Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
DittyDotDot

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

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

I think that's exactly what Speight meant.

I agree, it was the same thing as his passive-aggressive comment of Jared finally having a worthy actor to act off of in that dude who played Sully. Of course that one stupidly hit him, too, because he had scenes with Jared before in the show and the way he phrased it was that poor Jared never had a worthy actor of talent in a scene with him until that episode in the entire show. 

Speight is the reason I was annoyed when Gabriel was brought back and happy he was quickly and stupidly killed off again, and was played as a little weakling who cried about a few years of measly torture as an archangel. What a joke.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

49 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Speight didn't write the episode, so I don't consider him an author

I went back and looked up the inteview.  This is what Richard said.

Quote

My job was to tell the story that Jenny Klein wrote and it’s a great script, so we shot that script

He interpreted the script as Dean was a bad brother.   He may not have have wrote it but he directed that scene with that intent in mind.  So I change the statement what I feel the scene intended to to tell us.. Based on writing and directing it was too tell the audience that Dean failed Sam.

I went back and looked up the interview.

Quote

I think Dean is slower to trust, slower to open up, and really has to check his own reaction to this, because though he may not truly understand it, what he has to understand is that he and Sam are different, and that maybe Dean can’t fill every emotional gap that his brother needs filling. Maybe they require more, maybe sometimes he hasn’t been the best brother, maybe sometimes they haven’t been there for each other in the way that they should’ve been or wish they had been,and sometimes realizing that is to realize one’s own faults and fallibility, and that can be a difficult thing, and that’s where Dean finds himself.

In this ep we're shown that Dean was dragged off by John and Sam was left behind.   Even though there were times that Dean didn't make the best decisions, this episode was not one of them.   He literally had no choice about leaving Sam behind.  So Dean not being there for Sam was sometimes a physical impossibility but that is not what Speight was trying to say.

This episode could have had Sully spell that out in no uncertain times.  It didn't.

Of course, Dean wasnt' the perfect brother.  He was child.  Children make mistakes.  It goes back to what I was saying.  That instead of telling the audience Dean wasn't always there for Sam, they should be sending the message that he never should have hand to.  Sam telling Dean that he's was cleaning up Dad's messes is just more "you did the best you can."  Again I'm looking for,  "you shouldn't have hand to clean up Dean's messes for so long."  IMO, its not the same thing.

Edited by ILoveReading
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

this subject. He, himself, even knows this. He said so when he told Sam that he feels guilty for everything. That's why I don't get how his saying it that way is evidence that it's true or what the show itself is actually trying to show us. 

Scripted fictional television is about show AND tell. That's  why dialogue exists. And this show is frought with lack of show, and lack of tell, and conflicting show vs tell. IMO, if the show and tell were better there wouldn't be such disparate interpretations. It doesn't mean that the disparate interpretations are born out of some viewers just being too dumb to get it. I'd say it's because viewers are actually pretty darn smart and see the failures in the writing, and the failures of show and tell, and show vs tell, along with LOLcanon and lazy characterizations. It's been especially bad under Dabb, for TFW specifically.

JMI is a prime example. Dean feels guilty sure, but that doesn't mean he's an unreliable narrator. Allowing for that to be the case, the narrative could have other characters advocate on screen with dialogue, for Dean, which would really make the point that Dean is mired in useless guilt. Sam himself could have been given voice to say, 'Dean was dragged around by Dad and that kept him away even though I know I know he wanted to be here. And I appreciate him for that'. But that would have altered Sullys story too much. The episode was clearly putting Sully against Dean as to who was better for Sam during that time period. Sully encouraging Sam to run away wasn't condemned, it was shown that Sam was stuck all alone with a shit father and ineffectual big brother.

Writing is funny in that dialogue matters. It matters a lot. Writers get paid to use words and they use words on purpose. If Dean had said I couldn't be there because Dad, that would have undermined Sully. And Sully was the the hero of that episode even. He went through a whole hero journey.

Obviously, Dean isn't going to advocate for himself because he thinks he did fail Sam.its his trauma that unless he protects Sam he's failed. Because of what John did to him when Dean was too young to know he was being parentified by John. That dienst make Dean an unreliable narrator, though. It means that's how he sees himself. And since neither the show nor the tell subverted that, it stands as Dean just wasnt there. There was a flashback with Dean being upset with Sam which could be intrepreted as Dean not wanting to be there for Sam because he was out hunting. Or because Dean felt he couldn't get away because John wouldn't let him. Either way, Dean was going to feel guilty because of being parentified.

Dean is at the mercy of the writer, who wanted Sam to be wooby!Sam here and mostly, because it was Sully's story, Dean had to be the one who was mean to Sully and apologize later. If the episode is going to that much trouble to tell that much back story on Sam and Sully, the writer could have made the decision to use a different word or put words in another characters mouth. But she didn't and that is what stands as the aired canon episode about Sam's shitty childhood and Sully saving Sam.

12 minutes ago, SweetTooth said:

repeatedly, it was not Dean's fault, and John has apologized numerous times for being THE crappiest dad ever, the viewer over and over, saw John dragging his children to godforsaken places, abandoning them, and heading off to get himself killed. 

7 minutes ago, SweetTooth said:

As to John apologies, that is not true when it comes to Dean specifically. He apologized ONE time in 2.1, immediately followed by loading Dean down with the heaviest burden yet, the Save Sam or Kill Sam directive. John apologized to Sam, to his face maybe three times for their fractured relationship. And sorry, but Dean's wounds from John ate not the same as Sam's. So it's not a blanket apology to both that works. Dean deserves to have his own direct specific apology about himself and John beyond 2.1.

Now, if I thought the show was trying to tell the story of Dean being a damaged man, because of John, there needs to be a lot more dialogue on screen to address it. There isn't so it's not something they intend to address.

In s12, Dean got to say it to Mary, but Mary isn't the one who parentified Dean, John was. So for me, until John directly apologizes to Dean for what he out on Dean in s2, John is still a shitbird in my book.

All of this is to say, the show and tell are badly handled under Dabb. And it's not the viewers fault for not getting it. This show is not that deep now.

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
On 4/27/2019 at 7:38 AM, ILoveReading said:

All it did was leave me asking who was looking out for Dean.  It showed that he really had no one.  And that he literally had to be in two places at once.  No wonder he felt like he didn't succeed. 

Well, Thanks to Dabb it can only get worse.  Now, both brothers are being jerked around for God's entertainment.  I didn't get excited from the last show from season 14, in fact, the opposite.  I don't want to watch the train wreck so I'm left with fanfiction writers or going AU and ignoring the so-called cannon which has been turned upside down.  

The one real issue I felt that it was a slap to Kripke's original plan.  Sure he set up that God was Chuck but there had been some hope that God might care.  Now that's gone.  He is just getting his kicks watching the boys being miserable. 

My only hope is that Billie kills God, not spoiler.

If the J2's had some input on the final well I'm not convinced they can do anything about the train wreck coming.  IMO Cas, Dean, and Sam have been thrown under the bus all for what?  Taking a break from Supernatural.  Unlike a writer that shall NOT be named, I'll have to go back to the beginning when cannon mattered and there were some cool clues setting up what is to come.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, SweetTooth said:

If the writers were has horrible to Dean as people say, and making him out to be the bad guy, the hated guy, then why is it that a majority of people have Dean as their favorite brother? Yes, sure, Jensen kills it. He's amazing in the role and can break your heart. But that still wouldn't be able to combat fourteen seasons of him just being a monster.

It's because Jensen learned from Kim Manners to play what isn't on the page. To find what makes Dean a whole being, not a two dimensional paper character. He's talked about that for years.  And IMO that's what he still does.  He gives Dean layers that I don't think Jared does with Sam now for a few years. And I'm not bashing Jared's skills. I think he's playing it as it is written for the most part.  JMO

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

He gives Dean layers that I don't think Jared does with Sam now for a few years. And I'm not bashing Jared's skills. I think he's playing it as it is written for the most part.  JMO

This is how I see it also.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

If the episode is going to that much trouble to tell that much back story on Sam and Sully, the writer could have made the decision to use a different word or put words in another characters mouth.

Or use incidents and actions - like young Dean being the one to keep in contact with Sam and convincing John to let Sam join them - to show the situation. I don't need to be beat over the head with what I already know and what I know that Sam knows and has told Dean before.

For me, not every story has to be about Dean or be somehow related back to Dean. Sometimes the story can be about someone else.

You might not have enjoyed the time spent with Sully and the other Zanna or Sully and young Sam, but I did.

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

But she didn't and that is what stands as the aired canon episode about Sam's shitty childhood and Sully saving Sam.

How did Sully save Sam? In my opinion, he didn't, and that's what the episode showed... that Sully wasn't able to save Sam and actually in a way could have made things harder for him later. Maybe it was Sully putting it in Sam's head that it was a good idea that influenced Sam to run away later in his life, but Sam at 9 wasn't ready to hear that advice, and his running away later didn't amount to anything in the end except making everyone worry.

Sully did try to help Sam - that was the tragedy - but unless I'm remembering wrongly, it was  in the dialogue that Sam turned out to be the hero he was, because Sully hadn't succeeded. Sully said that at the time he thought he should have gotten Sam away from the hunting life, but he also said that he had been wrong about that, and that Sam did fulfill his destiny to help stop the apocalypse.

For me that's not saying that Sully saved Sam, but that Sully tried, like Dean did, and it wasn't in the cards for either of them, because sometimes people can't be saved, from themselves, from their fate, from life. Sully made Sam feel better for a little while - that was all. At the time, it was a big thing to Sam, but in the end, it turned out to be a small incident... one that Sam had forgotten almost all about. Unlike Dean who was there and who Sam knew was there for him.

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

Dean feels guilty sure, but that doesn't mean he's an unreliable narrator.

For me it does. Dean says he feels guilty for things when we see that they weren't his fault, but were actually beyond his control. His words contradict what we see and know. For me that is what an unreliable narrator is.

Just because Dean feels guilty about something and says it was his fault doesn't mean that it was his fault or that he has any logical reason to feel guilty beyond his psyche being screwed up. The viewer can't always trust Dean's guilt as earned or not, because it's going to be there whether he should feel guilty or not. Dean told us just that, so I had no reason to disbelieve him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

For me, not every story has to be about Dean or be somehow related back to Dean. Sometimes the story can be about someone else.

You might not have enjoyed the time spent with Sully and the other Zanna or Sully and young Sam, but I did.

hat iI didn't say every story has to be about Dean.   I don't hate the ep becuase it's about Sam. I hate it because it was just....not good.  But that episode did put Dean on the defense from the jump by putting him at odds with Sully.  So he wasn't the focus he wasn't unimportant either.

He was being compared to Sully throughout.

Sully saved Sam from loneliness.  He saved Sam from being alone.  That's what I mean by saving Sam.

Edited by catrox14
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

hat iI didn't say every story has to be about Dean.   I don't hate the ep becuase it's about Sam. I hate it because it was just....not good.  But that episode did put Dean on the defense from the jump by putting him at odds with Sully.  So he wasn't the focus he wasn't unimportant either.

He was being compared to Sully throughout.

Sully saved Sam from loneliness.  He saved Sam from being alone.  That's what I mean by saving Sam.

I agree. I don't remember seeing any posters stating that they disliked the episode because it was about Sam. I didn't like it but it certainly wasn't because it wasn't all about Dean; I would have to hate a good majority of the show if I used that as a reason. IMO all of the posts against the episode that I've read have been about Dean's portrayal and the overall message regarding Dean's attentiveness vs Sully's. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, catrox14 said:

He gives Dean layers that I don't think Jared does with Sam now for a few years. And I'm not bashing Jared's skills. I think he's playing it as it is written for the most part.  JMO

That could be true, but sometimes there isn't much to be done with what you're given. Like the latest episode. How would Jared conceivably have been able to make shooting Chuck look like anything but stupid or reckless? Or make joining the BMoL look anything but stupid or reckless? Or make yelling at the demons about not having a new leader look anything but over the top and ridiculous?

Sometimes, in my opinion, there's not going to be a way to rise above the writing, and you'll just look weird for trying.

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

Sully saved Sam from loneliness.  He saved Sam from being alone.  That's what I mean by saving Sam.

As I said, though, it was just for a short time. It was what Sam needed / wanted for that moment, but in the end what Sam really wanted and needed was to be with his family. That's what Sam chose, and he told Sully to go away, he didn't need him any more.

That was the tragedy and the irony. Sully couldn't save Sam, because in the end Sam - and fate - chose Sam's path.  They could try - just as Dean could try to save Sam or kill him - but in the end what was going to happen was going to happen despite all of their efforts.

Trying and failing doesn't always mean the failure is your fault. Sometimes it's just not in the cards that things go that way.

That for me is what the episode was saying. These awesome people and beings tried to help Sam and save him from the bad, but in the end, Sam and his fate chose the hard road, because sometimes that's just the way it is. "Afterschool Special" was similar. The teacher that tried to encourage Sam was a good man, and he was genuinely trying to help, but that wasn't in the cards. That wasn't his fault, just as it wasn't Sully's or Dean's.

1 hour ago, DeeDee79 said:

IMO all of the posts against the episode that I've read have been about Dean's portrayal and the overall message regarding Dean's attentiveness vs Sully's. 

Which is about Dean.

And I don't even entirely understand that criticism myself. In my opinion, Dean was shown as being as attentive to Sam as he could be. He was on a hunt... potentially life and death stuff and couldn't be paying attention to Sam 24/7. He was appreciative that Sully had filled in the gap when he couldn't do an impossible thing. So what? That's normal. That's human. No one, in my opinion, can be there for someone 24/7 nor should anyone be expected to be. And I never got the impression that that was what the story was trying to say.

It's not like Sully was shown to swoop in and save Sam from his life or that Dean had never been shown to leave Sam alone before - that was covered in "Plucky Pennywhistle's..." Dean's human, not a saint. I'm not going to fault him for actually being human nor fault a writer for showing him as such sometimes. The writers show Sam as human and making mistakes often enough and sometimes not being there for Dean. I'm not going to hate on all of those episodes just because they aren't showing Sam as perfect.

Just my opinion.

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

I don't hate the ep becuase it's about Sam. I hate it because it was just....not good. 

We disagree here, because I thought it was a great episode, and I got a lot out of it, including the themes that I mentioned above. For me, the characters were inventive, flawed and interesting. No one was perfect, and no one could change what was going to happen with Sam no matter how hard they tried. That doesn't mean their efforts weren't appreciated or didn't mean anything, because sometimes that's just the way life goes... and finding the humor - as this episode had, in my opinion - and the small kindnesses in the face of that hard truth is sometimes enough to make it livable and all worth it.

Two people - Dean and Sully - both helped Sam and did what they could for him. Even though they didn't succeed in saving him from what happened, they saved him from going through it alone and without someone to care about him. And they each appreciated what the other had done. And Sam appreciated them both.

That was contrasted with Reese who hadn't had anyone, because Sully had run away and she didn't have a Dean-like figure to support her afterward, only people who thought she was crazy and didn't believe her. She had no one apparently and "never needed anyone more." And unlike Sam, she was completely messed up without that support. For me Sully's "thank you" to Dean meant a lot, because it wasn't only Sully acknowledging that Dean "wasn't a germ," but Sully acknowledging that Dean had been there for Sam again afterwards... after Sully left. And for Sam - vs Reese - that made all the difference.

Edited by AwesomO4000
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
42 minutes ago, SweetTooth said:

Television is about showing, not telling.

So I refuse to believe that actually showing Dean had no choice but to sometimes not be there, and the fifty billion times they showed Dean literally raising Sam. And the 100 billion times they out and out stated, including just a few episodes ago, Sam and his dad acknowledging that Dean literally raised him, that one line, just one line, uttered by Dean, who feels guilty for literally breathing, would be sending a message that yeah, it was totally Dean's fault.

If the episode literally showed he had no choice, SHOWED It, how could the viewer then disregard everything they've seen and heard up until that point, take one line completely out of context, and say, "Oh, they're totally saying Dean wasn't there for Sam."

And again, not only have they stated, repeatedly, it was not Dean's fault, and John has apologized numerous times for being THE crappiest dad ever, the viewer over and over, saw John dragging his children to godforsaken places, abandoning them, and heading off to get himself killed.

They didn't have to say it outright, but they have. 

There's absolutely no way, in an episode that literally SHOWED John dragging him away and that Dean had no choice, and Speight, who didn't write the episode but DIRECTED IT, showed Dean being dragged away against his will, it would seem nonsensical for the guy who depicted Dean having no choice to say he interpreted the words to mean Dean chose not to be there.

One line. Out of context. Uttered by Dean, who feels guilty for breathing. Ignoring the episode as a whole and just concentrating on one line, would drive me bananas.

I can't concentrate on one line, and one line only, in a series that has been on for fourteen seasons, Sam has uttered some stuff due to his feelings of guilt. And as @AwesomO4000 has stated, others have said some stuff to him that would eat away at anyone, I've never thought that they were trying to depict Sam in just one way, because, again, I have fourteen seasons to go by.

If the writers were has horrible to Dean as people say, and making him out to be the bad guy, the hated guy, then why is it that a majority of people have Dean as their favorite brother? Yes, sure, Jensen kills it. He's amazing in the role and can break your heart. But that still wouldn't be able to combat fourteen seasons of him just being a monster.

So, yes, I choose to see the fourteen seasons as a whole. Of the constant depiction of John as worst father of every year, and Dean as the best brother of all time and loving and taking care of Sammy, rather than one little line in an episode where they actually showed him having no choice.

If that was the case, we'd be all about Silent movies and tv shows, like back in the 1920's.  No we have dialogue, and lots of it, to TELL US stuff.

So no IMO it's not about showing, not telling, it's about TELLING US what we are seeing and  most people are Othello's to the screenwriters/director's Iago's, which is exactly what TPTB are counting on - they can be seeing one thing, but if Iago is telling them with WORDS, they are seeing something else, they believe the words, the words are what make the impression far more than what they are seeing.  Othello got his "ocular proof" and interpreted it exactly how Iago told him, which was exactly NOT what it was in reality.  But the story made a point of showing Iago was lying and Othello was believing the wrongs things.  The story TOLD them Dean was a bad brother who wasn't there for Sam like he should have been and that's exactly what most of them take from it.

Supernatural doesn't do that.  They tell and then do almost nothing to say "no that's not what really happened" most of the time, especially after first few seasons.  

(Now mind you I am not saying that there aren't very well made films, etc where the show and tell are not meant to be different things for dramatic purposes but Supernatural isn't one of them, this is a show that for far too long has been written by barely interested writers who usually can't even be bothered to watch older seasons and who can't even remember what they themselves wrote in previous episodes so contradict themselves, who work almost exclusively in broad strokes and near caricatures and who wouldn't know subtlety if it very un-subtly smacked them in the face)

9 hours ago, SweetTooth said:

And I'm sorry, but I took "Dean had to learn he wasn't always there for Sam" to mean that he couldn't always be there for Sam and had to rely on someone else, as the rest of the line implies.

But that isn't what he says.  "Dean had to learn he wasn't always there for Sam" is entirely different than "Dean had to learn he COULDN'T always be there for Sam".  The words don't mean that.  And even so you go right on to say Dean didn't learn that anyway, because that isn't what Dean said, because Dean is an unreliable narrator and thus meaning didn't get what the lesson was supposed to be.

And yet according to the director, "Dean had to learn he wasn't(not couldn't be, but wasn't) always there for Sam" was exactly what he was supposed to learn and going by Dean's dialogue, that is exactly what he did learn. 

So there was no unreliable narrator, he saw and learned exactly what he was meant and Dean interpreted it exactly as the script and director is saying it was supposed to be interpreted.

Now as for my co-workers no I would not take that small sample as any kind of over all judgment.  We are mostly from a similar background who work in a similar environment, so we may just have similar feelings about other things as well.  Apparently we aren't supposed to take dozens and dozens of people online as some sort of guide to how people feel about the show and characters, even though they are likely to be far more diverse in background than 4 women in a relatively small office, so not sure why I should feel like these 3 other women are any more telling about the reality of how most people see the show than dozens of others

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, tessathereaper said:

But that isn't what he says.  "Dean had to learn he wasn't always there for Sam" is entirely different than "Dean had to learn he COULDN'T always be there for Sam".  The words don't mean that. 

The crux of the matter, right there.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

On 4/28/2019 at 4:49 PM, tessathereaper said:

So no IMO it's not about showing, not telling, it's about TELLING US what we are seeing and  most people are Othello's to the screenwriters/director's Iago's, which is exactly what TPTB are counting on - they can be seeing one thing, but if Iago is telling them with WORDS, they are seeing something else, they believe the words, the words are what make the impression far more than what they are seeing.  Othello got his "ocular proof" and interpreted it exactly how Iago told him, which was exactly NOT what it was in reality.  But the story made a point of showing Iago was lying and Othello was believing the wrongs things.  The story TOLD them Dean was a bad brother who wasn't there for Sam like he should have been and that's exactly what most of them take from it.

Honest question: If the writers supposedly want us to believe something - in this case according to some, that Dean was supposed to somehow always be there for Sam (which in my opinion is already a ridiculous thing) and it was his fault because he wasn't - why not just show us that thing and only that thing rather than show us one thing (in this case Dean checking in with Sam often and getting John to let Sam come) and "say" something else? What supposedly is the advantage of showing one thing and telling another?

If they wanted us to think that Dean just wasn't there for Sam, then why not just show that? Show Sam trying to call Dean on a pre-arranged call time and Dean not answering. Show Dean calling Sam, but then abruptly hanging up after a perfunctory wellness check, because he was busy. Have Sam decide on his own that he's going to go join his family, not have Dean trying his best to get John to let Sam come. ...And then voila, there you go: we see that Dean wasn't there for Sam. In my opinion, it's not that difficult to show what you want to get across. Unless they're trying to show - as with the Othello example - someone being convinced of something that's not true, then why wouldn't they just show something and then tell us what they showed?

For me, I'm not Othello. As with the CNN commercial - the writers can tell me banana all they want, but if they show me an apple... I'm going to see an apple, so all of their "banana" declarations are just going to be a waste of time. So why even risk me not getting the message they wanted by showing me an apple in the first place instead of the banana they supposedly want me to see? If they want me to see a banana... show me a banana. Simple.

