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

[Aeryn13]

I enjoyed the ship once upon a time and even today, they don`t bother me at all but the show has never even vaguely implied an endgame possibility. I was there for the Johnlock meltdowns and the Sterek anger and thought the same thing. The last time I even was dubious for a second on "wow, are they going there?" was the Merlin Finale a couple years back. Which, they made canon as much as they possibly could without making it canon.

But SPN has far greater problems. I would hope the final Season features some decent friendship scenes between Dean and Cas, just because once upon a time they used to crackle and I`ve always been disappointed to see that spark go.     

[tessathereaper]

3 hours ago, catrox14 said:

I'm not gonna get into a long discussion of it here, because I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I'm just saying that those who see it as endgame won't ever see it textually Canon and I don't think Dabb has been writing or directing his staff for that to be endgame. I guess to me it doesn't matter about the metas or what they think because the show at best has already given me subtext Destiel and that is fine with me.

Oh I know, I'm just taking about this little group, who is pretty much the only one I've seen who LOVES Dabb and thinks everything is great. :)  

And same, when it comes to non-canonical ships, hey whatever anyone likes is good with me but it's silly to act like show is saying something it hasn't been and everyone else is just too blind to see catch the subtext and mirroring.  I have always really liked Dean and Castiel's friendship, the idea that they have a special bond because of how they met and everything they've been through but it's still IMO never been presented as more than friendship, however special it is.  

[raven]

Get back on topic, please.  Don't talk about other fans and their expectations.

[ZennyKenny]

On 3/26/2019 at 6:38 PM, Lastcall said:

He wrote a comic, got on the show by teaming up with a better writer then got show runner because he was the last writer standing. That’s why him and Berrens are so desperate for a spin off. They know the gravy train is over and no one is going to hire the guy who killed supernatural and treated a highly industry loved actor like dirt.

Well I'M certainly never going to go near anything with Dabb's name on it! I sincerely hope that he is forever branded as "the guy who killed Supernatural".

[DeeDee79]

16 minutes ago, ZennyKenny said:

Well I'M certainly never going to go near anything with Dabb's name on it! I sincerely hope that he is forever branded as "the guy who killed Supernatural".

Ditto!

[Lastcall]

44 minutes ago, ZennyKenny said:

Well I'M certainly never going to go near anything with Dabb's name on it! I sincerely hope that he is forever branded as "the guy who killed Supernatural".

It’s not going to help him now that the major entertainment outlets are printing Jensen’s comments verbatim with titles like “the real reason Supernatural is ending.”

[DeeDee79]

1 minute ago, Lastcall said:

It’s not going to help him now that the major entertainment outlets are printing Jensen’s comments verbatim with titles like “the real reason Supernatural is ending.”

Good! 

[juppschmitz]

4 hours ago, Lastcall said:

It’s not going to help him now that the major entertainment outlets are printing Jensen’s comments verbatim with titles like “the real reason Supernatural is ending.”

Do you have sources?

[SueB]

1 hour ago, juppschmitz said:

Do you have sources?

Google "Supernatural" for the last 24 hrs.  There's literally 5-10 websites with that title.  EW, E!, TV Guide, TVLine, etc...

and Cosmo of all places! https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/tv/a27010030/superantural-final-season-jensen-ackles-jared-padalecki/

Edited April 2, 2019 by SueB

[juppschmitz]

21 minutes ago, SueB said:

Google "Supernatural" for the last 24 hrs.  There's literally 5-10 websites with that title.  EW, E!, TV Guide, TVLine, etc...

Well, all the ones I could find had the same about "fizzling out" and the "writing on the wall".

There weren't any that I found that gave any "real" real reasons, like what people here might think, i.e. blaming Dabb and his showrunning direction...

[SueB]

5 hours ago, juppschmitz said:

Well, all the ones I could find had the same about "fizzling out" and the "writing on the wall".

There weren't any that I found that gave any "real" real reasons, like what people here might think, i.e. blaming Dabb and his showrunning direction...

The ‘fizzle out’ quote along with a running out of gas analogy is ‘the reason’.  Their involvement in storyboarding next year and Jensen’s ‘no guarantees’ that the boys will be listened too is another basis for ‘the reason’ narrative being developed.  Finally, at a different point he reiterates the lack of direction on how to play Michael.  He further mentioned that just when Jensen ‘found’ the character, he was killed off.

Jensen said nothing directly negative about  Dabb in the videos. 

Edited April 2, 2019 by SueB

[ILoveReading]

4 minutes ago, SueB said:

Jensen said nothing directly negative about  Dabb in the videos

He did tell the story of Dabb blowing him off again when asked about Michael.

IMO, the fact that they want creative control speaks volumes.  They have always said in the past when asked about producer credits they've always said they aren't writers and don't want to be. 

Between Jared comment about putitng a beloved pet to sleep and Jensen saying that the writing was one the wall about when to end it if they didnt' want to fizzle out, and the car analogy they didn't actually have to mention Dabb's name to get the message across about what they think of the writing.

[Aeryn13]

Yup, it's not exactly complimentary to the current writing staff. Of course they wouldn't literally name names. Even Mark Sheppard only got more candid after he left the show. And he is more outspoken in those matters then the Js will ever be.

Does anyone really honestly think that, from what je said, Jensen was happy and satisfied with the way Michael played out? Does he need to come out more clearly like with the wire fight? I mean even with that I read how he didn't really mind which IMO cannot be supported. 

[Myrelle]

11 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

He did tell the story of Dabb blowing him off again when asked about Michael

Jensen also said flat out that he had just "found" the character-he mentioned the scene(in Nihilism) when he was in cuffs at the bunker and Cas and Jack were discussing Michael-right in time for him to be killed off.

And his frustration was very clear when he said that last part. No joking there, for sure.

14 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

Yup, it's not exactly complimentary to the current writing staff. Of course they wouldn't literally name names. Even Mark Sheppard only got more candid after he left the show. And he is more outspoken in those matters then the Js will ever be.

Does anyone really honestly think that, from what je said, Jensen was happy and satisfied with the way Michael played out? Does he need to come out more clearly like with the wire fight? I mean even with that I read how he didn't really mind which IMO cannot be supported. 

I was genuinely surprised at how much WAS said at the con. 

[ILoveReading]

9 minutes ago, Myrelle said:

And his frustration was very clear when he said that last part. No joking there, for sure.

I noticed that too,,

Nilishm makes a certian kind of sense if Jared and Jensen signed one year contracts.  (Ruth mentioned discussions about possibilty ending the show this year).  They were probably trying to entice Jensen by bringing back the story line.  Once he signed a contract for 15 they dropped it again and Jensen, finally said "I'd done."

[Pondlass1]

I'm wondering if Dabb will even be the showrunner for season 15? 

[catrox14]

Just now, Pondlass1 said:

I'm wondering if Dabb will even be the showrunner for season 15? 

If they know it's ending he'll probably retain showrunner title along with Singer.

And as an aside, I do think Singer once again is the Teflon showrunner. As much as I harangue Dabb, I won't exclude Singer from the criticism either. He probably has as much if not more power as Dabb for story and on site production. Imean he could have killed the wire fight if he wanted given he directed the episode. So for me, Jensen was throwing Singer under the bus as well and that for me is an even bigger surprise. Like maybe he is really chastising Singer more than Dabb on the production points. I almost don't blame Dabb regarding Jensen asking for guidance on Michael other than story, but Singer works with actors all the time and he could have helped as well. I really wonder if Singer and Jensen are all that friendly now. I know he says he admires Singer as a director but that wire fight really seemed to embarrass Jensen so much that he openly mocks. I really want to know what separates Dabb and Singer now? I used to think it was writing but Singer has written an episode with Dabb, unless he's just putting his name on it for reasons.

And Singer thinks Dean is dumb and uncouth. So Dean is kind of screwed in many ways by both Dabb and Singer.

[PAForrest]

55 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

Does anyone really honestly think that, from what je said, Jensen was happy and satisfied with the way Michael played out? Does he need to come out more clearly like with the wire fight? I mean even with that I read how he didn't really mind which IMO cannot be supported. 

I thought Jensen made it very clear he was not satisfied at all with the way it was wrapped up, nor was he happy about Dabb's dismissive attitude about how he should play Michael at the beginning of the shooting year.

So if Jensen was never the BI (still won't know until it's revealed), wasn't going to leave at the end of season 14 despite the perfect set up for Dean to do so with Billie's books and the box, then we're back to Dabb and Yockey simply throwing away a strong plot point and storyline, kicking Dean off the field right before the winning touchdown, and handing off the ball off to Nougat Sue just 'cuz. And that's bad showrunning. No wonder Jensen looks done and sounds ready to move on.

ETA: Though catrox is right, Singer is really every bit to blame as Dabb. He has zero vision, never had any.

As for whether Dabb will stay on, I'm guessing yes since it's the last season. However, there's a possibility that Singer's significant others, Buck-Lemming, will get the gig since it's their last chance to be completely in charge. We'll know soon enough.

Edited April 2, 2019 by PAForrest
addition

[catrox14]

1 minute ago, PAForrest said:

ox, then we're back to Dabb and Yockey simply throwing away a strong plot point and storyline, kicking Dean off the field right before the winning touchdown, and handing off the ball off to Nougat Sue just 'cuz. And that's bad showrunning. 

If I look back at Yockey's episodes he gave Dean more of a voice than he's had in a long time. Even in Ada Fox he let Dean speak his mind to Mary and didn't walk it back really. Advanced Thanatology he gave Dean a voice about his grief and that he may have been giving up because he lost so many people. He gave him some power in a way that I think Dean lost. He gave Jensen some brilliant stuff as Michael. That said, I think Dabb, Singer, et Al were merely using Dean/Michael to set up Jack's SL which pisses me off. It was all bait and switch.
Which I don't put on Yockey unless he's been the stealth showrunner which I don't think is the case. I think his shift with Dean was overall story driven vs him saying, hey look let's kill off Michael. I think that is Dabb and Singer.

[Myrelle]

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

If I look back at Yockey's episodes he gave Dean more of a voice than he's had in a long time. Even in Ada Fox he let Dean speak his mind to Mary and didn't walk it back really. Advanced Thanatology he gave Dean a voice about his grief and that he may have been giving up because he lost so many people. He gave him some power in a way that I think Dean lost. He gave Jensen some brilliant stuff as Michael. That said, I think Dabb, Singer, et Al were merely using Dean/Michael to set up Jack's SL which pisses me off. It was all bait and switch.
Which I don't put on Yockey unless he's been the stealth showrunner which I don't think is the case. I think his shift with Dean was overall story driven vs him saying, hey look let's kill off Michael. I think that is Dabb and Singer.

The writing on this show has always been suspect to me in that if a writer comes on the show and shows favoritism towards writing for Dean/JA over other characters on the show, in any way, shape, or form, well they either change their ways fast or they disappear from the writers room.

And this has been happening from very early on, IMO, starting with Shiban and Tucker and even Cathryn Humphries(all of whom I always saw as simply writing in a more balanced fashion for the lead actors, tbh), but also including other less notable ones-like Brett Matthews and the two Blackers who wrote The Mentalists.

That kind of thing has always seemed shady to me about the Supernatural writers room.

I think that the only extended period of time that *I* would consider as having shown Dean/JA with a somewhat "favored" status through the actual writing of the show, would have been during S9b through 10,  and at the end of Carver's reign and tenure.

And I can definitely buy that it's always been a showrunner thing.

I'm just glad that Jensen has finally seen the light, but very sad that it had to take Dabbernatural to show it to him.

Like some others here, I now just hope that Dean can go out with his more heroic core characteristics better intact than they have been for the last three seasons and that he will push for that in the writers room more than anything else, beginning with his leadership abilities being reinstated unequivocally. 

FWIW, I really think that Dabb just lost his mind and most of his sense after The Wayward Sues weren't picked up and Singer has just gotten old and doesn't care about the show or the quality of it anymore or as much as he might have at the beginning and has fallen back to seeing the brothers just as the more two dimensional cardboard cutout figures that Kripke envisioned them as when he first pitched the show to the network. Why he's chosen to ignore everything that's happened with the two characters since then is anyone's guess-but I wouldn't rule out crotchetiness from old age and/or early stage dementia because that's what it looks like to me.

Edited April 2, 2019 by Myrelle
Revision

[SueB]

3 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

Yup, it's not exactly complimentary to the current writing staff. Of course they wouldn't literally name names. Even Mark Sheppard only got more candid after he left the show. And he is more outspoken in those matters then the Js will ever be.

Does anyone really honestly think that, from what je said, Jensen was happy and satisfied with the way Michael played out? Does he need to come out more clearly like with the wire fight? I mean even with that I read how he didn't really mind which IMO cannot be supported. 

I was just answering @juppschmitz question because she was looking for more.

And because of the subsequent posts... I did bring up all of those points.  Perhaps if I had broken them up and bolded?
 

Quote

The ‘fizzle out’ quote along with a running out of gas analogy is ‘the reason’.  

Their involvement in storyboarding next year and Jensen’s ‘no guarantees’ that the boys will be listened too is another basis for ‘the reason’ narrative being developed.  

Finally, at a different point he reiterates the lack of direction on how to play Michael.

 He further mentioned that just when Jensen ‘found’ the character, he was killed off.

Jensen said nothing directly negative about  Dabb in the videos. 

Did I actually miss anything?

Edited April 2, 2019 by SueB
added bolding

[Lastcall]

I agree that Singer hasn’t done this show any favors lately. I will never forgive him for cutting down Purgatory and Demon Dean and Jensen being screwed for the third time with Michael had to be the final straw. It’s obvious Singer wants to retire but his wife won’t let him. Singer is the only reason the duo still get work.

As for Dabb, the biggest surprise for me that came from the con was Jared’s putting down a suffering dog joke. I would love to see Dabb’s face when he found out the guy that plays his hero threw him under the bus after 4 years of Sam love letter episodes.

[Myrelle]

21 minutes ago, Lastcall said:

As for Dabb, the biggest surprise for me that came from the con was Jared’s putting down a suffering dog joke.

Tbh, I'm not so sure that was a joke.

And maybe this is just me, but I honestly felt like that was a reverse quid pro quo, albeit unintentional, for Dabb's now infamous "breathing room" statement that he made in reference to Dean's absence while Jensen was taking on Michael.

Or maybe not really reverse quid pro quo as much as kismet-and yes, especially because it was JP who said it. 

[tessathereaper]

7 minutes ago, Myrelle said:

Tbh, I'm not so sure that was a joke.

And maybe this is just me, but I honestly felt like that was a reverse quid pro quo, albeit unintentional, for Dabb's now infamous "breathing room" statement that he made in reference to Dean's absence while Jensen was taking on Michael.

Or maybe not really reverse quid pro quo as much as kismet-and yes, especially because it was JP who said it. 

Yeah  I didn't think he meant it as a joke(and as a dog lover I don't think anyone who has been through it would joke about it), in fact I was surprised JP said it, because it's really a pretty harsh commentary on how they feel about the state of the show and suggests he feels as strongly about the lack of quality of late as Jensen does.  

[AwesomO4000]

1 hour ago, Lastcall said:

I would love to see Dabb’s face when he found out the guy that plays his hero threw him under the bus after 4 years of Sam love letter episodes.

I think maybe you and I have much different concepts of "love letter."

For me, "love letter" would mean writing a positive episode that actually uses a character's personality and traits and shows them as positive rather than turning the character into something else and implying that the way he was before wasn't good enough, but now he's "fixed." To me, that's not a love letter... that's something else. It's what Carver tried to do to Sam's character also (but differently), and it didn't work nor was it a "love letter" than either, in my opinion.

2 hours ago, Myrelle said:

The writing on this show has always been suspect to me in that if a writer comes on the show and shows favoritism towards writing for Dean/JA over other characters on the show, in any way, shape, or form, well they either change their ways fast or they disappear from the writers room.

And this has been happening from very early on, IMO, starting with Shiban and Tucker and even Cathryn Humphries(all of whom I always saw as simply writing in a more balanced fashion for the lead actors, tbh), but also including other less notable ones-like Brett Matthews and the two Blackers who wrote The Mentalists.

You forgot Adam Glass who was around for quite a while until he went off to executive produce another show. I personally did not miss him since he was often pretty crappy to Sam in his writing, but I think he was a pretty pro-Dean writer. I also thought that Ben Edlund - who was also around for quite a while - was fairly pro-Dean in his writing.

Those are off the top of my head, but I'm sure I could some up with a couple more.

[Lastcall]

40 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I think maybe you and I have much different concepts of "love letter."

For me, "love letter" would mean writing a positive episode that actually uses a character's personality and traits and shows them as positive rather than turning the character into something else and implying that the way he was before wasn't good enough, but now he's "fixed." To me, that's not a love letter... that's something else. It's what Carver tried to do to Sam's character also (but differently), and it didn't work nor was it a "love letter" than either, in my opinion.

It’s all in the way you see it but I have no doubt Dabb thought he was writing love letters though he doesn’t have the skill to pull it off. The whole point of 14x1 was to show how great a leader Sam is and how terrified Hell is of him. Also, to show how he bloomed when Dean wasnt sucking up all the oxygen. From then it was his minions circling around him calling him chief and even the Ice Queen melted enough to tell him how great he was. Cut to six months later and Sam has led a second group of hunters to their deaths. 

Then you get the 300th. Sam gets the famous kill (Gary) and gets to leech off Deans past victory. He even gets the better scene with John. In all of that though (and this may have been Glynn) they portrayed the world as far better off with Sam never resuming hunting. They made it canon that John and Sam weren’t necessary to stop the apocalypse. The only thing the world needed from 2003 on was Dean hunting (as opposed to AU where he was never born). I know these things were completely unintentional by Dabb and I know he thought he was doing Sam a favor but the execution was a complete failure.

[AwesomO4000]

49 minutes ago, Lastcall said:

It’s all in the way you see it but I have no doubt Dabb thought he was writing love letters though he doesn’t have the skill to pull it off. The whole point of 14x1 was to show how great a leader Sam is and how terrified Hell is of him. Also, to show how he bloomed when Dean wasnt sucking up all the oxygen. From then it was his minions circling around him calling him chief and even the Ice Queen melted enough to tell him how great he was. Cut to six months later and Sam has led a second group of hunters to their deaths. 

Then you get the 300th. Sam gets the famous kill (Gary) and gets to leech off Deans past victory. He even gets the better scene with John. In all of that though (and this may have been Glynn) they portrayed the world as far better off with Sam never resuming hunting. They made it canon that John and Sam weren’t necessary to stop the apocalypse. The only thing the world needed from 2003 on was Dean hunting (as opposed to AU where he was never born). I know these things were completely unintentional by Dabb and I know he thought he was doing Sam a favor but the execution was a complete failure.

There's bolded stuff for the Too Long: Didn't Read among you.

You say you "know" these things, but how?

I've often been told the same thing concerning Carver. "He didn't mean to make Sam look badly..." After it keeps happening multiple times, though - and now with two different showrunners - at what point is it no longer a mistake, but an on purpose?

And the problem with 14x1 was exactly the showing Sam as this great "leader." How is that a "love letter" to Sam - the actual Sam. To make the story get to that point, they first had to knock Sam down - "The Raid" and the resulting "speech" to the hunters - by making Sam do stupid things and implying that Sam the way he was previously was just "taking the easy way out" and a loser, and and then change him into something he wasn't really... And then if that wasn't bad enough, they kept writing things that showed us that Sam couldn't be what they were trying to make him be, by giving us situations to show us exactly how Sam made a bunch of mistakes and wasn't really that good a leader... in fact even worse than he had been in the past. (example "All Hell Breaks Loose, Pt1")

Again, how is that a "love letter?"

To me it's more like a guy who says to a girl "you know I could really love you... if only you lost 30 pounds, dyed your hair blond, and got a boob job... oh, and didn't have so many opinions of your own" and then after the girl tried to do that, but unsurprisingly mostly failed, seemed dumbfounded that well, wow, that didn't quite work out right after all. My point being it wasn't a "love letter" to begin with, because if it had been, Dabb wouldn't have been trying to change Sam so much. He would have actually celebrated Sam for who he was as a character, not torn him down and tried to rebuild him the way he wanted, and then punished the character for not being able to live up to his idealized expectations.***

To me, that's not a "love letter" at all.

Meanwhile, just by implying that Dean was sucking up all of the oxygen - though that didn't look exactly how it was said to me, but okay - and the other characters can only "bloom" if he's not around means that Dean is so awesome, everyone else seems to suck in comparison. So he'll try to make Sam a little more like Dean... there that'll fix him.  Again, how is that a love letter to the other characters and especially Sam? I don't want Sam to be like Dean. I like Sam the way he is, thank you very much.

And implying that without Dean's influence, Sam would just be a total jerk - as "Lebanon" seemed to imply - is just further proof to me that Sam is not really the favored one in this regime. At least not actual Sam. With that episode, they also took the thing that Sam is now wanting to be - well until the recent episodes where apparently Sam wants "normal" again (I am so tired of that being a go to - get over it.) - and said "look, the world would be better if he wasn't a hunter." Thanks, show.

So for this fan, I'm not seeing the Sam love, at least not Sam the way Sam really is... or was before they tried to turn him into something else and then blamed him for not being able to be that something else.

*** In my opinion, Carver did something very similar, but somehow even worse.

Edited April 2, 2019 by AwesomO4000

[DeeDee79]

5 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

So for this fan, I'm not seeing the Sam love, at least not Sam the way Sam really is... or was before they tried to turn him into something else and then blamed him for not being able to be that something else.

Maybe not for you in particular but on Tumblr and Twitter there are tons of Sam fans that have heaped tons of praise on Dabb for letting Sam finally "shine" since he became showrunner.

[Aeryn13]

12 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

There's bolded stuff for the Too Long: Didn't Read among you.

You say you "know" these things, but how?

I've often been told the same thing concerning Carver. "He didn't mean to make Sam look badly..." After it keeps happening multiple times, though - and now with two different showrunners - at what point is it no longer a mistake, but an on purpose?

And the problem with 14x1 was exactly the showing Sam as this great "leader." How is that a "love letter" to Sam - the actual Sam. To make the story get to that point, they first had to knock Sam down - "The Raid" and the resulting "speech" to the hunters - by making Sam do stupid things and implying that Sam the way he was previously was just "taking the easy way out" and a loser, and and then change him into something he wasn't really... And then if that wasn't bad enough, they kept writing things that showed us that Sam couldn't be what they were trying to make him be, by giving us situations to show us exactly how Sam made a bunch of mistakes and wasn't really that good a leader... in fact even worse than he had been in the past. (example "All Hell Breaks Loose, Pt1")

Again, how is that a "love letter?"

To me it's more like a guy who says to a girl "you know I could really love you... if only you lost 30 pounds, dyed your hair blond, and got a boob job... oh, and didn't have so many opinions of your own" and then after the girl tried to do that, but unsurprisingly mostly failed, seemed dumbfounded that well, wow, that didn't quite work out right after all. My point being it wasn't a "love letter" to begin with, because if it had been, Dabb wouldn't have been trying to change Sam so much. He would have actually celebrated Sam for who he was as a character, not torn him down and tried to rebuild him the way he wanted, and then punished the character for not being able to live up to his idealized expectations.***

To me, that's not a "love letter" at all.

Meanwhile, just by implying that Dean was sucking up all of the oxygen - though that didn't look exactly how it was said to me, but okay - and the other characters can only "bloom" if he's not around means that Dean is so awesome, everyone else seems to suck in comparison. So he'll try to make Sam a little more like Dean... there that'll fix him.  Again, how is that a love letter to the other characters and especially Sam? I don't want Sam to be like Dean. I like Sam the way he is, thank you very much.

And implying that without Dean's influence, Sam would just be a total jerk - as "Lebanon" seemed to imply - is just further proof to me that Sam is not really the favored one in this regime. At least not actual Sam. With that episode, they also took the thing that Sam is now wanting to be - well until the recent episodes where apparently Sam wants "normal" again (I am so tired of that being a go to - get over it.) - and said "look, the world would be better if he wasn't a hunter." Thanks, show.

So for this fan, I'm not seeing the Sam love, at least not Sam the way Sam really is... or was before they tried to turn him into something else and then blamed him for not being able to be that something else.

*** In my opinion, Carver did something very similar, but somehow even worse.

The "tell" was how Sam was a fantastic, natural born leader. He made demons run away from him in fear. I think that was the intent. And since Dean got never acknowledged as a leader onscreen and never got to lead a larger group, I've been seeing a lot of "of course, Sam was always a leader, Dean just kept him from bis true purpose, meanwhile Dean has no leadership abilities" from fans. Where do they take it from? Dabbernatural. It's in the text and IMO it's the intent. And it works in lots of fans, too.

