's first priority - some examples, imo: Sam trying to find a way to get Dean out of his deal in season 3, Sam worrying about Dean's depression in season 7, and Sam trying to find/save Dean from being a demon and then the mark of Cain in season 10 - Sam is often criticized for that, too. Dean can be Sam's first priority but only if he does it in such a way that let's Dean do exactly what he wants or generally does so in a way that actually wouldn't do much of anything at all anyway. And Sam also better not do it in a way that seems to be "pushing" ...in other words likely not to be in any way that actually looks like something Sam would do. (Because when Sam wants to help and thinks he needs to, he gets earnest about it, and backing off and just watching Dean suffer in silence while he knows Dean is suffering is likely not going to be a thing Sam wants to do. He'll do it - "Everybody Loves a Clown" - but not before there's been drama, pushback, and consequences.)

2 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

All I'm seeing is, Dean is secondary, if that, and everyone else's needs are more important. That is de rigueur for this series, but doind it so blatantly and completely in the week following HIS possession is egregious, even for Dabbernatural. No amount of rationalizing will make that okay for me.

When has possession ever really been dwelt upon by the show? Even when Sam was dealing with his Lucifer hallucinations, the general tone was that Sam was zen about it while Dean was the one who they needed to worry about. Later it was no big deal that Sam lend his home to Lucifer and work with him. Gadreel - same thing. Sam went fairly quickly from it being a horrible experience to Gadreel being a "misunderstood" ally. Meg, of all people, became a talking buddy Sam shared personal information with about the supposed love of his life that he likely didn't even share with Dean (me: No, just no.) Is there anyone who possessed Sam that the writers didn't make him be allies or friends with at some point?

I think it was pretty similar with Castiel and Lucifer also... didn't Castiel have to help save Lucifer even?

I see this less as the show ignoring the possession effects because it's Dean, and more because that's often what they do anyway no matter who it is being possessed. Dean may even come out of it a little better in some way in that maybe the writers won't make Dean be allies or friends with Michael.

1 hour ago, Casseiopeia said:

We just had an episode where a snake had the most tragic story....they might have well just dug Garth out of the trunk and let him drive Jack around. Jensen could have taken the entire week off then.

Jack doesn't look up to Garth. He looks up to Dean.

tessathereaper · March 19, 2019

1 hour ago, SueB said:

All three quotes are responses to me, hence I thought I was part of the conversation.

Of course you are part of the conversation, wasn't trying to exclude, but I'm not sure why you would have felt like you had to take that one single line from the post as if I was saying to you, personally, that you felt that way when none of the posts quoted were even yours. I did quote and respond to one of your posts later. It was more I was mostly agreeing with them in things I saw in their responses, as opposed to disagreeing with you, which is why I quoted their posts.

But for that, I personally don't think we should have to work that hard to see or figure out or find something worthwhile in Dean's storylines. I don't think we should have to watch it a second time or third to find something interesting in it, most of which isn't even text but sort of "hey maybe this is what they mean". That's great for fanfic, but frankly Dean is supposed to one of the two lead characters on the show and I want it and him on screen, canon, acting it out, saying the words. I want him to have stuff to do that's related to HIS storyline, not reliant on propping up everyone else's.

I mean Michael ultimately imo just ended up being the vehicle for which NougatSue could lose his soul and go dark beige. Which is why they could devote so little time to Michael himself - it wasn't about Michael, it wasn't really about Michael's affect on Dean, it was about having that moment where we find out "hey it isn't Dean's storyline after all, it's Nougat's!" I think Dean's role in the storyline, one of the lead characters, was nothing but a minimally used red herring.

It is about NougatSue's humanity or lack thereof, it was about Sam's leadership(or IMO very serious lack thereof), it really had nothing to do with Dean beyond being an excuse for the writing to sideline him. It ended up having nothing to do with Dean and his own trauma(of which there was zero evidence in this past episode, even "lurking") from the experience, it was about everyone else.

And why? Well because everyone else's trauma naturally, as usual, was so much greater than Dean's(who wasn't feeling anything except hungry and tired and not from his traumatic experience, but because Sam's keeps making them hunt). There's always a reason for why Dean's trauma isn't that bad, someone else has it worse, he can of course put it aside and should put it aside, And despite plenty of promises that something will come of it, nothing ever comes of it, except Dean getting knocked further into the background of the story, now as support for the supporting characters.

IMO this needs to change, they need to change how they write this. The whole Dean's family first thing is beyond old as characterization and at this point it's just an excuse for the writers to not have to write any of this for the character.

Let's put it this way, you think Leader Sam is success, this is a good change for his character, it's growth etc even though IMO he never showed any real interest in or talent for it in the past. So why in the world is it fine for Dean to kept in the "Dean Family Caretaker" characterization? "But it's Dean's character" - IMO its only and only ever was, a part of his character and they have been slowly relegating him to that being ALL his character.

I want this to change. imo it's well past time for this characterization to change, for Dean to grow beyond this. I want Dean to be treated as a full character, not just as the caretaker of his family, who tend to turn on him at the first sign he isn't doing what they want him to do.

Dean IS a natural born leader, he always has been shown as such until Dabbnatural, Dean IS a brilliant hunter and strategist, Dean IS smart, creatively smart, he knows his damn lore(they seem to have totally forgotten about how good he was with remembering spells even when he'd never seen them before and with knowing plant lore and symbology, if anyone was the expert with that it was him, not Sam), he doesn't need the world "liturgical" explained for him, he grew up with a pastor as one of the closest family friends they had - it's time for that to be what his character finishes growing into, for that to be HIS consistent characterization.

If there is something to emphasize that is what they should be emphasizing, not Dean as the team Mom, even for auxiliarly members like Rowena. Or heck his OWN mother, he freaking ends up mothering his own mother(because god knows she doesn't really mother her own kids). At this point in time that should be a small part of his characterization, not the main gist of it. Something that informs the character Dean and his choices, not the whole shebang and the excuse for everything they don't write for the character.

It's also well beyond time for them to retire "dumb Dean" for good, it has no place in the story anymore, IMO. Dean's perfectly capable of being funny without being stupid or crude. He's IMO actually being written as LESS mature now in his behavior than he was ten years ago.

Edited March 19, 2019 by tessathereaper

Sign In

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

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Aeryn13

BabySpinach

BabySpinach

Posted Images

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment