tessathereaper December 21, 2020 Share December 21, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Katy M said: I just can't see Sam taking an innocent human being hostage. He'd have found a better way to kill Benny. I already said that Sam was wrong for chaining dean up. But, despite being in a mental hospital, Martin somehow became unstable between Sam intrrupted and this episode. Because he was perfectly fine in SAm Interrupted. He was the one who figured out what the creature was, stopped Sam from attacking the doctor and took care of Wendy after the Wraith attacked her. The main problem is the "killing Benny" part. Sam still would have been trying to kill Benny and being as he's a better hunter than Martin, Benny would have probably been dead. Not to mention the other really big thing, Sam allowed Dean to get knocked out and instead of reading the riot act to Martin, and frankly tying him up if he wouldn't stay on his way, and staying with Dean. He then let him CHAIN him up, chain up his unconscious brother while vamps are in the area, and left with him to go kill Benny. I mean dear god I can't even imagine what would have happened if Dean did that to Sam. It would have been a sh!t show. And somehow Dean, is the bad guy, gets other characters telling him he was oh so wrong(no one bitched out Sam for doing much much worse) and Sam gets off with no blame. Edited December 21, 2020 by tessathereaper 5 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6511546
ahrtee December 21, 2020 Share December 21, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Katy M said: I just can't see Sam taking an innocent human being hostage. He'd have found a better way to kill Benny. I already said that Sam was wrong for chaining dean up. But, despite being in a mental hospital, Martin somehow became unstable between Sam intrrupted and this episode. Because he was perfectly fine in SAm Interrupted. He was the one who figured out what the creature was, stopped Sam from attacking the doctor and took care of Wendy after the Wraith attacked her. That's the point. Sam was ready to kill Benny, who *was* innocent. He might not have involved the granddaughter, but he wasn't about to believe Benny enough to help him prove his innocence. ETA: Or what @tessathereaper just said. Martin wasn't "perfectly fine" in Sam Interrupted. He was stuttering, talking too much and too fast, very obviously anxious and unwilling to hunt. He had called the boys in the first place because he didn't feel he could hunt himself. MARTIN: I know you boys think I'm a bag of loose screws. Now, you wouldn't be wrong. But I wouldn't have called you unless there was something here. I can feel it in my gut. DEAN and SAM exchange looks. SAM: We believe you. Have you checked any of the bodies? Found signs of an attack? MARTIN: Well, uh, no...I don't go around dead b-b-b-bodies anymore. The fact that he managed to stop the wraith from attacking Dean and stayed behind to take care of Wendy (while sending Dean off to chase the wraith alone) doesn't mean he was perfectly fine. Edited December 21, 2020 by ahrtee 7 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6511550
Katy M December 21, 2020 Share December 21, 2020 9 minutes ago, ahrtee said: e was stuttering, talking too much and too fast, Wow. Just wow. This is like the time my boss accused me of being on drugs because I talk too fast. Whatevs. 1 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6511569
ahrtee December 21, 2020 Share December 21, 2020 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Katy M said: Wow. Just wow. This is like the time my boss accused me of being on drugs because I talk too fast. Whatevs. There's a difference between talking too fast and babbling. Believe me, I've done both (pretty frequently). 😊 But *the way he played it* this doesn't seem the speech pattern of a mentally stable person: MARTIN: In the old days, I could've taken care of this thing with both hands tied behind my back...but, well...now... SAM: What do you think it is that we're hunting? MARTIN: I don't know yet. A ghost, demon, monster...animal, vegetable, mineral. (chuckles) Hospital's had five deaths in the last four months. Doctors keep calling it suicides, but they're wrong. SAM: So, you've seen this thing? MARTIN shakes his head. DEAN: Has anyone seen this thing? MARTIN: Well, a couple patients have, uh...had glimpses, but there's not a lot to go on. DEAN: Are they reliable? MARTIN: Oh, sure, why wouldn't they be? Edited December 21, 2020 by ahrtee 4 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6511578
Katy M December 21, 2020 Share December 21, 2020 4 minutes ago, ahrtee said: There's a difference between talking too fast and babbling. Believe me, I've done both (pretty frequently). 😊 But *the way he played it* this doesn't seem the speech pattern of a mentally stable person: MARTIN: In the old days, I could've taken care of this thing with both hands tied behind my back...but, well...now... SAM: What do you think it is that we're hunting? MARTIN: I don't know yet. A ghost, demon, monster...animal, vegetable, mineral. (chuckles) Hospital's had five deaths in the last four months. Doctors keep calling it suicides, but they're wrong. SAM: So, you've seen this thing? MARTIN shakes his head. DEAN: Has anyone seen this thing? MARTIN: Well, a couple patients have, uh...had glimpses, but there's not a lot to go on. DEAN: Are they reliable? MARTIN: Oh, sure, why wouldn't they be? Why? The animal, vegetable, mineral thing was obviously a joke. He doesn't think they're hunting broccoli. I wouldn't call any of this babbling. There's not a lot of extraneous words here. OK, yeah, maybe the patients aren't reliable, but then again maybe they were. And, he was right, there was a monster there. The doctors were wrong about them being suicides. He later figured out what the monster was. There are tons of times S&D don't know what they're hunting and it takes them a while to figure it out. The fact that Martin hadn't done so yet, doesn't mean he was mentally unstable. He saved the doctor from Sam. He helped Dean with the wraith. When it came down to it, he was ready to do what needed to be done. 1 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6511594