Episodes like Red Meat are Super!Sam whereas Dean is usually portrayed as weak and inept in Dabb episodes since he became showrunner. So he most certainly isn't writing "Dean love letters" for me.

[AwesomO4000]

30 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

So he most certainly isn't writing "Dean love letters" for me.

Didn't say he was.

But Dabb has written some strong Dean episodes also. I don't have time now to comment, however.

31 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

The "tell" was how Sam was a fantastic, natural born leader.

I generally don't buy into "tell." For me that's usually a shiny object trying to distract me from what's actually happening, and that generally doesn't work for me.

40 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Maybe not for you in particular but on Tumblr and Twitter there are tons of Sam fans that have heaped tons of praise on Dabb for letting Sam finally "shine" since he became showrunner.

I wouldn't know, because I don't go on either one and wouldn't know what to make of any of it.

[Lastcall]

1 hour ago, AwesomO4000 said:

And the problem with 14x1 was exactly the showing Sam as this great "leader." How is that a "love letter" to Sam - the actual Sam. To make the story get to that point, they first had to knock Sam down - "The Raid" and the resulting "speech" to the hunters - by making Sam do stupid things and implying that Sam the way he was previously was just "taking the easy way out" and a loser, and and then change him into something he wasn't really... And then if that wasn't bad enough, they kept writing things that showed us that Sam couldn't be what they were trying to make him be, by giving us situations to show us exactly how Sam made a bunch of mistakes and wasn't really that good a leader... in fact even worse than he had been in the past. (example "All Hell Breaks Loose, Pt1")

Again, how is that a "love letter?"

I believe Dabb considers this episode a love letter but it is based on very superficial things. I think he feels what makes Dean so popular are his hero moments and general badassness. So he gives all those things to Sam and stops giving them to Dean. Sam gets the kills, he gets a legion of worshippers, Mary says how great Sam is. The re-do the iconic colt kill and give him an old Dean kill (failing to do it better both times). Dabb seems to want to transfer the Dean love by giving all his qualities to Sam. He should have realized that Sam and Dean both have strengths and weaknesses but as a whole they are the ultimate hunter. Instead, he tilted it so one way that he killed the show. I stand by my opinion that Dabb wants Sam to be the undisputed star of Supernatural and for Dean to be recognized as the sidekick. Dabb just doesn’t have the talent to pull it off. 

I am curious though, in all the episodes since Dabb took over, when has Dean ever gotten an episode like Red Meat, the Raid or 14x1?

Edited April 2, 2019 by Lastcall

[Reganne]

2 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

So for this fan, I'm not seeing the Sam love, at least not Sam the way Sam really is... or was before they tried to turn him into something else and then blamed him for not being able to be that something else.

*** In my opinion, Carver did something very similar, but somehow even worse.

I agree.  I dont see the Sam love letter thing others seem to see.  For example, Sam hasnt really had much in terms of a storyline since season 9.  In season 13, he got knocked unconscious so much they actually had to make a joke about it on the show.  When they supposedly want to "tell" the audience Sam can be a leader, they half ass it.  They really only showed him making mistakes and he never really had a chance to shine prior to getting the entirety of his people killed.  His leadership didnt accomplish anything and ended up pointless.  The narrative relied heavily on the tell and forgot to show us Sam's abilities which is a lazy way of writing and tells me they couldnt be bothered enough to actually take the time to write something decent.

[AwesomO4000]

48 minutes ago, Lastcall said:

I am curious though, in all the episodes since Dabb took over, when has Dean ever gotten an episode like Red Meat, the Raid or 14x1?

For "Red Meat" if "Baby" is too early (since it's early season 11), then I'd say "Regarding Dean."

For "The Raid" probably none, because I don't even consider that a pro-Sam episode. I consider it a negative Sam episode. In my opinion, they wouldn't generally have Dean do something as stupid as join the British Men of Letters, say he'd get Sam on board, and then not tell Sam about it. The writers mostly do that kind of shit to Sam - in this case try to paint Sam as a "follower" who doesn't ask questions and ignores the obvious right in front of his face - and usually so they can further some kind of plot point which wouldn't work or make sense later on unless Sam does this stupid-ass thing... except it doesn't generally make sense anyway, but they treat it like it does, and expect us to forget previous show history. Yup that's Sam alright, take the easy way out and just follow along like he's always done... except not. In fact not following orders without questioning things was pretty much Sam's thing and why he rebelled against John and took the course in life he did. But sure let's throw that all out the window and make Sam a trusting "follower" just because that fits our agenda.

So I'd say that there isn't an equivalent, because I don't think they would do that sort of thing to Dean's character. Not something that would fundamentally change Dean's moral compass and make him do something shady to do it in the process.

For 14x1, I'd say "Alpha and Omega." It's not officially in Dabb's season, but was at the end of 11 and written by Dabb. In that episode we have Dean influencing the thought process of one very powerful being, changing her mind, and helping to save the world in the process and being told that he is the protector of the world by another. And this is pretty much the subject of most of the episode, not just some random throwaway scene that makes little sense thrown in there as window dressing and never remarked on again. And Dean's association with powerful beings has continued even into this season with Billie's association with Dean. Generally when a powerful being has an association with a character and gives that character respect, Dean is the character who gets it. Sam gets respect from stunt demon #3.

I personally think that the demon scene was less "oooh look at Sam" and more "good, now we don't have to explain why the demons aren't an issue this season and we can forget all about them. Whew, bullet dodged."

But I also get that miles will vary.

[gonzosgirrl]

@AwesomO4000 It will never stop amazing me that you and I are watching the exact same show. LOL! While I can appreciate what you're saying about the writing for Sam, and Sam vs Dean, I just don't see it, and I don't believe that (especially) Dabb intends me to see it that way. I don't think it's the general impression out there in the world beyond we intense fans who dissect every moment of the show, either. Read just about any 'impartial' reviews of the show on entertainment blogs and magazines, EW's and TVLine's and the like. The broad stereotypes that are Dabb's wont seem to be the prevailing opinions - strong, smart, put-upon Sam and loyal but not-too-bright, unsophisticated horn-dog Dean.