If the apple is already there, then okay, I get it. Trying to say it's a banana has a manipulative purpose. But they created the apple they are showing us. They control how it's made and what it looks like. So why then call it a banana?

For me, that makes no sense.

Quote

And yet according to the director, "Dean had to learn he wasn't(not couldn't be, but wasn't) always there for Sam" was exactly what he was supposed to learn...

The director can say anything he wants, but if the writer writes evidence of the opposite, and that is what is shown, then it's the writer - and what I see - that I'm going to believe. It's likely that most viewers don't even see director interviews, so they can only be influenced by what they see, and the dialogue.

Which brings me to...

Quote

...and going by Dean's dialogue, that is exactly what he did learn. So there was no unreliable narrator, he saw and learned exactly what he was meant and Dean interpreted it exactly as the script and director is saying it was supposed to be interpreted.

Since most viewers aren't going to see the director's interview, they can only go by what they see - which was Dean checking in on Sam a lot and Dean trying to convince and succeeding in convincing John to let Sam join them - and by what Dean says.

However, Dean has already told us that he feels guilty for everything. The viewers have heard Dean saying (paraphrase) "the Lindbergh kidnapping, that's on me." Obviously that's not true. Viewers saw Dean blaming himself for Sam's death in season 2. We again knew that was not his fault. There is plenty of evidence that Dean is not a reliable narrator on this subject. Just because Dean "learns" something is his fault and says something is his fault and believes something is his fault, that is not evidence that it is his fault. There are too many examples showing us otherwise, as I'm assuming that even though Dean says the Lindbergh kidnapping is his fault and Sam's death was "on him" we aren't supposed to actually believe him.

That was the point I was making. And without the director's words, I never would have even guessed that I was supposed to see Sam's situation as Dean's fault or be seeing Dean as purposely not being there for Sam.*** For me, the evidence for it wasn't there. I could see that Dean likely blamed himself, but that's not anything new, and Dean isn't reliable in terms of what actually is his fault and what isn't. The evidence for that had been all over the show up until that point, so I don't generally believe what Dean says on that subject (not that Dean doesn't believe it. I'm sure that he does. But I don't believe that he actually should believe it, because chances are, he shouldn't and it isn't his fault at all.)

*** Just as while I was viewing the first half of season 8, I never would have guessed that I was supposed to be seeing Sam making the "mature" decision. I don't care what Carver said concerning that in his interviews, because none of what he said he was supposedly showing made it onscreen in my opinion, not even in his own episodes. So his interview opinions didn't make me go "ohhhh, now I see. What I thought I was seeing was entirely wrong. What actually happened was..." His interviews made me think "Was he high? I know what I saw, and it certainly wasn't that."

Similarly these interviews didn't make me think "oh, so they were trying to blame this on Dean and/or say Dean didn't take care of Sam. Now I see." They made me think "That's not what the writing said to me. I don't know where Speight got that from. Was he high?"

For me what's actually onscreen is what is actually show canon. What the writers, directors, producers, or whoever say behind the scenes is all just a bunch of "blah blah blah" to me, especially if I don't see the evidence of it onscreen. Obviously miles vary here.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Mulva said:

Didn't Dean ditch Sam at Plucky Pennywhistles when ever he could?

Probably-because some of these writers have just never been able to resist sometimes and somehow making PoorSam's lonely and pitiful childhood MeanDean's fault, too-even though MeanDean was also just a child during PoorSam's childhood-and making sure that Dean apologized for not being good enough or there or whatever for PoorSam in those episodes-which he wound up doing in that episode, too,  IIRC.

  • Like 6
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Myrelle said:

Probably-because some of these writers have just never been able to resist sometimes and somehow making PoorSam's lonely and pitiful childhood MeanDean's fault, too-even though MeanDean was also just a child during PoorSam's childhood-and making sure that Dean apologized for not being good enough or there or whatever for PoorSam in those episodes-which he wound up doing in that episode, too,  IIRC.

Exactly! It's funny how it's always (conveniently ) forgotten that Dean was a child along with Sam. He's only 4 years older and he had no one doting on him the way that he doted on Sam. Being ditched inside of a knock off Chuck Cheese establishment is paradise compared to being left in charge of your kid brother in a motel when you're only 9 to fight off a freaking shtriga, Just one example but there are plenty more.

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post

Finally caught up and watched the last five episodes. I got so bummed out by the crap that this season foisted upon us, I had run out of steam. Then I heard next season was the last, and thought... What could it hurt?  

Me. Me is what it could hurt. I've kept out of the episode specific threads because my beef isn't with any one episode, it's with sooo much of it that this seemed a better location for my venting. Actually, I surprised myself with how much negative I feel. Usually, other than ripping a scene or a character misfire, I try to see the positive, even if that means a little digging or fan-wanking. But this just... defies my ability to see the better.

I'm probably a bibro when it comes down to it, although I tend to identify a bit more with Dean's approach to the world. So it pains me twice as much when both brothers are given the crappy shrift of this writing team. Because I don't consume any SM from the show runner, writers, etc., I'm not going taking the position that the writers have it "out" for one or both of them, or that they are scorching earth w/r/t Sam or Dean.  Maybe yes, maybe no, it just doesn't matter to me what the motivation is when the outcome is dreck. The fact that J2 pulled the plug suggests that whatever the show has become, it's not enough for them anymore. And, that mirrors my own feelings.

I don't mind when the show introduces other characters to share the lead, whether those new characters have multi-ep, season-long, or multi-season relevance. It's 14 seasons in, and new blood can be useful. But the elevation of Jack, the send-off for Mary, and this Chuck-thing, have me at my wits end. 

Never hated the idea of Jack-- I thought it might be a cool story device to explore something heavenly without representing actual biblical figures. And there have been times I've really rooted for the kid, which is likely a tribute to the actor as much as anything. But the handling of him has been off for the better part of his existence. And now? Now he's set up as part of the final confrontation? An inexperienced, soulless toddler so prone to manipulation that he just wiped a congregation off the map because he was told, by someone he has NO REASON TO TRUST (having heard "angels are dicks" how many times?) that his doing so would please Sam and Dean? WTAF, show.

And as a result of his utter failures to see anything but his own woobieness, he gets to pair up with Billie? And the Empty? Aaaarrrrgggghhhh. Not appealing to me. At all. I guess, at heart, I was okay with him suffering a death for the death he caused. Sure Mary was a dumbass, poking at the super-powerful being who was clearly in a fit of some kind. But Jack's total inability/unwillingness (doesn't matter) to see her death as anything other than "an accident" coupled with his failure to seek out ANYONE who could help him assess the matter clearly (hint: auditory and visual hallucinations are NOT normal and Lucifer TOLD YOU that you conjured him up in your own head) renders him a nullity to me. But I'm going to bet stuck with him in S15, and that just bums me out. Which brings me to mommy dearest.

The fact that Mary came back as not-perfect Mom was FINE with me. She's been out of the world for a lifetime, and as much as a mother's love might be able to patch that over, I was FINE with her not being that great of a Mom to virtual strangers. And I was okay that she didn't undertake an effort to become that Mom-- given the time limitations and what I perceive to be the actress's limited range. Sam and Dean never really called her on her shit, and as long as they were happy with her as is, I could manage. Didn't like her much as a character, because her only relevance to me was as the mother of our heroes. Absent any other defining characteristic, her being not-so-good at that just meant I didn't have to invest much in her. 

What bothers me most with her is the wasted opportunity of her death; the retcon could have done SO much more. I like the idea that Mary tends to praise Sam more because of her guilt over the deal with YED, and until her send-off I could hand-wave her differing treatment of Dean with the occasional bitching.  But when they decide to flash back with that saccharine BS, instead of allowing her to speak truth and clarity to both brothers? To deny her any self-awareness at all before final death? Despicable.

I have no skill for dialogue, but what a difference my take would have been had she uttered something along these lines:

  • Sam, I cursed you years ago because of a weak, short-sighted deal that I thought I could ultimately prevent, but didn't. You have paid for my stupidity with such pain and loss, and I am truly sorry for that. What you have grown into, what you have become [strong, brave, leader, blah blah].
  • Dean, I have not been able to provide you the kind of support you deserved since I came back. That you have been satisfied with so little breaks my heart. But I want you to know that in my own flawed way, I have cherished the time we have had and I love you for the man you have become." Then she has to firmly pish-tosh any of Dean's attempting to accept responsibility for her own shortcomings.

She doesn't have to compliment Dean the same way as Sam. They couldn't even have her own her failures both old and more recent? Disappointing to say the least.

And Chuck... hoooboy. Either God is evil, or a switcheroo on two and it isn't God? That rankles me to the core, and I'm not a religious person at all. It's just not who Chuck EVER was before the last ep. This "twist" made me think back and wonder why we ever bothered with heaven and the angels at all if this is the final confrontation. Because once there is a "heaven" opposite  the "hell" of this show, God is necessarily part of the conversation given the degree of horror the show has introduced (i.e., where is God? why isn't God helping? how can we find God? etc.), and "he's not a helicopter parent" was never going to be a good enough explanation for the Winchesters. God was going to have to make an appearance, and I sort of liked the Chuck/God character earlier on. Hands off because, as I learned in Bible School, free will is just that-- and consequences exist.  Now he's just an entertainment hungry douche? Brought back to us because they elevated Jack to world-ending powers? 

Sorry for all the shouting, and the bits of incoherence, but I am so very sad with this. And yes, I'll tune in for S15, because J2 may actually get this ship righted in time for me to miss it. Wouldn't it be cool to see our lost favorites featured throughout as a 20-episode good-bye? I will sit through a lot of crap if I can seen Ellen and Jo again. But right now I am going to re-watch an earlier season to cleanse this taste.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

@Zipper, 1000% agree with your post. I'm more than disappointed, I'm downright angry that Dabb has turned this show into a joke. Nothing makes sense anymore. We can only hope that the Js have enough input to make the final season worthwhile. It would be a damn shame if this show doesn't go out with style after fifteen years - a record length of time for this genre of show.

  • Like 5
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post

Please, tell me again that there's no anti-Dean bias in the Dabb era of Supernatural. 

https://www.etonline.com/supernatural-stars-on-how-michael-gave-the-show-new-life-exclusive-125244?amp&__twitter_impression=true

So basically, the Michael storyline was all about Sam and how he stepped up, how he lead "their little family," . It gave the show new life because they were able to step away from Dean.(there's that breathing room again) Interesting that the only "Supernatural star" not quoted here is Jensen. You know  the guy who played Michael. 

I don't care what actually played out on the screen, this is the narrative they continue to push.This was their intention. This is what they want us to take from it.

Screw you, Dabb.

Edited by gonzosgirrl
  • Like 4
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
43 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Please, tell me again that there's no anti-Dean bias in the Dabb era of Supernatural. 

https://www.etonline.com/supernatural-stars-on-how-michael-gave-the-show-new-life-exclusive-125244?amp&__twitter_impression=true

So basically, the Michael storyline was all about Sam and how he stepped up, how he lead "their little family," . It gave the show new life because they were able to step away from Dean.(there's that breathing room again) Interesting that the only "Supernatural star" not quoted here is Jensen. You know  the guy who played Michael. 

I don't care what actually played out on the screen, this is the narrative they continue to push.This was their intention. This is what they want us to take from it.

Screw you, Dabb.

From this promo, this "featurette" seems to be so insulting to both Dean and Jensen, and all he's done over the years for this show and for everyone whom he's worked with and for on it.

I think from this promo, it's easy to see that Dean has been written as nothing more than a support character to every other character on this show under Dabb; and  he's treated Jensen as nothing more than a supporting actor, too.

Again I'll say it. How insulting and disrespectful after all that Jensen has done for this show. 

What he said at that recent con about looking forward to the acting opportunities that the end of this show might bring for him becomes even more of a definitive statement to me on how be felt about leaving the show and ending it when they did.

And once again, I'll say thank God he finally saw the "writing on the wall" as far as that was concerned.

  • Like 4
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
45 minutes ago, Myrelle said:

From this promo, this "featurette" seems to be so insulting to both Dean and Jensen, and all he's done over the years for this show and for everyone whom he's worked with and for on it.

I think from this promo, it's easy to see that Dean has been written as nothing more than a support character to every other character on this show under Dabb; and  he's treated Jensen as nothing more than a supporting actor, too.

Again I'll say it. How insulting and disrespectful after all that Jensen has done for this show. 

What he said at that recent con about looking forward to the acting opportunities that the end of this show might bring for him becomes even more of a definitive statement to me on how be felt about leaving the show and ending it when they did.

And once again, I'll say thank God he finally saw the "writing on the wall" as far as that was concerned.

I wish they had comments I'd love to tell them all that, it's hard in a tweet(esp when I can't get the actual video to play keeps giving me an error).  So Jensen isn't even in the video?  About a character he played.  

I can't believe how freaking insulting the article is.  Oh yeah having Dean around is SUCH a burden.  Well guess what, if anything this proves he's been doing the heavy lifting all these years and often being kicked out of his own storylines(as he was again) and apparently y'all weren't equipped to handle it no matter how much you keep patting yourselves on the back for it.

I am glad Jensen finally said enough if enough I'm outta here because this is the level of disrespect he's treated with by TPTB and it's insulting after everything he's given the show and how generous he's been all these years.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Caveat: I didn't watch the video - the article was enough for me. At the very least, those quoted shows the writer's impression of things. Jensen who?

ETA: I took one for the team and watched. The video is from the same shoot as the 'best season ever!' one talked about elsewhere, filmed the day they made the announcement of the series ending,  if clothes are any indication. In this article about how the Michael(Sam) story breathed new life into the show, the speakers are Buckner, Jared, Misha (Misha?), and Dabb. Jensen is beside Jared in the video but doesn't speak.

Edited by gonzosgirrl
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Dabb is jealous of Jensen.  And he's pissed because his stupid ideas for spinoffs didn't pan out.  

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Caveat: I didn't watch the video - the article was enough for me. At the very least, those quoted shows the writer's impression of things. Jensen who?

ETA: I took one for the team and watched. The video is from the same shoot as the 'best season ever!' one talked about elsewhere, filmed the day they made the announcement of the series ending,  if clothes are any indication. In this article about how the Michael(Sam) story breathed new life into the show, the speakers are Buckner, Jared, Misha (Misha?), and Dabb. Jensen is beside Jared in the video but doesn't speak.

It's clearly a snippet of a BTS story.  It seems like they are going thru the season.  If it ends up being ONLY about Michael I'll be surprised.  The title is "The Winchester Mythology: The Choices We Make".  

Having said that, it's pretty clear that EW was given a snippet about next year.  ET was given a snippet about the start of S14.  So, I think it's HollyO who makes the decisions on what snippets to release to whom.  

Share this post


Link to post

I don't usually get into the writers/producers like or hate one character more, but I have to agree that this video - if this is it in its entirety - is totally blowing off Dean and Jensen, which is nuts.  And insulting, given what a super job Jensen did playing Michael.  As for the Sam stepping up story line, I think they screwed that up too.  Just because they gave it lip service doesn't make it so.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, SueB said:

It's clearly a snippet of a BTS story.  It seems like they are going thru the season.  If it ends up being ONLY about Michael I'll be surprised.  The title is "The Winchester Mythology: The Choices We Make".  

Having said that, it's pretty clear that EW was given a snippet about next year.  ET was given a snippet about the start of S14.  So, I think it's HollyO who makes the decisions on what snippets to release to whom.  

None of that changes the message that this video, story and 'headline' puts out there.

4 minutes ago, Pondlass1 said:

Dabb is jealous of Jensen.  And he's pissed because his stupid ideas for spinoffs didn't pan out.  

Word.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

I'll get the whole video on Friday and post a summary in "Media".

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Wynne88 said:

I don't usually get into the writers/producers like or hate one character more, but I have to agree that this video - if this is it in its entirety - is totally blowing off Dean and Jensen, which is nuts.  And insulting, given what a super job Jensen did playing Michael.  As for the Sam stepping up story line, I think they screwed that up too.  Just because they gave it lip service doesn't make it so.

Yep.

2 minutes ago, SueB said:

I'll get the whole video on Friday and post a summary in "Media".

I'll wait with baited breath for the part where they talk about how great Jensen was and how the story never really lived up to its (and his) potential before being handed off to Jack.

Blue, after all, is my colour.

Edited by gonzosgirrl
  • Like 6
  • Laugh 4
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

I'll wait with baited breath for the part where they talk about how great Jensen was and how the story never really lived up to its (and his) potential before being handed off to Jack.

Which only reminds me that even when they stole the story away from Jensen, they couldn't even give him the final Michael/Jack showdown - they gave it to Rowena/Ruth of all people. And it's not like it would have killed Dean - it didn't kill Rowena.

  • Like 6
  • Sad 4

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Please, tell me again that there's no anti-Dean bias in the Dabb era of Supernatural. 

https://www.etonline.com/supernatural-stars-on-how-michael-gave-the-show-new-life-exclusive-125244?amp&__twitter_impression=true

So basically, the Michael storyline was all about Sam and how he stepped up, how he lead "their little family," . It gave the show new life because they were able to step away from Dean.(there's that breathing room again) Interesting that the only "Supernatural star" not quoted here is Jensen. You know  the guy who played Michael. 

I don't care what actually played out on the screen, this is the narrative they continue to push.This was their intention. This is what they want us to take from it.

Screw you, Dabb.

Remember when I said they were trying to turn Sam into Dean...well this another quote from the article: 

"With Sam's brother gone, with Dean being Michael, Sam has to try and play both roles of Dean and Sam," Padalecki explains. "It was a big step for Sam to be the older brother dynamic."

LOLOLOL... Jared literally said what I (and others) saw happening on screen.  Remember when Blemming had Lucifer declare himself the older brother....and then Lucifer ate the show right before Jack ate the rest of it. 

Not one word about what being possessed by Michael meant FOR Dean.. only what enabled Sam to do.  Fuck DabBlemming. They are the worst thing to happen to Dean.

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post

3 hours ago, Pondlass1 said:

Dabb is jealous of Jensen.  And he's pissed because his stupid ideas for spinoffs didn't pan out.  

And if Dabb really dislikes Jensen as much as he seems to go out of his way to make it appear so, he probably headcanons the reason his ideas sucked like a Hoover and didn't go forward is because of Jensen ... And the "just 'cuz" justification ends there.

It really is no fun to continue to receive confirmation that the anti-Dean/Jensen bias is a legit thing.

Edited by PAForrest
  • Like 6
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post

I was SO HOPING that we would find out that Dabb was out as showrunner. What a disappointment!!! How he treats Jensen/Dean is so completely disrespectful. But what should we expect from a fat-assed frat boy who wouldn't know a good story/actor if it hit him in that fat ass!!!

  • Like 4
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/16/2019 at 9:46 AM, catrox14 said:

Remember when I said they were trying to turn Sam into Dean...well this another quote from the article: 

"With Sam's brother gone, with Dean being Michael, Sam has to try and play both roles of Dean and Sam," Padalecki explains. "It was a big step for Sam to be the older brother dynamic."

LOLOLOL... Jared literally said what I (and others) saw happening on screen.  Remember when Blemming had Lucifer declare himself the older brother....and then Lucifer ate the show right before Jack ate the rest of it. 

Not one word about what being possessed by Michael meant FOR Dean.. only what enabled Sam to do.  Fuck DabBlemming. They are the worst thing to happen to Dean.

Jared always talks about how storylines affect him. The question is whether there is any discussion of Dean in the stupid featurette. The season did discuss that Dean felt guilt for saying yes to save Sam and Jack because Nichael used him to do horrible things and he felt absolute horror at being possessed and he was willing to sacrifice himself to a living hell for eternity in the Malak box to prevent Michael from using his body as his vessel to destroy this earth. So there was a Dean/Michael storyline. There was also the entire tie-in to Advanced Thanatology and Nihilism and his fate and if you are me this all ties in to his tragic fall as a classic tragic hero... yada yada yada.

A storyline which was built up from 11 with Chuck saying you are responsible for everything and  Mary's resurrection through the writers summarily dropping it in Ouroboros with the introduction of deus ex machina-lite or Just Jack on Michael juice.

The writers may not be able to acknowledge Dean's storyline out of embarrassment because they weren't good enough to connect the dots well once they found out the actor(s) had pulled the plug. What they did is embarrassing. They ruined Nihilism and Ouroboros which otherwise are two excellent episodes.

I will add that Sam stepping up was Sam's storyline and it was about time he wore big boy pants and showed some leadership qualities. AND it was about time he stepped into Bobby's vacant shoes. Is he great at it. Soooooo. He has a lot of room to grow. Dean is the natural leader and natural hunter however Dean is all about family not about running an organization. Sam seems better suited for manning the computers and his upgrades to the basic operation were good... growing pains aside. 

Edited by Castiels Cat

Share this post


Link to post

GoT fans are so angry about the writing of the final season that there is a petition with over 500,000 signatures and counting.

Noe we cannot suggest a do-over. It would be disrespectful to the actors.

However there might be a way to publicly show support for the actors, and the brothers and complain about the marginalization of Dean and the illogical vaporization of Dean's storyline.

Is it a petition? Is it a trending Twitter hashtag like F@#! Andrew Dabb or Rescue Dean Winchester? IDK

I might actually learn to tweet.

I think a positive hashtag like rescue Dean Winchester is the way to go.

Edited by Castiels Cat

Share this post


Link to post
On 4/26/2019 at 4:41 PM, AwesomO4000 said:

But when did Sam get redemption for starting the apocalypse in season 10? Dean was the one who got to go face Amara and be the influence that stopped the destruction Sam caused. So Dean got to have redemption for the mark of Cain storyline even though all of the really bad consequences were put onto Sam. So Dean got almost no consequences and the redemption.

And I highly doubt Sam will get any redemption out of this latest fiasco either. It will be Jack or Dean who does. Sam will just have to apologize and admit that he screwed up - like he pretty much always has to do.

And it's not like Sam hasn't been reduced to moral declarations and bitch-faces either, so he doesn't even have the luxury of being a more complex character anymore. And he's always proven wrong and/or to have done the wrong thing... Joining the BMoL - wrong. Trying to be a leader - get everyone killed, so - wrong. Even with Jack, it was just a two year plot arc to prove how wrong Sam was to have tried to give Jack a chance in the first place. Where was the "redemption" there?

It's only an advantage if the character actually gets to have growth and redemption. Otherwise, he's just the goat.

It was ironic to me how many of the predictions were about how Sam was going to make the ultimate sacrifice to save the day as the season finale somehow, because Dabb prefers him so much... and then then Dabb goes and has Sam start another apocalypse. If that's a writer "preferring" a character, I kinda wish he didn't and would just pretty much ignore Sam.

Sorry, but at this point, I think I'd rather take the no consequences myself.

Sam recognized he was at fault, accepted responsibility and made changes in himself. He worked to save people in the beginning of the season. All of season 10 was a dark arc to save Dean which included lying to his brother repeatedly and culminated in increasingly dark and desperate actions, finally using the BotD to remove the MoC and release the Darkness.

Carver deliberately repeated Sam's dark arc but made Sam human. Sam's redemption was equally human. He made changes to himself. He talks about changing throughout the season. He confronts his childhood imaginary friend who he hurt deeply and apologizes. He apologizes to Dean. He faces the devil and chooses to put his trust in Dean, the opposite choice he made in season 4 when he chooses Riby over Dean. These things are his redemption.

The MoC storyline was about Dean's inherent Darkness. In accepting Amara Dean makes  peace with his own darkness and then he is able to bring her towards the light. His family keeps him grounded.

It is a very beautiful storyline. Highly symbolic. Not the usual simplistic big bad stuff. This was pretty obvious from the premiere. Carver always lays out his season thesis in the premiere.

Share this post


Link to post

47 minutes ago, Castiels Cat said:

GoT fans are so angry about the writing of the final season that there is a petition with over 500,000 signatures and counting.

Noe we cannot suggest a do-over. It would be disrespectful to the actors.

However there might be a way to publicly show support for the actors, and the brothers and complain about the marginalization of Dean and the illogical vaporization of Dean's storyline.

Is it a petition? Is it a trending Twitter hashtag like F@#! Andrew Dabb or Rescue Dean Winchester? IDK

I might actually learn to tweet.

I think a positive hashtag like rescue Dean Winchester is the way to go.

If there is a petition or anything like it, let me know and I'll join in.

Share this post


Link to post

I apologize in advance. I feel the need to vent here... and it's going to be a loooong vent, some previously covered material and some new stuff (Key new points in bold). Please feel free to skip if you aren't interested...

6 hours ago, Castiels Cat said:

Carver deliberately repeated Sam's dark arc but made Sam human.

Sam's redemption was equally human. He made changes to himself. He talks about changing throughout the season. He confronts his childhood imaginary friend who he hurt deeply and apologizes. He apologizes to Dean. He faces the devil and chooses to put his trust in Dean, the opposite choice he made in season 4 when he chooses Riby over Dean. These things are his redemption.

The MoC storyline was about Dean's inherent Darkness. In accepting Amara Dean makes  peace with his own darkness and then he is able to bring her towards the light. His family keeps him grounded.

It is a very beautiful storyline. Highly symbolic. Not the usual simplistic big bad stuff. This was pretty obvious from the premiere. Carver always lays out his season thesis in the premiere.

I can see the season 10 thing - sort of - except if that was supposed redemption, it was pretty backhanded considering that Sam was then blamed by God himself for everything while Dean was given the hero role. So the implication might be there that Sam only earned "redemption" by "learning his place" as the screw up who makes the wrong choices and who should defer to and apologize to his big brother, not as an equal hero in the story. For me, this isn't exactly a "beautiful" storyline for Sam, and I say this as someone who mostly loved season 11 (mostly in spite of Carver).

And Carver completely muddled the story in my opinion when it came to including Dean's parallel storyline. If it was about Dean accepting his darkness and his family grounding him, why was Dean's storyline showing that his darkness was okay (and maybe partially caused by Sam's attitude and not "supporting" Dean), but Sam's was oh so awful? Why was it shown in the end that Sam's lying to Dean repeatedly was so dark and wrong in season 10, worthy of starting an apocalypse and getting blamed by God for it while, for Dean, lying repeatedly to Sam in season 9 was given lip service (in a way that made Sam look badly, not Dean)*** only to then be followed up with repeated imagery and messages of "isn't Sam so mean not to forgive Dean."

So Sam lies to Dean for what he thinks is the good of saving Dean, and his redemption is to admit he is wrong and to apologize. Dean lies to Sam for the same reasons, and Dean is justified by the narrative  - in my opinion, based on what happened - in doing so. Dean doesn't apologize, and he doesn't have to, because he is shown as right to have done so. (Kevin's death is severely lessened, Gadreel is redeemed, Sam was merely inconvenienced by his possession - what an asshole Sam was for complaining about it.) The message is then that what is okay and justified for Dean to do is completely wrong and "dark" when Sam does it. For me, if this is "redemption" it is also at least equal part putting Sam in his place, because it is only Sam who has to learn this lesson and be "human." Dean gets to be above that same lesson and be justified in being that way.

For me that considerably waters down Sam's redemption as Carver showed it.

The argument I'm sure is that Sam's choices endangered the world, but in my opinion, that only happened because Carver chose for that to be the case. Dean's decisions to save Sam could have just as easily endangered the world had the writers chosen to show that. Gadreel could have been Metatron instead or an angel equally as bad who then got a hold of Sam's body and mind and all of the knowledge and weapons in the bunker. Dean killing Death could have caused a catastrophic event. That none of that happened - to me - looks like Carver is saying that for Dean it is okay to be reckless and have hubris and make any decisions he wants, but for Sam it is bad. If it had happened for Dean only once or even twice, I could dismiss it, but it happened every season of Carver's tenure.

And that to me, seemed to be part of Carver's message from the very beginning in season 8 when it looked like he started trying to ruin Sam's character and trying to make Sam not a hero anymore. Little Carver had Sam do in season 8 was "repeating Sam's dark arc" or "making him human." It was mainly just crap.^^^ The not looking for Dean - or even worse, Kevin - unjustified in my opinion and not necessary. Sam turning his back on helping people? Also not part of Sam's character since like early season 2 at the latest. The jealousy of Benny: why? What for, except to make Sam look badly? Sam giving the untrue "The Purge" speech and Dean's lying being left by the wayside in favor of Sam blaming Dean for stuff that Sam would be made to do also by the end of the season? In my opinion was there to make Sam look badly and/or Dean look sympathetic. None of that was needed to repeat Sam's "dark arc" and in my opinion it also had little to do with Dean accepting his "dark side," since it gave Dean an excuse to be dark... Dean was shown partially to go dark because of his depression because Sam was mean to him - which in itself I contend was not really in character for Sam the way it was shown - as much as it being in Dean's nature.

For me, there was little "beautiful" in the storyline of Sam's redemption. Carver made it as ugly as possible for little reason, in my opinion, to the point that a character I once loved and thought had a beautiful character progression through season 7 when Sam was also changing himself and growing, I then almost loathed. Sam's "redemption" - which I actually suspect was likely more due to Dabb starting to take over more than Carver, myself - was as stingy as possible, making sure that in order to get redemption Sam was "put in his place" as wrong, apologetic, and of less importance than Dean. If Sam dared to question a decision Dean made or dared to not follow Dean's directive, Sam was made to look badly, proven wrong, or smacked down by the narrative... hard. And then had to admit he was wrong and apologize. The opposite was never shown as true under Carver's reign, not in any meaningful way at all. Sam had to learn a lesson and be humbled and apologize. Dean got to be justified and declared caretaker of the world.  For me, that looks like what Carver wanted to show and what he intended to show from the beginning. That I ended up liking Sam's character at all by the time Carver was done I credit mostly to the humanity Jared managed to give the character in season 10 and 11 and the fact that Dabb started taking over in season 11. Had Dabb not started taking over, I question if Sam would have gotten any redemption at all, since it took that long to let Sam really apologize when Carver could have had that happen earlier and instead seemed to purposely resist all opportunities to do so in order to continue his narrative of Sam the "bad brother" vs Benny the "better brother."

It's actually sad, because before Carver became showrunner, some of his episodes were favorite Sam episodes for me (still are), but sadly little of what he showed for Sam's character in those episodes made it to season 8. He even ignored some of the character traits and progression he gave Sam in those episodes to do so.

*** The writers can claim they were having Sam saying "hard truths" in "The Purge" all they want, but the fact that Sam wasn't actually telling the truth (and we the audience knew it) and the lingering camera shots on Dean's sad face and Kevin's later "get over it" tell me that as Chuck said very recently: writers lie. The intent - which culminated at the end of the season was that Sam was the liar - "I lied" - not the truth-teller, and that Dean was vindicated. And in my opinion, Carver and the writers knew this when they wrote "The Purge" and Sam was always meant to be shown as a hypocrite and the one in the wrong. In my opinion, there was no doubt where that story was going, so Sam could only be shown to be a jerk by having Dean lying to Sam be justified.

^^^ And if Carver lays out his season thesis in his premier, what was the season thesis for season 8? Sam doesn't really want to help people and make a difference (like Sam was saying and practicing all of season 6B through 7 on his own), he's really just a self-absorbed asshole who only does good because he wants his brother Dean's approval... because that's what I got out of Carver's season 8 premier and finale. Good Chuck I hated most of season 8.

Edited by AwesomO4000 · Reason: Because when do I not have to edit. *sigh* and waves at @gonzosgirrl.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Snippet brought over from Sue's featurette recap in the DVD thread:

7 hours ago, SueB said:
  • Sam’s story was what people saw Jared say in the clip – play the ‘older brother’ plus offering other a path to redemption (like he himself was redeemed). 
  • Padalecki: “We’ve made decision, made mistakes, and moved on, and I feel like Sam, when he sees, whether it’s Nick or Jack or whomever, he tries to believe in the best in people, so you know Sam’s made mistakes.” Then Dabb and Berens revisit Sam’s S4 mistakes/S5 redemption as his motivation in helping people be redeemed.  But both people he tries to ‘rescue’ (Nick and Jack) wind up horribly bad. Which Berens says is unusual for Supernatural to both have it end bad. Redemption was a reasonable gamble on Sam’s part but both fail. @Awesom04000 would likely throw something thru the screen during this part of the video.
  • Berens: “This is the point that we always knew Jack was heading towards when the character was conceived. We knew he would end up there and it’s been a really interesting sort of journey figuring out when he was gonna get there. 

And pretty much what I've been expecting and saying for the last two seasons, so not unexpected... Of course Sam "playing the older brother" was also set up to fail, too, so pretty much Sam's entire arc since season 12 on was set up for him to fail.

But I have no idea what story Berens has been watching / writing, because when it comes to Sam, it isn't "unusual" at all for it to end badly... that's what they do to Sam all the damn time. Except for undemoning Dean, when has a Sam decision since season 8 not resulted in something bad? And Berens wrote some of them - i.e. "The Werther Project" and "The Raid" - so my annoyance is with how clueless or disingenuous this sounds.

Why can't they just admit that they set Sam up to fail? Don't pretend that this is somehow so "unusual" and unexpected. That I saw it coming two seasons ago and entirely knew that Jack was going to go bad - and predicted that Nick would, too - is in my opinion pretty much the opposite of what would have happened had this been "unusual."

Sorry Berens, but I don't believe you. If you want me to believe things going badly is "unusual" you'll have to actually let Sam do something right and not screw up first.... and since you haven't been around long enough to qualify for that and have actually contributed in a major way to the opposite (I'm still bitter about "The Raid"), then... well, I would finish that, but it wouldn't be nice, so I won't.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I apologize in advance. I feel the need to vent here... and it's going to be a loooong vent, some previously covered material and some new stuff (Key new points in bold). Please feel free to skip if you aren't interested...

I can see the season 10 thing - sort of - except if that was supposed redemption, it was pretty backhanded considering that Sam was then blamed by God himself for everything while Dean was given the hero role. So the implication might be there that Sam only earned "redemption" by "learning his place" as the screw up who makes the wrong choices and who should defer to and apologize to his big brother, not as an equal hero in the story. For me, this isn't exactly a "beautiful" storyline for Sam, and I say this as someone who mostly loved season 11 (mostly in spite of Carver).

And Carver completely muddled the story in my opinion when it came to including Dean's parallel storyline. If it was about Dean accepting his darkness and his family grounding him, why was Dean's storyline showing that his darkness was okay (and maybe partially caused by Sam's attitude and not "supporting" Dean), but Sam's was oh so awful? Why was it shown in the end that Sam's lying to Dean repeatedly was so dark and wrong in season 10, worthy of starting an apocalypse and getting blamed by God for it while, for Dean, lying repeatedly to Sam in season 9 was given lip service (in a way that made Sam look badly, not Dean)*** only to then be followed up with repeated imagery and messages of "isn't Sam so mean not to forgive Dean."

So Sam lies to Dean for what he thinks is the good of saving Dean, and his redemption is to admit he is wrong and to apologize. Dean lies to Sam for the same reasons, and Dean is justified by the narrative  - in my opinion, based on what happened - in doing so. Dean doesn't apologize, and he doesn't have to, because he is shown as right to have done so. (Kevin's death is severely lessened, Gadreel is redeemed, Sam was merely inconvenienced by his possession - what an asshole Sam was for complaining about it.) The message is then that what is okay and justified for Dean to do is completely wrong and "dark" when Sam does it. For me, if this is "redemption" it is also at least equal part putting Sam in his place, because it is only Sam who has to learn this lesson and be "human." Dean gets to be above that same lesson and be justified in being that way.

For me that considerably waters down Sam's redemption as Carver showed it.

The argument I'm sure is that Sam's choices endangered the world, but in my opinion, that only happened because Carver chose for that to be the case. Dean's decisions to save Sam could have just as easily endangered the world had the writers chosen to show that. Gadreel could have been Metatron instead or an angel equally as bad who then got a hold of Sam's body and mind and all of the knowledge and weapons in the bunker. Dean killing Death could have caused a catastrophic event. That none of that happened - to me - looks like Carver is saying that for Dean it is okay to be reckless and have hubris and make any decisions he wants, but for Sam it is bad. If it had happened for Dean only once or even twice, I could dismiss it, but it happened every season of Carver's tenure.

And that to me, seemed to be part of Carver's message from the very beginning in season 8 when it looked like he started trying to ruin Sam's character and trying to make Sam not a hero anymore. Little Carver had Sam do in season 8 was "repeating Sam's dark arc" or "making him human." It was mainly just crap.^^^ The not looking for Dean - or even worse, Kevin - unjustified in my opinion and not necessary. Sam turning his back on helping people? Also not part of Sam's character since like early season 2 at the latest. The jealousy of Benny: why? What for, except to make Sam look badly? Sam giving the untrue "The Purge" speech and Dean's lying being left by the wayside in favor of Sam blaming Dean for stuff that Sam would be made to do also by the end of the season? In my opinion was there to make Sam look badly and/or Dean look sympathetic. None of that was needed to repeat Sam's "dark arc" and in my opinion it also had little to do with Dean accepting his "dark side," since it gave Dean an excuse to be dark... Dean was shown partially to go dark because of his depression because Sam was mean to him - which in itself I contend was not really in character for Sam the way it was shown - as much as it being in Dean's nature.

For me, there was little "beautiful" in the storyline of Sam's redemption. Carver made it as ugly as possible for little reason, in my opinion, to the point that a character I once loved and thought had a beautiful character progression through season 7 when Sam was also changing himself and growing, I then almost loathed. Sam's "redemption" - which I actually suspect was likely more due to Dabb starting to take over more than Carver, myself - was as stingy as possible, making sure that in order to get redemption Sam was "put in his place" as wrong, apologetic, and of less importance than Dean. If Sam dared to question a decision Dean made or dared to not follow Dean's directive, Sam was made to look badly, proven wrong, or smacked down by the narrative... hard. And then had to admit he was wrong and apologize. The opposite was never shown as true under Carver's reign, not in any meaningful way at all. Sam had to learn a lesson and be humbled and apologize. Dean got to be justified and declared caretaker of the world.  For me, that looks like what Carver wanted to show and what he intended to show from the beginning. That I ended up liking Sam's character at all by the time Carver was done I credit mostly to the humanity Jared managed to give the character in season 10 and 11 and the fact that Dabb started taking over in season 11. Had Dabb not started taking over, I question if Sam would have gotten any redemption at all, since it took that long to let Sam really apologize when Carver could have had that happen earlier and instead seemed to purposely resist all opportunities to do so in order to continue his narrative of Sam the "bad brother" vs Benny the "better brother."

It's actually sad, because before Carver became showrunner, some of his episodes were favorite Sam episodes for me (still are), but sadly little of what he showed for Sam's character in those episodes made it to season 8. He even ignored some of the character traits and progression he gave Sam in those episodes to do so.

*** The writers can claim they were having Sam saying "hard truths" in "The Purge" all they want, but the fact that Sam wasn't actually telling the truth (and we the audience knew it) and the lingering camera shots on Dean's sad face and Kevin's later "get over it" tell me that as Chuck said very recently: writers lie. The intent - which culminated at the end of the season was that Sam was the liar - "I lied" - not the truth-teller, and that Dean was vindicated. And in my opinion, Carver and the writers knew this when they wrote "The Purge" and Sam was always meant to be shown as a hypocrite and the one in the wrong. In my opinion, there was no doubt where that story was going, so Sam could only be shown to be a jerk by having Dean lying to Sam be justified.

^^^ And if Carver lays out his season thesis in his premier, what was the season thesis for season 8? Sam doesn't really want to help people and make a difference (like Sam was saying and practicing all of season 6B through 7 on his own), he's really just a self-absorbed asshole who only does good because he wants his brother Dean's approval... beause that's what I got out of Carver's season 8 premier and finale. Good Chuck I hated most of season 8.

Edited by gonzosgirrl · Reason: No reason except to sympathize over the edit thing. :)
  • Like 1
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, SueB said:

The new featurette is out today for those who have digital subscriptions.  I've written down some direct quotes which I consider highlights.  Note:  I skipped a lot of the Nick stuff because it is a done story and apparently his whole arc was to provide a parallel to Dean.  Dean=good, Nick= bad after angel possession. 

Highlights:

  •  Michael/Nick story summary by BB & ERL: The possession parallel story lines was a major theme. Nick’s story was a foil to Dean’s.  Both could have been very dramatically damaged but while Nick failed abysmally, Dean did not.  Dean takes responsibility for what happened, Nick did not.  Dean could pull himself out of his darkness with his family supporting him.  Nick choose to ignore the outstretched hand of Sam and in his isolation, combined with likely being a nobody who wanted power in the first place, he just degrades into complete darkness.  Dean Winchester doesn’t have that power.  He and Sam have ALWAYS mattered.  Dean already has an identity, Nick got it from Lucifer and hates it when Abraxis tells him that he was just a convenient nobody.  Which is what drove him to go so far. Dean is always about family and his extended family.  That family support is what allowed him to overcome the effects of the possession. ...  
  • Berens: “This is the point that we always knew Jack was heading towards when the character was conceived. We knew he would end up there and it’s been a really interesting sort of journey figuring out when he was gonna get there. But it was actually all the more interesting to have built up ALL that equity in the character, and to realize, ‘No we’re still heading towards the story, this is still an important part of the story of Jack and the story of the Winchesters, and it became almost horribly unavoidable from a narrative perspective.

(edited for the relevant quotes)

OH...I understand.  The writers/producers knew exactly what they were saying, and it's the fault of the viewers that we were too stupid to understand what wasn't said (or shown.)  They believed in Dean's strength and didn't need to show it.  They just wanted to show Nick's weakness so we could draw the comparison ourselves.  And it makes no difference that Dean was possessed for, oh, maybe a day** (and had Michael locked up for another week or so) while Lucifer held Nick for years?  We should *know* that Dean would have been strong enough to handle Michael if he'd ever had to.  Because after all, he had his whole family supporting him...um.....

And Jack was always a bad guy, but he played a woobie so well that everyone but Dean was taken in.  We were all supposed to be rooting for Dean and not Jack all along.  I can see it all now.  

**ETA: OK, I know it was more than a day, since he went around asking everyone what they wanted.  But it still was only a short time.  

Edited by ahrtee
  • Like 9
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, ahrtee said:

(edited for the relevant quotes)

OH...I understand.  The writers/producers knew exactly what they were saying, and it's the fault of the viewers that we were too stupid to understand what wasn't said (or shown.)  They believed in Dean's strength and didn't need to show it.  They just wanted to show Nick's weakness so we could draw the comparison ourselves.  And it makes no difference that Dean was possessed for, oh, maybe a day** (and had Michael locked up for another week or so) while Lucifer held Nick for years?  We should *know* that Dean would have been strong enough to handle Michael if he'd ever had to.  Because after all, he had his whole family supporting him...um.....

And Jack was always a bad guy, but he played a woobie so well that everyone but Dean was taken in.  We were all supposed to be rooting for Dean and not Jack all along.  I can see it all now.  

**ETA: OK, I know it was more than a day, since he went around asking everyone what they wanted.  But it still was only a short time.  

Wow.

I don't think I have ever seen such a poor example of supposed "parallel storylines" than the Michael/Dean and Nick/Lucifer storylines.

And IIRC, the Sam character,  via actual dialogues, even drew his own parallels between himself and Nick more than once this season.

So I would like to know when this featurette was dubbed or made because what we've gotten here all just sounds and smells like a big pile of bullshit to me.

  • Like 6
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

9 hours ago, Myrelle said:

Wow.

I don't think I have ever seen such a poor example of supposed "parallel storylines" than the Michael/Dean and Nick/Lucifer storylines.

And IIRC, the Sam character,  via actual dialogues, even drew his own parallels between himself and Nick more than once this season.

So I would like to know when this featurette was dubbed or made because what we've gotten here all just sounds and smells like a big pile of bullshit to me.

Total BS. As I read it I legitimately wondered what show they were talking about. Seriously,  if that is truly what they believe ended up on screen, I...I don't even know what to say about that, except it probably explains the shitshow we've been handed the last four seasons.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

I have not actually timed it, but it seemed like the featurette spends more time on Nick - clips, Mark P talking, B-L talking, Dabb talking, Berens talking - than Dean and Sam combined. At least that's how I experienced it......

  • Useful 1
  • Sad 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, auntvi said:

I have not actually timed it, but it seemed like the featurette spends more time on Nick - clips, Mark P talking, B-L talking, Dabb talking, Berens talking - than Dean and Sam combined. At least that's how I experienced it......

I agree.  I didn't time it either and I didn't bother transcribing the Mark P stuff about Nick.  But since J2 filmed their bits on the same day they announced the series was ending, they may have had limited commentary they wanted to contribute in the first place.  Honestly I don't know WHY they would ask them to do anything on that day.

1 hour ago, Pondlass1 said:

Where is this featureltte of which you speak?

If you have the iTunes season pass for S14 you saw another 'chapter' of the "Winchester Mythology" featurettes that have been on the DVDs for the last few years.  This one was "Winchester Mythology: The Choices We Make".  I'm sure, just like in past seasons, it'll be on the DVD in the fall.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/19/2019 at 9:11 AM, gonzosgirrl said:

Total BS. As I read it I legitimately wondered what show they were talking about. Seriously,  if that is truly what they believe ended up on screen, I...I don't even know what to say about that, except it probably explains the shitshow we've been handed the last four seasons.

Unhuman Nature clearly emphasizes the parallel storylines between Nick, Dean and Jack that had been set up in earlier episodes. This was obviously scrapped later on post Nihilism. Nihilism ended with Michael!Dean going strong and firmly tied to Dean's character arc from season 13 via Advanced Thanatology and the reckless desperation he had to save Mary *and Jack) and later Sam (and Jack) which lead to Michael learning about this world, coming to this world and accessing his OTV or perfect suit. SIGH.

Dabb is such a P*SS!.  One assumes it was Jensen et al. Informing him that his rifexat the top was over that abruptly turned it into the Jack show.

Jensen better take over next season. It still sounds bad with no resolution. Just 20(?) Episodes of hunting with an no resolution.

I read Jensen wants Sam to die at the end and Dean to be distraught and carry on with the family business... forget where I read that...

Implication is that Jared is done but Jensen maybe is up for something else later on?

... without Dabb and whoever else mucked the pot.

The talk of bringing back the old talent to write is a great idea. He should definitely use his weight to make that happen. If they are going for motw then make them great.

And resurrecting John (might also mean resurrecting mom) is also a great idea. Billie, Rowena, Jack... if they can get an archangel on board or Amara...

Just deliver good writing.

Edited by Castiels Cat

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/18/2019 at 8:16 PM, ahrtee said:

(edited for the relevant quotes)

OH...I understand.  The writers/producers knew exactly what they were saying, and it's the fault of the viewers that we were too stupid to understand what wasn't said (or shown.)  They believed in Dean's strength and didn't need to show it.  They just wanted to show Nick's weakness so we could draw the comparison ourselves.  And it makes no difference that Dean was possessed for, oh, maybe a day** (and had Michael locked up for another week or so) while Lucifer held Nick for years?  We should *know* that Dean would have been strong enough to handle Michael if he'd ever had to.  Because after all, he had his whole family supporting him...um.....

And Jack was always a bad guy, but he played a woobie so well that everyone but Dean was taken in.  We were all supposed to be rooting for Dean and not Jack all along.  I can see it all now.  

**ETA: OK, I know it was more than a day, since he went around asking everyone what they wanted.  But it still was only a short time.  

That's not exactly what they are saying. The parallels between Dean and Nick were there from the beginning and an entire episode focused on them  (Unhuman Nature), as well as the ongoing parallels between Dean and Jack because he also grappled with the outcome of his choices that lead to him pursuing a relationship with Lucifer and losing his grace.

As usual however their discussion is more reductive than Cliff's Notes... and yes. Nick was possessed longer than Sam and Sam was extremely broken requiring the intervention of 2 supernatural entities and had the support of Dean and Bobby. It is beyond a case of apples and oranges.  Nick was going through the motions of "hunting" but it was ugly and twisted and depraved. It was interesting... except for the fact that Dean the star wasn't getting any attention at all. After watching Sam suffer two seasons of post-Lucifer PTSD thanks to Gamble's hard-on for Hurt!Sam as well as more PTSD Sam in s 11-13, we now get to watch Nick's psychokiller demented long distance season long romance with Lucifer whilst Dean still gets nada. Dean gets what... a line in an episode or maybe two plus Jensen's magnificent facial acting which he has had plenty of practice mastering because they have not written the scenes to convey Dean's logical mindset to convey what he has just been through for so many storylines that I have lost count... I might have to kill Sammy y'all, Sammy's a freak y'all, I might go to hell y'all, hell, betrayed by Sam for a demon, Sam's gone, Sam let me become a vampire y'all, omg Sam's soulless and I might have to kill him, my bff is a dick, my bff is dead, my bro is crazy crazy, Bobby is dead, my bro is really crazy cray, my bff is alive but cray cray, my bro betrayed me again and left me to die, my bff is dead again, my bro tried to kill my new bff, my bro made me break up with my new bff, my bro is dying again, I am keeping a secret from my bro and guilty, my prophet died and my bro hates me so I hate myself, I feel crazy and dangerous so I got drunk with the king of hell and got a tattoo...

This is a partial list. Ask yourself. When has the show spent time on Dean's reactions to what he has been through. Answer...never. Jensen will act with his face. Dean reacts by hunting or drinking or eating. It's a joke to the writers. With the MoC he ate constantly. I think possibly Deans biggest reaction arc was post Purgatory through his friendship with Benny. Two episodes in which part of the episodes featured Dean and Benny hunting together and talking about reacclimating. Seriously. Thanks Carver.

Likewise, the MoC arc told us that Dean channeled his aggression into hunting and showed us how that would play out with the Styne episode as well as with the pedophile rapist episode penned by Dabb. Again thanks for the bones Carver.

And the Darkness storyline, as weirdly eroticizef as it was with Dean,  was in a nutshell his love affair with his inner darkness. He accepted his inner darkness and she accepted her love of her family. It also clearly set up Chuck as the bad guy imo. Amara was locked up and set up as a fall guy by misogynist Chuck as the evil other. He then puts everything on Dean's shoulders, the one guy who already feels responsible for everything when Chuck created the mess in the first place. He lets everyone else do all of the work and plays the 100 pound weakling... 

As for short changing Dean in the writing year after year...

It is as if Kripke and Singer have never forgiven Jensen Ackles personally for single handedly created a character so iconic that Supernatural lasted for 15 years. It is not as if Kripke wanted Dean to be a co-star. It is not as if Kripke can do it again with his world building or writing. 

I never bought into that the writers are against Dean stuff... until now.  

And Jack... I think it is more a matter of he was always part Lucifer's grace which meant that anger and strong emotions were always  powerful triggers, tempered by his human parents' teachings. He was always a volatile mixture of grace and soul that could easily become imbalanced. We saw that again and again in his early episodes. That was the entire point of the raIsing of the shadeem. He isn't evil. He is powerful. He is not human. Control is a serious issue. Once he was too old to listen to his elders without question there were problems... This was telegraphed pretty well I thought early on but handled badly at the end because of the soullessness conundrum. For me soullessness is as pickly as rogue reapers. I don't think it even should mean the flame thing with a nephilim per se because they are not human. Meh. They rushed this part. I had whiplash. I don't care about Jack. I care that Dean does. I loved the father son bonding for that reason and when Jack expressed a semblance of remorse I knew Dean would see the son and not the monster. 

I saw Jack as a prop to explore character growth. He worked as that but then he stole the show. 

I was fine until Nihilism. I was even kind of ok after Ouroboros. The episode was sooo good until that end.The end was whacked. I knew Jack would help and figured he would try to strengthen the door in Dean's mind but it would backfire... yada yada yada he would end up releasing Lucifer. That was my season spec.

I just thought Michael tricked them. I really held onto that...lol. But then the season fell apart and it was Nick this, Jack that. The end of Ouroboros looks like it was reshot to me. It felt so off. I think they scrambled at the end. IDK

They shot their golden goose.

This is just rambling.

I am worried about next season. I hope Jensen can save it. He appears to be the visionary.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/18/2019 at 12:28 AM, AwesomO4000 said:

I apologize in advance. I feel the need to vent here... and it's going to be a loooong vent, some previously covered material and some new stuff (Key new points in bold). Please feel free to skip if you aren't interested...

I can see the season 10 thing - sort of - except if that was supposed redemption, it was pretty backhanded considering that Sam was then blamed by God himself for everything while Dean was given the hero role. So the implication might be there that Sam only earned "redemption" by "learning his place" as the screw up who makes the wrong choices and who should defer to and apologize to his big brother, not as an equal hero in the story. For me, this isn't exactly a "beautiful" storyline for Sam, and I say this as someone who mostly loved season 11 (mostly in spite of Carver).

And Carver completely muddled the story in my opinion when it came to including Dean's parallel storyline. If it was about Dean accepting his darkness and his family grounding him, why was Dean's storyline showing that his darkness was okay (and maybe partially caused by Sam's attitude and not "supporting" Dean), but Sam's was oh so awful? Why was it shown in the end that Sam's lying to Dean repeatedly was so dark and wrong in season 10, worthy of starting an apocalypse and getting blamed by God for it while, for Dean, lying repeatedly to Sam in season 9 was given lip service (in a way that made Sam look badly, not Dean)*** only to then be followed up with repeated imagery and messages of "isn't Sam so mean not to forgive Dean."

So Sam lies to Dean for what he thinks is the good of saving Dean, and his redemption is to admit he is wrong and to apologize. Dean lies to Sam for the same reasons, and Dean is justified by the narrative  - in my opinion, based on what happened - in doing so. Dean doesn't apologize, and he doesn't have to, because he is shown as right to have done so. (Kevin's death is severely lessened, Gadreel is redeemed, Sam was merely inconvenienced by his possession - what an asshole Sam was for complaining about it.) The message is then that what is okay and justified for Dean to do is completely wrong and "dark" when Sam does it. For me, if this is "redemption" it is also at least equal part putting Sam in his place, because it is only Sam who has to learn this lesson and be "human." Dean gets to be above that same lesson and be justified in being that way.

For me that considerably waters down Sam's redemption as Carver showed it.

The argument I'm sure is that Sam's choices endangered the world, but in my opinion, that only happened because Carver chose for that to be the case. Dean's decisions to save Sam could have just as easily endangered the world had the writers chosen to show that. Gadreel could have been Metatron instead or an angel equally as bad who then got a hold of Sam's body and mind and all of the knowledge and weapons in the bunker. Dean killing Death could have caused a catastrophic event. That none of that happened - to me - looks like Carver is saying that for Dean it is okay to be reckless and have hubris and make any decisions he wants, but for Sam it is bad. If it had happened for Dean only once or even twice, I could dismiss it, but it happened every season of Carver's tenure.

And that to me, seemed to be part of Carver's message from the very beginning in season 8 when it looked like he started trying to ruin Sam's character and trying to make Sam not a hero anymore. Little Carver had Sam do in season 8 was "repeating Sam's dark arc" or "making him human." It was mainly just crap.^^^ The not looking for Dean - or even worse, Kevin - unjustified in my opinion and not necessary. Sam turning his back on helping people? Also not part of Sam's character since like early season 2 at the latest. The jealousy of Benny: why? What for, except to make Sam look badly? Sam giving the untrue "The Purge" speech and Dean's lying being left by the wayside in favor of Sam blaming Dean for stuff that Sam would be made to do also by the end of the season? In my opinion was there to make Sam look badly and/or Dean look sympathetic. None of that was needed to repeat Sam's "dark arc" and in my opinion it also had little to do with Dean accepting his "dark side," since it gave Dean an excuse to be dark... Dean was shown partially to go dark because of his depression because Sam was mean to him - which in itself I contend was not really in character for Sam the way it was shown - as much as it being in Dean's nature.