tessathereaper December 21, 2020 Share December 21, 2020 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Katy M said: Wow. Just wow. This is like the time my boss accused me of being on drugs because I talk too fast. Whatevs. The actor was obviously playing it as a mentally unstable person. That's why Martin was in the mental hospital to begin with, he was still with it enough to know he needed to be in a hospital, but that doesn't mean he didn't have an actual problem. Martin KNEW he had mental health problems and he was being treated for them at the time. That doesn't mean because he was out of the hospital he was suddenly cured. It meant he was well enough to leave at the time he left, none of which says he did not then deteriorate once he was out and back hunting again. Which he clearly had. Edited December 21, 2020 by tessathereaper 6 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6511595
ahrtee December 21, 2020 Share December 21, 2020 1 minute ago, Katy M said: Why? The animal, vegetable, mineral thing was obviously a joke. He doesn't think they're hunting broccoli. I wouldn't call any of this babbling. There's not a lot of extraneous words here. OK, yeah, maybe the patients aren't reliable, but then again maybe they were. And, he was right, there was a monster there. The doctors were wrong about them being suicides. He later figured out what the monster was. There are tons of times S&D don't know what they're hunting and it takes them a while to figure it out. The fact that Martin hadn't done so yet, doesn't mean he was mentally unstable. He saved the doctor from Sam. He helped Dean with the wraith. When it came down to it, he was ready to do what needed to be done. Have you seen the episode? Have you seen the way he played it? Do you really think he was in the hospital because he was perfectly normal? It doesn't mean he isn't intelligent enough to figure things out, just that he was unable to deal with it. 6 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6511597
goyour-own-way December 21, 2020 Share December 21, 2020 (edited) Re: The discussion about Martin's health as portrayed in "Sam, Interrupted". Quote SAM: Most of the time, I can hide it, but...I am angry. I'm mad at everything. I used to be mad at you and Dad, then Lilith, now it's Lucifer, and I make excuses. I blame Ruby or the demon blood, but it's not their fault. It's not them. It's me. It's inside me. I'm mad...all the time...and I don't know why. SAM is very anguished and exasperated. DEAN steps closer. DEAN: Stop. Stop it. So what if you are? What are you gonna do? You gonna take a leave of absence? You gonna say yes to Lucifer? What? SAM: No, of course not. I-- DEAN: Exactly. And that's exactly what you're gonna do. You're gonna take all that crap and you're gonna bury it. You're gonna forget about it, because that's how we keep going! That's how we don't end up like Martin! Are you with me? I think that pretty clearly shows that Martin was meant to be mentally ill. That doesn't mean he was totally incapable of taking care of himself or being reasoned with, but he was not "perfectly fine". Edited December 21, 2020 by goyour-own-way 4 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6511675
gonzosgirrl December 21, 2020 Share December 21, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, ahrtee said: Any other hunter would have had to start from scratch, not knowing Benny was involved in any way. A competent hunter might have found the other vamp (using due diligence) and not just assumed it was Benny to start with. And if the killings had stopped when Benny killed the vamp, other hunters might have assumed that another hunter finished the job. This, exactly. Unless Desmond signed the body with BENNY DID THIS, they would have had no reason to find their way to him. In fact Dean probably got Sam out of the way because he knew Sam was a better hunter than Martin and would indeed kill Benny, regardless of circumstances. Sam was jealous and guilty (for not being the one who got Dean out of Purgatory, or, you know, even trying). Even months later, after Benny died to save his life, Sam still threw him back in Dean's face in the church in 8x23. And we're supposed to feel bad for Sam being 'scared' for Amelia for a few hours, but he wasn't at all worried about his unconscious brother or his fate (he didn't know Dean escaped before he left). Not to mention he stole Martin's car and left him to twist in the wind as well. Edited December 21, 2020 by gonzosgirrl 13 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6511678
Terese December 21, 2020 Share December 21, 2020 7 hours ago, tessathereaper said: Part of me really hopes, after he actually saw it, Kripke apologized to Jensen for telling him that ending was good. LOL I don't know how much any were told about the ending. "Sam and Dean die; after years of struggle and strive, they are rewarded with Heaven." Sounds lovely and fitting. But, the shallow, almost vengeful, execution of that is deplorable. Maybe in contrast to Kripke's season 5 finale leaving Sam damned in Hell with Lucifer for all eternity while Dean attempts to live a normal life while drinking himself to death, this series finale did seem ok. As I think about it, what the hell is wrong with these people? 1 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6511993
Terese December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 7 hours ago, PAForrest said: More than one person owes an apology to Jensen. But I honestly don't believe Kripe thought it was good or not good. I don't think he really cared. Hell, I'm not convinced he even watched it. I still believe his advice to Jensen was to hang in there, live with it, and get ready to move on because the last part was the most important and it was past time. And I also now sincerely believe this finale was mostly rewritten by the suits at the CW, given the changes they probably wanted made. At Misha's Vegas m&g in March - before they had any idea they'd be shut down for months, thinking then it was only going to be a couple of weeks - he apparently told fans that the finale was already undergoing rewrites, likely at the behest of Pedowitz. At the time those had nothing to do with COVID changes. He also told them he had four more days to shoot - whether those four were split between 19 and 20, or were all in one or the other will never be known until such a time that Misha spills. But one way or the other, we were supposed to see Castiel again. And then of course there's Alex who did come back to film a scene that was cut - and no way in hell would Dabb have cut out his own celestial insert. The only thing I'm certain of with this finale is that Dabb intended to kill off Dean, and that was the source of Jensen's dissatisfaction with the finale. But Dabb was not a Wincester, and he did not care that much about the brothers' relationship overall. He was about his OCs and characters other than the Winchesters. This finale does not feel like Dabb at all. In a way it plays out much like Swan Song did - an episode Kripke was not exactly thrilled with either, so much so that he used a pseudonym. The changes to his original plans were requested by Gamble and likely Dawn Ostroff who supported Gamble. If the series finale was the result of the network meddling, I'd be very curious what Dabb's original intention was. I probably wouldn't like it any better, because Dean would still be dead. But I wouldn't be at all surprised anymore if it wasn't exactly what we got. Maybe. I doubt beyond crowning Jack king and all the retcon required to get there, that the finale for Sam and Dean was much more than an afterthought, whether written or rewritten. The point was to separate them, allow enough time to pass that no realistic continuation is plausible. Except that it is, and I am in the process of writing it. Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6512012
gonzosgirrl December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 (edited) Kripke used a pseudonym?! I think it's ironic that the guy a faction of fans credit with 'saving' the show is pretty much solely responsible for most of the (non-Dean dying badly) angst over the final few episodes. Misha should learn when to keep his mouth closed. I personally think Badd wrote and filmed exactly what he wanted to. Edited December 22, 2020 by gonzosgirrl clarity 3 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6512047
Katy M December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 6 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said: Unless Desmond signed the body with BENNY DID THIS, Or if they happened upon him with blood on his hands as he was burying one of the victims. Plus, Desmond was picking victims that had a connection to Benny. Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6512226
PAForrest December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 19 hours ago, Pondlass1 said: I wish we’d got more episodes along the lines of Baby. The Night Moves montage is them sharing brotherly affection and intimacy. A good place in their relationship during a streak of bleak episodes and seasons. A million times better than that lame montage we got at the end of 19 - and that was better than anything we got in 20. SAD! Yes, we needed a lot more episodes like this one - we needed an entire last season like this episode. But that required bringing back the good writers from the past, which is what Jensen wanted. WRT Martin, clearly he was portrayed as a man suffering severe PTSD in Sam, Interrupted. And it was also clear he had been released WAY too soon when Sam snagged him to kill Dean's friend - because that's what Sam intended, bottom line. If Supernatural was a teen stalker movie in season 8, Sam would definitely be the crazy jealous roommate who seems harmless at first, but spends the movie working to eliminate all Dean's friends as they are rivals for Sam's obsession. The whole jealousy angle that season was hella weird. 7 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6512761
ILoveReading December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 (edited) 22 hours ago, Katy M said: In fact, had Dean not removed Sam from the scene, all that would never have happened. This is 100% why I lost any respect for Sam as a character. Its never poor Sammy's fault. He only does bad things/makes poor decisions because someone else made him. Imagine if Dean had Martin kill Amy, but Amy killed him instead, Sam would have lectured Dean about how he should at least do his own dirty work and how he shouldn't have used a clearly unstable person to do it. 26 minutes ago, PAForrest said: The whole jealousy angle that season was hella weird. I don't know if Sam was jealous, but more that Benny was a walking, talking reminder of Sam's failure. Since, as established above, Sam looks for external factors for his mistakes, it was easier for Sam to blame Benny and eliminate that reminder rather than just admit that weakness to Dean. I mean even in Sam's big confession he put the burden of trust on Dean's shoulders. "What happen when YOU decide I can't be trusted." No Sam. Dean didn't wake up and decided not to trust you. You earned that lack of trust. And each time Sam made Dean prove that he trusted Sam. It was always backwards, and we saw that with the trials. Sam lies again, but Dean has to prove that he trusts Sam to succeed. That line should have been, |"How many times have I given you reasons not to trust me, and you had to turn to an angel and a vampire rather than your own brother." It took Lucifer, of all people to show Sam the truth. Even then Sam made it about Sam. "I'll never forgive myself' Maybe that would have had more an impact if I could think of a single scene that Sam felt guilty. Quote Sam would definitely be the crazy jealous roommate who seems harmless at first, but spends the movie working to eliminate all Dean's friends as they are rivals for Sam's obsession. That turned out to be Cas. Edited December 22, 2020 by ILoveReading 8 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6512784
Katy M December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 41 minutes ago, ILoveReading said: This is 100% why I lost any respect for Sam as a character. Its never poor Sammy's fault. He only does bad things/makes poor decisions because someone else made him. Most everything is Sam's fault. The Apolcalypse, Seriously, who the heck thinks drinking demon blood is a good idea? Amara. You were warned 100 bazillion times about the book of the damned. yeah, Dean shouldn't have taken the mark, equally stupid as demon blood, but that ship had sailed and two wrongs don't make a right. A lot of what the BMOLs did. We don't know what would have happened if Sam hadn't joined up with them and talked Dean into it (though Dean is responsible for his own choice of going along), but you join up with a group, you're equally responsible for all the murder and mayhem they cause. And, I think shooting Chuck was a big reason of why he went off the rails. Dumb, stupid, move, Sam. Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6512835
ILoveReading December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 2 minutes ago, Katy M said: The Apolcalypse Only because Dean was bossy and forced Sam to go to Ruby. Sam's own words where he had to go to Ruby to get away from Dean. Sam is esentially saying that its only his fault because someone (Dean) made him do it in the first place. 2 minutes ago, Katy M said: drinking demon blood is a good idea The show. After all Sam was doing to save people because the knife kills the victim. (I guess exorcisms stopped existing since Dean wasn't allowed to make that argument. Then there was the whole white washing of how Ruby was only trying to get Sam ready to host Lucifer, making her motives pure. The show even made Dean participate and endorse the demon blood drinking or once again that mean he had no trust or faith in Sam. The entire plan was framed that if Dean objected it meant he was treating Sam like a child. 9 minutes ago, Katy M said: 100 bazillion times about the book of the damned. The show never held Sam responsible for that. They gave Sam and Cas endless dialogue about how Dean was getting worse and how he was losing it or snapping, But they never showed Dean really doing these things anything worse than Sam and Cas were doing. The show made sure to justify Sam's use of the book. I still remember Sam lecturing Dean during 11.1 about how they have to save everyone. Since when? 13 minutes ago, Katy M said: A lot of what the BMOLs did Justified. After all Dean needed a very special lesson about respecting others choices but it was okay for Sam to make a choice for Dean and to lie to him about it. Sam was never called out. He even got a promotion to leader of the hunters because it wasnt' that he joined that was the mistake, it was that he didn't take charge and he was promoted to leader of Team Free will. According to Dabb that was because Dean held him back and that position should have been his all along. 16 minutes ago, Katy M said: Chuck was a big reason of why he went off the rails. This was never really addressed. From what I saw it was a lot of Sam F'ing Winchester shot God. In fact, I remember Dean being the bad guy here because he was upset about Mary's death and Cas turned himself into the victim, and Sam never took responsibility for going along with Dean and locking Jack up. That just felll back on Dean. Show has a long history of trying to give Sam excuses and justifications for his bad decisions or they just ignore it, but it rarely does so for Dean. When Sam does something controversial, they bend over backwards to lesson the blow. Dean tricking Sam with Gadreel, was a poor decision but never once did Dean say that John made him do it because he made Dean responsible for Sam. Of course when it came time for Sam to take on the mark it was framed as as sacrifice, despite Sam's history making him the worse person to take it on. 4 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6512866
Katy M December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 6 minutes ago, ILoveReading said: Of course when it came time for Sam to take on the mark it was framed as as sacrifice, despite Sam's history making him the worse person to take it on. I didn't even understand the point of that. 1. It didn't end up happening. 2. It made no sense that someone who already had the mark couldn't take it again. 3. Wouldn't they just end up where they were a year ago? That was so stupid for what ended up basically being a throw away line. 1 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6512873
gonzosgirrl December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 (edited) 49 minutes ago, Katy M said: I didn't even understand the point of that. 1. It didn't end up happening. 2. It made no sense that someone who already had the mark couldn't take it again. 3. Wouldn't they just end up where they were a year ago? That was so stupid for what ended up basically being a throw away line. I think the whole point was that starting the transfer of the Mark from Amara to Sam was what twigged her to the fact that Chuck wasn't going to kill her, he was going to lock her up again. That's when she snapped and went all Darkness on his ass. ETA: the point of saying Dean could no longer do it and pure-as-the-driven-snow Sam could? Badd was still a Sam!Girl before Nougat Baby came along. Edited December 22, 2020 by gonzosgirrl 3 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6512930
ahrtee December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 2 hours ago, ILoveReading said: I still remember Sam lecturing Dean during 11.1 about how they have to save everyone. Since when? Since season 5, when Sam and Cas refused to let Dean say yes to Michael because it would torch half the planet (maybe...I assume only if Dean couldn't control Michael?) as opposed to Sam's gamble of all or nothing that he could defeat Lucifer by himself. 2 hours ago, ILoveReading said: They gave Sam and Cas endless dialogue about how Dean was getting worse and how he was losing it or snapping, But they never showed Dean really doing these things anything worse than Sam and Cas were doing. The show made sure to justify Sam's use of the book. Considering that nothing Dean did was as bad as Soulless Sam's actions. Both were under outside influences, but at least Dean felt guilty afterwards. But "forcing" Sam to take his soul back was rape, as opposed to going behind Dean's back to remove the Mark. The other thing that never made sense to me was Death insisting that Dean kill Sam. Yes, Sam might try to get Dean back, but there was no way he would succeed (or even do any real damage to earth) if Dean was off in a galaxy far, far away (which was, after all, what they were suggesting to do, both with Dean and Sam, once he took on the mark.) I assume the idea was to do the Cain/Abel thing (revised edition) where Cain killed Abel to send him to heaven and save him from going to hell. Of course, that turned out to be exactly what Chuck had wanted--so was Chuck writing Death's dialogue, too? Of course, if things had gone the way it was planned, Sam would be dead and Dean would have had the mark removed *afterwards* (it wasn't till after he killed Death that the spell kicked in), so Dean would have been left alone with both massive guilt and the Darkness to deal with. 4 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6513063
Casseiopeia December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 15 minutes ago, ahrtee said: Yes, Sam might try to get Dean back, but there was no way he would succeed (or even do any real damage to earth) if Dean was off in a galaxy far, far away (which was, after all, what they were suggesting to do, both with Dean and Sam, once he took on the mark.) Maybe Death meant the Empty, that place no one comes back from unless...reasons. 1 1 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6513081
tessathereaper December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 Just now, Casseiopeia said: Maybe Death meant the Empty, that place no one comes back from unless...reasons. No I'm pretty sure he actually said another planet with no one on it so Dean couldn't hurt anyone but liveable for Dean. That would have been so freaking cool, to me. Seriously taking the show to outer space in it's 10th season? They've done everything else(AU's starting in Season 12, was it?), I mean it certainly would have made SPN a show that basically touched almost every genre. LOL I can think of so many interesting potential storylines though. Of course they all involve Dean with minimal input from anyone else... Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6513089
Casseiopeia December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 2 minutes ago, tessathereaper said: No I'm pretty sure he actually said another planet with no one on it so Dean couldn't hurt anyone but liveable for Dean. That would have been so freaking cool, to me. Seriously taking the show to outer space in it's 10th season? They've done everything else(AU's starting in Season 12, was it?), I mean it certainly would have made SPN a show that basically touched almost every genre. LOL I can think of so many interesting potential storylines though. Of course they all involve Dean with minimal input from anyone else... Death actually said... DEATH (walking away from Dean): What if I told you I could relocate you somewhere far away, not even on this earth, where you would still be alive, but no longer a danger to yourself or to others? Later.... SAM: What? He's gonna... Gonna send you into outer space? DEAN: No, well, he didn't say outer space. 1 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6513097
Katy M December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 2 minutes ago, Casseiopeia said: Death actually said... DEATH (walking away from Dean): What if I told you I could relocate you somewhere far away, not even on this earth, where you would still be alive, but no longer a danger to yourself or to others? Later.... SAM: What? He's gonna... Gonna send you into outer space? DEAN: No, well, he didn't say outer space. Yeah, as soon as Billie mentioned the Empty two episodes later, I was pretty sure that was exactly what Death was talking about. 1 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6513102
gonzosgirrl December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 (edited) 48 minutes ago, Casseiopeia said: Maybe Death meant the Empty, that place no one comes back from unless...reasons. Unless you are super speshul and made of nougat and you can yell really, really loud. ETA: I know it wasn't the nougat baby who came back, but he woke up the other squishy baby so he could wake up the entity and be more annoying than anything in the history of ever until he was excreted by said entity just to get a little peace and quiet. Edited December 22, 2020 by gonzosgirrl 4 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6513135
ahrtee December 22, 2020 Share December 22, 2020 38 minutes ago, Katy M said: Yeah, as soon as Billie mentioned the Empty two episodes later, I was pretty sure that was exactly what Death was talking about. Remember when the Empty was actually a threat? When it sounded like a vast, unending blackness/emptiness where Dean would be alone for eternity? Not just a giant room filled with sleeping (dead) angels? (What's so scary about that, as opposed to Memorex Heaven?) 5 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6513142
MAK December 23, 2020 Share December 23, 2020 For Dean, I think the original concept of the Empty (where angels and demons weren't writhing/dreaming in agony) would have been preferable to any type of Heaven. He could be asleep, truly at peace. In the old version of Heaven, how many happy memories did he actually have to live through --- 3? maybe 4?. And what's he going to do for eternity in the new Heaven? Sounds like he's going to bored out of his mind. 1 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6514351
tessathereaper December 23, 2020 Share December 23, 2020 4 hours ago, MAK said: For Dean, I think the original concept of the Empty (where angels and demons weren't writhing/dreaming in agony) would have been preferable to any type of Heaven. He could be asleep, truly at peace. In the old version of Heaven, how many happy memories did he actually have to live through --- 3? maybe 4?. And what's he going to do for eternity in the new Heaven? Sounds like he's going to bored out of his mind. Same, I find it hard to believe he isn't already planning his escape. :) 1 4 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6514522
AwesomO4000 December 24, 2020 Share December 24, 2020 On 12/20/2020 at 11:40 AM, ahrtee said: Dean was mocked for his interest in porn (in Out with the Old), his tolerance for alcohol (in Party Down Garth), his eating habits (in How to Win Friends). The difference is that the comments were said not in anger (or in concern) but as a joke, and Dean didn't seem to take offense. But the fact is that that's the same way Sam has seemed to view Dean over the entire show. The fact that he wasn't flinging them as accusations doesn't negate the fact that that's his opinion of Dean. So the only way they can "work together well" is if Dean doesn't take offense (or get hurt) at Sam's barbs? It was light teasing at best. Sam also teased Dean about the ballet shoes, too, but it was all in fun. And so what if Sam teases Dean for being a horndog... why is being a horndog so much of a bad thing? On 12/20/2020 at 11:40 AM, ahrtee said: To stop the comparison between Dean's teasing of Sam: well, IMO making fun of someone for eating healthy foods, being overly organized or having too long hair isn't exactly in the same class; and those were obviously affectionate teasing, not angry, nasty or even worried. I really don't see much difference. In Dean's opinion, all of those things are nerdy and uncool. Sam's not wanting to drink with Gordon was teased with "remind me to beat that buzzkill out of you later," or something to that effect. They're brothers. They tease each other. And until Carver got a hold of them, I really didn't see the negativity all that much. Sam is sometimes more annoyed - because Dean likes to annoy Sam and pushes his buttons. I understand that all too well. Things that some members of my family do seem much more annoying when they do it, because they know how to push my buttons while doing it. It doesn't mean that Sam doesn't love Dean or even sometimes find his behavior endearing... it just means sometimes he gets annoyed when Dean pushes his buttons. On 12/20/2020 at 11:40 AM, ahrtee said: About Amy--I have a question. If Dean hadn't taken the responsibility of killing Amy himself but had sent another hunter to follow and kill her (like Martin following Benny) would that have been better or worse? Would Sam have accused Dean of not trusting him? Of going behind his back? I'm honestly curious. Was the sin in not trusting Sam's judgment or just in lying about it? It was the lying about it. No question, in my opinion. Sam was having reality issues. A big part of his world at that point was not knowing what to believe or what not to believe right away. There were hints that when Dean was talking to Sam at the beginning of "The Mentalists" that Sam might not even have realized at first that it was actually Dean and not a hallucination. Dean told Sam that he would be his stone one. Lying to Sam when a big part of his reality was a lie was the main "sin" as you put it, for me anyway. When Dean explained why he lied - that he was worried about Sam's "shooting at Satan" mental state, Sam understood why Dean had done it almost immediately and forgiven him, so the whole situation could have been avoided if Dean had confessed sooner and explained why he had lied to begin with. But he waited much too long... If Dean trusted Sam to back him up on hunts, claiming that he was worried Sam was unstable and might react badly to the truth got a little harder to understand as time went on. It was the same thing in season 9. It wasn't the helping Gadreel - no matter what Carver turned it into - that was the problem for me: it was Dean lying about it. In that case however, Dean blamed his lying on circumstance, never took responsibility for it, and the entire thing was swept under the rug and played off as a good thing in the end. 1 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6515865
AwesomO4000 December 24, 2020 Share December 24, 2020 On 12/22/2020 at 9:46 AM, ILoveReading said: Only because Dean was bossy and forced Sam to go to Ruby. Sam's own words where he had to go to Ruby to get away from Dean. Sam is esentially saying that its only his fault because someone (Dean) made him do it in the first place. Sam didn't say that. The word "bossy" was never even used. That was fan interpretation. Sam just said that he went to see Ruby to get away from Dean. He said that he did it so that he wouldn't feel like the little brother. People interpreted that to be bossy, but there could be a half a dozen reasons that works without the explanation being "Sam said Dean was bossy." Sam didn't. At all. It could be because of Sam's own insecurities - and Sam's "it was my fault" points to that much more than Dean was bossy. If you feel like a little brother and want not to feel like a little brother, you go away from your big brother for a while. Bossy has nothing to do with it and isn't necessary to the feeling. Family dynamics are family dynamics. It's like coming home from college and seeing your parents and feeling like a kid again... It doesn't mean that your Mom is "bossy." It means that your mom is your mom, and you're going to feel those family dynamics irregardless. On 12/22/2020 at 9:46 AM, ILoveReading said: The show never held Sam responsible for that. They gave Sam and Cas endless dialogue about how Dean was getting worse and how he was losing it or snapping, But they never showed Dean really doing these things anything worse than Sam and Cas were doing. The show made sure to justify Sam's use of the book. The show surely did hold Sam responsible. For one, they made it cause an apocalypse (so Dean taking the mark in the first case was hand-waved away). And secondly they had Chuck, God himself, say exactly that it was Sam's fault and absolved Dean altogether. I'm not sure how much clearer the writer's intentions could have been myself, since they had another character come right out and state it as such. On 12/22/2020 at 9:46 AM, ILoveReading said: After all Dean needed a very special lesson about respecting others choices but it was okay for Sam to make a choice for Dean and to lie to him about it. Sam was never called out. He even got a promotion to leader of the hunters because it wasnt' that he joined that was the mistake, it was that he didn't take charge and he was promoted to leader of Team Free will. Except that Sam had to admit in front of everyone that he made the mistake. And if Dabb had Dean get some kind of very special lesson, I don't remember it much, myself. And in season 9, Dean was justified in making decisions for Sam, because in the end Sam "lied," so Dean making the decision about Gadreel was seen as the same thing... and to make sure that was the case, Gadreel helped save the world, so good thing Dean made that decision for Sam. At least that was the message that I got from that. At least Dabb had Sam have to publicly apologize for his bad judgement. Dean didn't have to apologize for anything at all and got to blame his lying on circumstance, saying that he didn't have a choice. And then be justified for it. He even got to make the decision for Sam again singlehandedly when he killed Death after Sam had agreed to help Dean be banished... and again there were no consequences for Dean making that decision. For me, Dean's very special lessons lose a whole lot of meaning when there aren't any actions to back it up. It just comes off as empty words. Like the writers are making some token "now Dean, you shouldn't make unilateral decisions for other people," words, but they don't really mean any of it, because there aren't any real consequences when Dean does, or often times there are actual benefits that come from Dean having made those unilateral decisions. That makes for an entirely muddled message. If the writers really believed that Dean shouldn't make unilateral decisions for Sam, then they should have actual bad consequences come from Dean's unilateral decisions... but they don't, so I don't believe that's their actual opinion on the subject. I believe in results, not pretty words. Which is why I don't believe the writers actually believed the leader Sam thing, either. If they really thought Sam was such a good leader, they wouldn't have had everyone get killed under his leadership... twice. (Three times if you count the AU universe deaths). Again, it's results. The pretty words don't matter, and I'm not going to believe the writers' "nothing to see here, folks" declarations if I can see the building on fire (or in this case, the bodies piling up) behind them. I mean once, maybe it was just circumstance and they didn't mean to make Sam look like a failure as a leader, but twice? That starts to stretch credibility, in my opinion. Twice is starting to be a message. Just my opinion on that one. 1 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6515878
ILoveReading December 24, 2020 Share December 24, 2020 53 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said: It was the lying about it. No question, in my opinion But what is so often forgotten about this episode is that Sam himself lied and snuck out in the middle of the night with a vague note. Given Sam's mental state and that Sam couldn't tell reality from fantasy Dean isn't wrong to think that maybe Satan took Sam for a joy ride again. 55 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said: There were hints that when Dean was talking to Sam at the beginning of "The Mentalists" that Sam might not even have realized at first that it was actually Dean and not a hallucination. This is a fundamental flaw in this storyline. Under no circumstances should Sam be trusted as back up when those hallucinations could over take him at any moment. He was a danger to himself and others and almost shot Dean. He should never be given a gun and used as back up. 57 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said: Dean told Sam that he would be his stone one And Sam promptly took off in the middle of the night with nothing more than a note. Dean can't be Sam's stone number 1 if Sam doesn't want him to be. Sam also has admit he needs help and lean on Dean. He often doesn't. That's why that whole speech doesnt' work for me. It felt like Sam thought Dean meant use the pain, not Dean himself. Sam needs to take responsibility for his own actions. If he wants to be trusted he has to demonstrate that he came be. Which is why this.. 1 hour ago, AwesomO4000 said: ... If Dean trusted Sam to back him up on hunts, claiming that he was worried Sam was unstable and might react badly to the truth got a little harder to understand as time went on. Is once again, the show getting it backwards. Sam is the one running off in the middle of the night and not giving Dean the whole story. If Sam was honest from the start and told Dean about the hunt, then the burden of trust is on Dean. Dean can't hunt with his leg but Sam could have agreed to check ins, not because Dean is treating him like a child, but because in this situation they were necessary. With Sam's hallucinations, Dean's being slow to trust Sam can handle this isn't about not having faith in Sam, its about the reality of the situation. Sam can't be trusted. The burden is 100% on Sam in this situation and if Sam told Dean right from the start then maybe when Sam defended Amy, Dean might have been in a better position to trust him. Trust is a two way street, but not necessarily always equal. Sam is in a compromised position. He had to prove he can be trusted. Dean shouldn't be automatically the bad guy because he questions Sam here. Especially when Sam is sneaking off . 1 hour ago, AwesomO4000 said: Sam understood why Dean had done it almost immediately and forgiven him, so the whole situation could have been avoided if Dean had confessed sooner and explained why he had lied to begin with. He didn't really when he threw Amy in Dean's face, not once but twice. Also the show situation started because Sam snuck out in the middle of the night in the first place. Sam doesn't have the moral high ground her when he was the one that lied first. Its why Sam is Hypocrite number 1. He needs to take responsibility for his own actions. 4 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6515884