[gonzosgirrl]

17 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I personally think that the demon scene was less "oooh look at Sam" and more "good, now we don't have to explain why the demons aren't an issue this season and we can forget all about them. Whew, bullet dodged."

Except they didn't do by closing the gates of Hell, or having some higher power reign them in - they had Sam say Boo! Maybe it was an easy way out, but once again, when there was a choice of which brother to give the moment to, they chose Sam.

[DeeDee79]

3 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

when there was a choice of which brother to give the moment to, they chose Sam.

As they always seem to do.

6 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Read just about any 'impartial' reviews of the show on entertainment blogs and magazines, EW's and TVLine's and the like. The broad stereotypes that are Dabb's wont seem to be the prevailing opinions - strong, smart, put-upon Sam and loyal but not-too-bright, unsophisticated horn-dog Dean.

This is unfortunately spot on. I tend to stick to recaps and reviews on Dean friendly blogs because the ones that you've mentioned are often rage inducing.

[Lastcall]

52 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

For "Red Meat" if "Baby" is too early (since it's early season 11), then I'd say "Regarding Dean."

For "The Raid" probably none, because I don't even consider that a pro-Sam episode. I consider it a negative Sam episode. In my opinion, they wouldn't generally have Dean do something as stupid as join the British Men of Letters, say he'd get Sam on board, and then not tell Sam about it. The writers mostly do that kind of shit to Sam - in this case try to paint Sam as a "follower" who doesn't ask questions and ignores the obvious right in front of his face - and usually so they can further some kind of plot point which wouldn't work or make sense later on unless Sam does this stupid-ass thing... except it doesn't generally make sense anyway, but they treat it like it does, and expect us to forget previous show history. Yup that's Sam alright, take the easy way out and just follow along like he's always done... except not. In fact not following orders without questioning things was pretty much Sam's thing and why he rebelled against John and took the course in life he did. But sure let's throw that all out the window and make Sam a trusting "follower" just because that fits our agenda.

So I'd say that there isn't an equivalent, because I don't think they would do that sort of thing to Dean's character. Not something that would fundamentally change Dean's moral compass and make him do something shady to do it in the process.

For 14x1, I'd say "Alpha and Omega." It's not officially in Dabb's season, but was at the end of 11 and written by Dabb. In that episode we have Dean influencing the thought process of one very powerful being, changing her mind, and helping to save the world in the process and being told that he is the protector of the world by another. And this is pretty much the subject of most of the episode, not just some random throwaway scene that makes little sense thrown in there as window dressing and never remarked on again. And Dean's association with powerful beings has continued even into this season with Billie's association with Dean. Generally when a powerful being has an association with a character and gives that character respect, Dean is the character who gets it. Sam gets respect from stunt demon #3.

I personally think that the demon scene was less "oooh look at Sam" and more "good, now we don't have to explain why the demons aren't an issue this season and we can forget all about them. Whew, bullet dodged."

But I also get that miles will vary.

I thought about Regarding Dean but like many have said it really felt like a goodbye to the old Dean we all loved. It was the last Glynn episode where she was free to gush over the character. I imagine Dabb had a talk after that episode to get her to tone it down. I like to pretend she is like a hostage in the movies sneaking out a code to the Dean fans while being forced to say what her overlord commands. I think the Gog/Magog kills went completely over Dabbs head in their significants. One legend is the Messiah will kill them (Dean is the Messaiah). The other is the world would have been better if Dean just hunted by himself. There is no way Dabb wrote that, he was too focused on Zachariah and the John apologies.

I would say Dabb was in total control by Red Meat but at the same time he probably honored Carvers wishes on how to end Alpha and Omega so I’m not inclined to give credit to Dabb on that one.

Maybe a better way to put it is Dabb thinks he is writing love letters but he is failing spectacularly at it.

[Myrelle]

4 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

The "tell" was how Sam was a fantastic, natural born leader. He made demons run away from him in fear. I think that was the intent. And since Dean got never acknowledged as a leader onscreen and never got to lead a larger group, I've been seeing a lot of "of course, Sam was always a leader, Dean just kept him from bis true purpose, meanwhile Dean has no leadership abilities" from fans. Where do they take it from? Dabbernatural. It's in the text and IMO it's the intent. And it works in lots of fans, too.

Episodes like Red Meat are Super!Sam whereas Dean is usually portrayed as weak and inept in Dabb episodes since he became showrunner. So he most certainly isn't writing "Dean love letters" for me.

It was both the "tell" and the "show" in the premiere, so I don't and can't ever see how the writer intent could be seen as other than that. Miles might still vary on that, but again, I can't see how except for those that don't want to see how wrong it was of Dabb to elevate Sam in the exact way he did-that being by shitting on BOTH Jensen and Dean. On Jensen, by giving him basically nothing as Michael in the premiere(and this, after the big build-up both the fandom and Jensen had been fed at the end of S13) and on Dean,  by turning him strictly into the comic relief and/or the prop master for pretty much everyone else when he wasn't playing Michael.

Where was all the Dean was so sorely missed dialogue or even scenes that might have shown this?!-when Dean was propping Sam in his "Leadership" role? Or Jack in his soul tuberculosis role?

God, I hate Dabb for s14 as much as I hate him for 12b-more, tbh.

The only solace I can find in all of this is, yes, that it all seems to be coming out as truth now that Jensen(at least) was/is extremely unhappy with the writing of the Michael!Dean storyline and possibly even as unhappy as his own fandom-not the bi-bro fandom, mind you-but his, and only his fandom.

Jensen even stated at the Vegas con this weekend that he only had two scenes as Michael in the s14 premiere-to which JP quipped "That's why it was so good."-something that, sorry, not sorry, just didn't come across as that "funny" at all to this Dean/JA fan.

Edited April 3, 2019 by Myrelle
Revision

[AwesomO4000]

31 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Read just about any 'impartial' reviews of the show on entertainment blogs and magazines, EW's and TVLine's and the like. The broad stereotypes that are Dabb's wont seem to be the prevailing opinions - strong, smart, put-upon Sam and loyal but not-too-bright, unsophisticated horn-dog Dean.

I haven't read any of these, so I can't say whether or not I agree, but unless the people writing these reviews have watched at least most of the show, then for me, their opinions don't count and are just superficial.