For me, there was little "beautiful" in the storyline of Sam's redemption. Carver made it as ugly as possible for little reason, in my opinion, to the point that a character I once loved and thought had a beautiful character progression through season 7 when Sam was also changing himself and growing, I then almost loathed. Sam's "redemption" - which I actually suspect was likely more due to Dabb starting to take over more than Carver, myself - was as stingy as possible, making sure that in order to get redemption Sam was "put in his place" as wrong, apologetic, and of less importance than Dean. If Sam dared to question a decision Dean made or dared to not follow Dean's directive, Sam was made to look badly, proven wrong, or smacked down by the narrative... hard. And then had to admit he was wrong and apologize. The opposite was never shown as true under Carver's reign, not in any meaningful way at all. Sam had to learn a lesson and be humbled and apologize. Dean got to be justified and declared caretaker of the world.  For me, that looks like what Carver wanted to show and what he intended to show from the beginning. That I ended up liking Sam's character at all by the time Carver was done I credit mostly to the humanity Jared managed to give the character in season 10 and 11 and the fact that Dabb started taking over in season 11. Had Dabb not started taking over, I question if Sam would have gotten any redemption at all, since it took that long to let Sam really apologize when Carver could have had that happen earlier and instead seemed to purposely resist all opportunities to do so in order to continue his narrative of Sam the "bad brother" vs Benny the "better brother."

It's actually sad, because before Carver became showrunner, some of his episodes were favorite Sam episodes for me (still are), but sadly little of what he showed for Sam's character in those episodes made it to season 8. He even ignored some of the character traits and progression he gave Sam in those episodes to do so.

*** The writers can claim they were having Sam saying "hard truths" in "The Purge" all they want, but the fact that Sam wasn't actually telling the truth (and we the audience knew it) and the lingering camera shots on Dean's sad face and Kevin's later "get over it" tell me that as Chuck said very recently: writers lie. The intent - which culminated at the end of the season was that Sam was the liar - "I lied" - not the truth-teller, and that Dean was vindicated. And in my opinion, Carver and the writers knew this when they wrote "The Purge" and Sam was always meant to be shown as a hypocrite and the one in the wrong. In my opinion, there was no doubt where that story was going, so Sam could only be shown to be a jerk by having Dean lying to Sam be justified.

^^^ And if Carver lays out his season thesis in his premier, what was the season thesis for season 8? Sam doesn't really want to help people and make a difference (like Sam was saying and practicing all of season 6B through 7 on his own), he's really just a self-absorbed asshole who only does good because he wants his brother Dean's approval... because that's what I got out of Carver's season 8 premier and finale. Good Chuck I hated most of season 8.

When I say Carver's premieres are a thesis for the season I mean for the major themes. Obviously they cannot function to cover every episode of the season now highlight a speech from a single episode. You are nitpicking.

The Purge speech was a hateful speech which Sam gave in anger. Sam says ugly things when he is angry. He did it to Sully too. Sam is human and not perfect. Neither is Dean. They both make mistake. Season 13 was a season of Dean making several ugly mistakes. I do not make excuses for them even though he did them to save his family.

He apologizes to Dean in Love Bites. I  don't think it had anything to do with this tit for that that you are obsessed with. He hurt his brother. That was all that mattered. He apologized for hietimg him. I forget the language of the speech. It was an important moment.

I do not understand your rant about Sam's place. Dean was not even allowed to take one day away from Sam wothout him ordering a hit squad on Dean's  friends and you are ranting about Sam's place? Where does this come from?

Dean has inherent darkness that makes him a good hunter he needs his family to ground him. Sam when he goes dark to save family... a different storyline... went out of control with lies and manipulation that gets people killed. It starts with him manipulating Lester.

We see Dean's version of this storyline in multiple seasons, most recently seasons 9 and 13...The reckless save. His version gave us Gadreel and Michael. They have different personalities so their flaws manifest differently. Dean should have gotten a redemption arc after the Michael storyline played out because this was his really big oopsie. Up until the end of Nihilism this appeared to be on track. I would say it has all been dropped because of the End.

Sam's arc spanned seasons 8-11. I think Dean's was meant to span seasons 12-15. It was dtopped in 14 before it was completed.  Dean punished himself for the things you mentioned which pushed the narrative towards Sam's dark arc in 10. Dean did not threaten the world until he said yes to Michael. At that point he was due a redemption arc.

Benny was the better brother in every way. He died to bring Sam back into the world and Sam never apologized about trying to kill him and ruining his life. I think Carver had the attitude that he had to really make it ugly because the fangirls were delusional. The fangirls were still delusional. There are sites that insist Benny fooled Dean to this day. It was all a nefarious plan for world dominance. Lol. Sam drove Benny back to drink. Heartbreaking. And Sam doesn't care at all because he's Sam (patented shoulder shrug).

So in Season 11 We See Sam ... Acknowledging Mistake. Avow to Make Changes in Himself. Make Amends. This is a Redemption Arc.

Sam apologies to Sully, tells Lucifer that he chooses to believe in Dean this time, apologizes to Dean along with a frank acknowledgement of Dean's tendency to sacrifice himself for others recklessly, setting up Dean's forthcoming arc.

This should have happened in season 6 instead we received 2 seasons of what is wrong with Sam and hurt Sam including an episode in which Dean feels guilt for people that died during the Apocalypse but not Sam because he's paid his dues (patented shoulder shrug). LMAO. Sorry Sera. This was bad writing and bad writing and it made me loathe the character. 

Dean technically broke the first seal by torturing evil dead souls in hell where he had no idea it would have no effect on the living. He was only in Hell to save his brother and he was tortured mercilessly to break him.

Sam betrayed his brother because he was seduced with the demoness who laughed when his brother was carted off to hell,lied about it to him, sucked her blood, did it because he wanted to be better and stronger than Dean, was jealous a out the angel thing, beat Dean to a pulp and chose the demon over Dean... thereby sucking a possessed human dry, killing them, killing Lilith and them breaking the final seal to release Lucifer and start the Apocalypse. 

Which brother is more sympathetic? Which brother bears more moral responsibility?Seriously.

For me Carver made Sam likeable again. Kripkecand Gamble ruined him with the tropes and their inability to write heroic arcs or dark anti heroic arcs. Meanwhile Jensen is just acting the hell out of whatever they hand him.

  • Like 1
  • Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Castiels Cat said:

I do not understand your rant about Sam's place. Dean was not even allowed to take one day away from Sam wothout him ordering a hit squad on Dean's  friends and you are ranting about Sam's place? Where does this come from? 

I mean Sam's place in the story. If, as you say, Sam's redemption was to be shown as "human" - which I thought he already was, myself - and apologize for his mistakes, then fine, I'll agree with that. However - and this is a big however - in my opinion that "redemption" becomes pretty watered down when Dean has very similar mistakes and does very similar things, but the narrative shows that it is perfectly fine for Dean to do those things without having to go through the same process. Dean is justified in doing what he does while Sam must be made "human," including dragging his character through the mud, and apologize. In other words Dean can make reckless decisions, use dark powers, flaunt the natural order, be arrogant, but for Dean these things are okay to do. It's only for Sam that they are not.

In my opinion that is less redemption and more showing that only Sam has to be wrong and be made to apologize even when they do very similar things.

Yes, their personalities are different, but that only goes so far as an excuse. "I did it for my family" is not an excuse to do extremely questionable things to your brother and risk the world no matter which brother does it to the other. That the narrative seemed to go out of its way to excuse Dean for his behavior while condemning Sam for the same, in my opinion, is where the inequity is and why I am saying that if that was the message, it is not treating Sam as an equal in the relationship.

And as for Benny and Sam's jealousy, in my opinion that was not previously hinted at as part of Sam's personality at all and was something Carver did to trash Sam's character so that his new pet Benny could be Mary-Sued.

1 hour ago, Castiels Cat said:

Dean punished himself for the things you mentioned which pushed the narrative towards Sam's dark arc in 10. Dean did not threaten the world until he said yes to Michael. At that point he was due a redemption arc.

And here's where we fundamentally disagree.

In my opinion, Dean endangered the world way before that. The narrative just chose to ignore it or excuse it. Gadreel turning out not to be entirely evil was lucky. That could have gone entirely wrong on a cosmic level. Access to all of the weapons in the bunker and Sam's knowledge? What if Gadreel had brought that stuff to Metatron? What if Gadreel had somehow been Lucifer that Sam accidentally said yes to? And that's not even counting the mark of Cain and how reckless and dangerous that could have been.

And then there was Death. For me it's the height of - something - that in the same episode the writers are showing how awful and dark Sam is for using of the Book of the Damned to save Dean thereby starting an apocalypse, Dean arrogantly and flippantly kills Death Himself one of the supposed potentially balancing forces of the universe maybe on par with God to save Sam, but oh well, it's Dean, he can do that without consequence.

That's what I'm talking about. In my opinion, it's only "tit for tat" because the writers are putting it right there next to each other in the same episode even, daring me to compare them. It's kind of hard to ignore that kind of thing, in my opinion.

2 hours ago, Castiels Cat said:

Benny was the better brother in every way. He died to bring Sam back into the world and Sam never apologized about trying to kill him and ruining his life. I think Carver had the attitude that he had to really make it ugly because the fangirls were delusional. The fangirls were still delusional. There are sites that insist Benny fooled Dean to this day. It was all a nefarious plan for world dominance. Lol. Sam drove Benny back to drink. Heartbreaking. And Sam doesn't care at all because he's Sam (patented shoulder shrug).

My opinion... it was to make Benny a Mary Sue, and they trashed Sam to do it, and didn't care that they did. There

was, in  my opinion, no precedence for Sam to have acted that way at all. Sam went out of his way when it came to Castiel because of how Dean felt about Cas, for example, and Castiel was fairly crappy to Sam a lot during the time Sam was doing it.

2 hours ago, Castiels Cat said:

ncluding an episode in which Dean feels guilt for people that died during the Apocalypse but not Sam because he's paid his dues (patented shoulder shrug). LMAO. Sorry Sera. This was bad writing and bad writing and it made me loathe the character. 

That was one bad episode out of an entire season and a half - for me I'd call that nitpicking also. And it was written by Adam Glass - who in my opinion wrote Sam terribly and took potshots at the character, too (see "Sharp Teeth"). That episode was one of his potshots.

Sam did a lot of making up for what he'd done during seasons 6B and 7. He took solace in hunting and in making a difference. He was at peace with his hallucinations, because he thought it was just. He was happy hunting with Dean and happy making a difference. Sam said it over and over again throughout that season and a half. It was Carver who chose to take that away from the character in season 8... not Gamble.

2 hours ago, Castiels Cat said:

For me Carver made Sam likeable again.

Whereas in my opinion, Carver tried to take away all of Sam's character growth from seasons  5 - 7 and turn him into a jealous, uncaring jerk who only wanted his brother's approval, thereby cementing an even unhealthier relationship between the two of them.

To each their own.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size