27 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

This is unfortunately spot on. I tend to stick to recaps and reviews on Dean friendly blogs because the ones that you've mentioned are often rage inducing.

Before I came here to PreviouslyTV, I was over on TelevisionWithoutPity... I learned to put up with a lot of bias against Sam. Even though one of the reviewers there was fairly pro-Sam, by the time Carver was done, he was more pro-Castiel, and there was little positive to be had for Sam... which is why it's generally hard for me to believe Carver was trying to be kind to Sam's character. Even many of us who preferred Sam didn't like him much for quite a while by the time Carver was done with season 8 and again in season 9.

45 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Maybe it was an easy way out, but once again, when there was a choice of which brother to give the moment to, they chose Sam.

Dean was Michael at the time.

And I don't know, maybe it is true. I don't remember enough moments like this to say whether Sam always gets them (I tend to doubt it, though).*** And Dean gets his own thing which as I described is the time with the heavy-hitters. Whenever a powerful being has a heart to heart with one of the brothers, it is almost always with Dean. Even with Jack it is generally Dean's respect and opinion he wants. Sam has the faith in and/or respect for them, but Dean is the one they respect and want to talk with, have faith in, or impress. In my opinion, that has been pretty consistent during Dabb's tenure: with Amara, with God, with Death (both original and Billie), and with Jack. Even with Castiel to an extent. Castiel's gotten better lately in regards to Sam, but in general, it's still Dean he respects more.

So I believe the writers give each brother their own type of respect. They just generally do it differently, and maybe it depends on which way you prefer whether you see it as such.

*** And here I'm talking about Dabb's term as showrunner. During Carver's term, these moments mostly went to Dean. Sam was lucky if he got a kill at all or wasn't a damsel in distress.

[DeeDee79]

4 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

but unless the people writing these reviews have watched at least most of the show, then for me, their opinions don't count and are just superficial.

Unfortunately for many other fans and for newcomers that may be thinking about tuning in these reviews are what they will base their opinions on. Superficial or not it's still damaging to characters that longtime fans have gotten invested in and the blame for this is at Dabb's feet IMO.

[AwesomO4000]

44 minutes ago, Lastcall said:

Maybe a better way to put it is Dabb thinks he is writing love letters but he is failing spectacularly at it.

And I think my analogy still stands. It doesn't matter if Dabb thinks he's writing "love letters" if it's only in his own mind. Like that guy I talked about in my example above. That guy might be thinking he's turning that woman into something better and worthy with his suggestions for changes, but in reality he's just disrespecting who the woman really is and implying she can only be worthy if he changes her. To me that's not love, it's exerting control.

And I can entirely see why Jared would be unhappy with that situation and change to his character. It pretty much ignores how Jared portrayed the character for so many years, and says "Nope. Sam has to be a leader, or otherwise he's just lazy and useless." Never mind that the writers then didn't give Sam any real opportunity to show that he was a good leader, before everyone got killed under his watch... that was just unfortunate circumstance. That then left it with Sam has to be a leader to be useful, but well, I guess he's not that much of a leader either, so it pretty much belittled Sam's role for most of the show. In my opinion anyway.

[DeeDee79]

15 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

It doesn't matter if Dabb thinks he's writing "love letters" if it's only in his own mind.

And IMO it does matter if a large amount of viewers and reviewers see his episodes as such and decide that his vision is what's been missing from the show's formula from the jump. I understand that you're seeing this from the perspective of a Sam fan who wants better writing but the Dean fans are just as frustrated. Keep in mind that I'm just speaking about seasons 11B through the current season. Whether or not Dabb's writing sucks he has shown more enthusiasm with Sam's characterization than with Dean's in the years that he's been at the helm. Overall both brothers have suffered because of Dabb's preference for the Waywards, Lucifer and Jack but Dean IMO has taken more of a beating to his character.

15 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

And I can entirely see why Jared would be unhappy with that situation and change to his character. It pretty much ignores how Jared portrayed the character for so many years,

And you can't see how Jensen would be unhappy as well?

We can agree to disagree at this point.

Edited April 3, 2019 by DeeDee79

[AwesomO4000]

30 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Unfortunately for many other fans and for newcomers that may be thinking about tuning in these reviews are what they will base their opinions on. Superficial or not it's still damaging to characters that longtime fans have gotten invested in and the blame for this is at Dabb's feet IMO.

But is that really going to happen all that much? I suspect that most new viewers that aren't coming in from seeing episodes on TNT or binging on Hulu or Amazon or whatever (I don't have any of those things so I wouldn't know) are likely tuning in for Jack or the new younger characters and likely don't care too much about Sam or Dean anyway beyond good-looking men hunting the supernatural. And if they want to watch for that, that's their prerogative, but I don't have to share it, and it's not my job to change their minds.

In other words, who cares about what casual viewers - especially viewers who aren't them - think? I certainly don't. Especially if they don't want to watch and decide for themselves what they are seeing. I only care what I think and what other peoples' opinions are who have watched the show for years and want to discuss the show's nuances. I could care less about the superficial stuff and for me, it's not worth my time worrying about the opinions of those who do care about that superficial stuff. It's why I only come here to discuss the show and don't follow twitter or tumbler or read reviews. I don't need an echo chamber or for everyone (or even anyone) to agree with me. For me, that would be a fairly boring discussion.

Edited April 3, 2019 by AwesomO4000

[DeeDee79]

1 minute ago, AwesomO4000 said:

But is that really going to happen all that much? I suspect that most new viewers that aren't coming in from seeing episodes on TNT or binging on Hulu or Amazon or whatever (I don't have any of those things so I wouldn't know) are likely tuning in for Jack or the new younger characters and likely don't care too much about Sam or Dean anyway beyond good-looking men hunting the supernatural. And if they want to watch for that, that's their prerogative, but I don't have to share it, and it's not my job to change their minds.

In other words, who cares about what casual viewers - especially viewers who aren't me - think? I certainly don't. Especially if they don't want to watch and decide for themselves what they are seeing. I only care what I think and what other peoples' opinions are who have watched the show for years and want to discuss the show's nuances. I could care less about the superficial stuff and for me, it's not worth my time worrying about the opinions of those who do care about that superficial stuff. It's why I only come here to discuss the show and don't follow twitter or tumbler or read reviews. I don't need an echo chamber or for everyone (or even anyone) to agree with me. For me, that would be a fairly boring discussion.

This pretty much disregards the point that I was making. Therefore I will say ( again ) to agree to disagree.

[Lastcall]

33 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

And I can entirely see why Jared would be unhappy with that situation and change to his character. It pretty much ignores how Jared portrayed the character for so many years, and says "Nope. Sam has to be a leader, or otherwise he's just lazy and useless." Never mind that the writers then didn't give Sam any real opportunity to show that he was a good leader, before everyone got killed under his watch... that was just unfortunate circumstance. That then left it with Sam has to be a leader to be useful, but well, I guess he's not that much of a leader either, so it pretty much belittled Sam's role for most of the show. In my opinion anyway.

I was surprised by Jared’s suffering dog comment, I never thought he would be unhappy with his storyline.  I do remember a comment last year about being out of his comfort zone being the leader. Something like he saw Sam as more of the thinker, researcher bookish type. I admit I’ve been way more focused on Dean/Jensen. I completely believe Jared wants Jensen to be happy and he has heard Jensen’s true feelings on this matter. I’m sure both of them don’t want the show to become a laughing stock which it pretty much is right now. I think Jared said something about not having scenes with Jensen anymore. I will leave the speculation on that to those that have paid more attention.

[AwesomO4000]

1 hour ago, DeeDee79 said:

And you can't see how Jensen would be unhappy as well?

Well, of course I can. I thought that that was a given. The discussion was about how ironic or whatever it was that Jared was being harsh against Dabb and why should he be when Dabb was being so supposedly awesome to Sam. So that's what I focused on. That and why I personally didn't think that Dabb was doing Sam's character any favors either.

56 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

This pretty much disregards the point that I was making. Therefore I will say ( again ) to agree to disagree.

I wasn't meaning to... we cross posted. I didn't see your "it does matter post" until after mine was posted.

1 hour ago, DeeDee79 said:

And IMO it does matter if a large amount of viewers and reviewers see his episodes as such and decide that his vision is what's been missing from the show's formula from the jump. I understand that you're seeing this from the perspective of a Sam fan who wants better writing but the Dean fans are just as frustrated. Keep in mind that I'm just speaking about seasons 11B through the current season. Whether or not Dabb's writing sucks he has shown more enthusiasm with Sam's characterization than with Dean's in the years that he's been at the helm. Overall both brothers have suffered because of Dabb's preference for the Waywards, Lucifer and Jack but Dean IMO has taken more of a beating to his character.

And this is how I felt about season 8 and 9, but I'm generally told "But Carver didn't mean to make Sam look badly, so it doesn't count," so maybe you can also see my frustration... I've been told my opinion and frustration doesn't count for years, because it was "unintentional." It's just as frustrating to be told "but can't you see that really the writers / showrunners love your character, you only think he's being given bad storylines and writing, and if he is being given bad writing,they didn't mean to do it. Really you're lucky." I didn't feel lucky and then I also felt condescended to, because apparently I just don't understand.

And for me Dabb's "enthusiasm" for Sam counts little if that enthusiasm means he wants to fundamentally change Sam and take away what I liked about him. And then be told I should feel lucky that he's doing it.

So I understand most of your frustration entirely, except the part about reviewers, because that doesn't enter into my frustration, so I can sympathize but not understand. I just can't agree that my own frustration doesn't count just because it's supposedly unintentional.

You may call what Dabb is doing "love." I explained why I didn't see his attention as "love" at all, since it didn't respect Sam's characterization... and it's something I've seen before with Carver, who I similarly thought didn't respect Sam's characterization (and was told then that I was just not understanding it well). You may not agree, but in my opinion, that doesn't mean my opinion is somehow delusional.

Edited April 3, 2019 by AwesomO4000

[DeeDee79]

1 minute ago, AwesomO4000 said:

You may not agree, but in my opinion, that doesn't mean my opinion is somehow delusional.

And I don't recall stating in any of my posts that it was. Please do not put words into my mouth.

[AwesomO4000]

2 hours ago, Lastcall said:

I was surprised by Jared’s suffering dog comment, I never thought he would be unhappy with his storyline.  I do remember a comment last year about being out of his comfort zone being the leader. Something like he saw Sam as more of the thinker, researcher bookish type. I admit I’ve been way more focused on Dean/Jensen. I completely believe Jared wants Jensen to be happy and he has heard Jensen’s true feelings on this matter. I’m sure both of them don’t want the show to become a laughing stock which it pretty much is right now. I think Jared said something about not having scenes with Jensen anymore.

I could see it, mostly because the storyline wasn't just having Sam become a leader. It was about implying that Sam was a follower - which was why he supposedly joined the British Men of Letters according to his speech to the hunters - or that he was wanting to kill all monsters so he wouldn't have to hunt any more. Considering Jared has not played Sam as any of those things in my opinion - as in Sam didn't just blindly follow, he didn't want to kill all monsters, and he enjoyed hunting with Dean and has several times said that "normal" isn't for him - I can see why Jared might not have liked the storyline. It basically took everything he had portrayed Sam as for years and said "actually Sam should be like this instead."

I mean I may be wrong, but if I played a character for that long in a particular way and had him get to that point through hard work - twice - and then that character was changed almost fundamentally from how I thought the character should be and what I'd built him into, I think I wouldn't be happy either.

But I don't disagree with you that Jared could also have been mostly thinking of Jensen, too. Jared isn't often given that kind of consideration, so thank you for that. Genuinely.

Edited April 3, 2019 by AwesomO4000

[AwesomO4000]

2 hours ago, DeeDee79 said:

And I don't recall stating in any of my posts that it was. Please do not put words into my mouth.

I apologize for it coming out that way.

I was more referring back to my above part about being told for years that it didn't count (specifically Carver's term) because it was unintentional, so what I was seeing wasn't really there. Hence the delusional. I wasn't meaning you specifically, but I can see how it looked like that based on how I worded it and where I put it.

So again, I apologize.

Edited to add: what I should have said was "that doesn't mean my opinion doesn't also have merit."

Edited April 3, 2019 by AwesomO4000

[juppschmitz]

6 hours ago, Lastcall said:

Dabb just doesn’t have the talent to pull it off. 

(Nor Jared...)