ILoveReading December 24, 2020 Share December 24, 2020 14 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said: Sam didn't say that. The word "bossy" was never even used. That was fan interpretation. Sam just said that he went to see Ruby to get away from Dean. He said that he did it so that he wouldn't feel like the little brother. People interpreted that to be bossy, but there could be a half a dozen reasons that works without the explanation being "Sam said Dean was bossy." Sam didn't. At all. It could be because of Sam's own insecurities - and Sam's "it was my fault" points to that much more than Dean was bossy. If you feel like a little brother and want not to feel like a little brother, you go away from your big brother for a while. Bossy has nothing to do with it and isn't necessary to the feeling. Family dynamics are family dynamics. It's like coming home from college and seeing your parents and feeling like a kid again... It doesn't mean that your Mom is "bossy." It means that your mom is your mom, and you're going to feel those family dynamics irregardless. Except that Ruby was far more manipulating and controlling then Dean ever was. Dean even told Sam, keep your secrets just stop lying. Sam's response was to lie. Dean wasn't treating Sam like a kid brother here. He was treating Sam like a person who Dean knew was hiding things. Dean also gave Ruby repeated chances. So Sam saying Ruby didn't make him feel like like a kid is Sam refusing to acknowledge just how controlling Ruby was and that is why IMO, Sam didn't take responsibility. Ruby made Sam feel like he was in control. Dean actually gave Sam control. So why exactly did Sam need to get away from Dean? Because Ruby was his drug dealer and Dean was the guy trying to hold Sam responsible for his actions. Sam didn't like that, so Sam telling he needed to get away because Ruby didn't treat him like a child, when she did exactly that was Sam blaming Dean. 7 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6515886
AwesomO4000 December 24, 2020 Share December 24, 2020 4 minutes ago, ILoveReading said: So why exactly did Sam need to get away from Dean? Because Ruby was his drug dealer and Dean was the guy trying to hold Sam responsible for his actions. Sam didn't like that, so Sam telling he needed to get away because Ruby didn't treat him like a child, when she did exactly that was Sam blaming Dean. Sorry I'm not following on how that is Sam blaming Dean. It might be Sam not seeing the problem, but that's not blaming Dean. That's Sam not seeing the problem. And I always interpreted Sam talking about seeing Ruby as Sam talking about everything, even when he first started seeing Ruby - as in season 3. I could be wrong about my interpretation, but that was the impression that I got. But even if it was just season 4, my original point still stands. This was about Sam's feelings. He felt like a little brother. He felt like a failure - Dean was a constant reminder that Sam couldn't save him from hell, and was now messed up in ways Sam couldn't fix. And yes, Dean was a moral reminder that Sam was doing wrong. Another reason to want to get away. Ruby's illusion was an illusion, but it was easier than the reality. Sam said Ruby made him feel strong (not that she didn't treat him like a child). And she did - with a drug yes, and it was false, but Sam felt like he was saving people. Not a failure. Strong. The illusion of hope. None of which has to do with Dean or what Dean was doing or him being "bossy", and everything to do with how Sam felt. Dean could have just been standing there and Sam would have felt that way... which is why Sam assured Dean that Ruby wasn't Dean's fault but his. The only thing iffy was Sam saying that Dean needed to let him grow up. But even that doesn't imply "bossy" to me. It more implies protective. And that had nothing to do with the Ruby part of the discussion, since it related to the current issue in their working relationship. That whole dialogue was badly written and needed more fleshing out. In it's current state, it takes two issues that are separate points - Ruby and the current hunt scenario - and combines them when in reality they are only tangentially related. Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6515900
ahrtee December 24, 2020 Share December 24, 2020 3 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said: Sorry I'm not following on how that is Sam blaming Dean. It might be Sam not seeing the problem, but that's not blaming Dean. That's Sam not seeing the problem. And I always interpreted Sam talking about seeing Ruby as Sam talking about everything, even when he first started seeing Ruby - as in season 3. I could be wrong about my interpretation, but that was the impression that I got. But even if it was just season 4, my original point still stands. This was about Sam's feelings. He felt like a little brother. He felt like a failure - Dean was a constant reminder that Sam couldn't save him from hell, and was now messed up in ways Sam couldn't fix. And yes, Dean was a moral reminder that Sam was doing wrong. Another reason to want to get away. Ruby's illusion was an illusion, but it was easier than the reality. Sam said Ruby made him feel strong (not that she didn't treat him like a child). And she did - with a drug yes, and it was false, but Sam felt like he was saving people. Not a failure. Strong. The illusion of hope. None of which has to do with Dean or what Dean was doing or him being "bossy", and everything to do with how Sam felt. Dean could have just been standing there and Sam would have felt that way... which is why Sam assured Dean that Ruby wasn't Dean's fault but his. The only thing iffy was Sam saying that Dean needed to let him grow up. But even that doesn't imply "bossy" to me. It more implies protective. And that had nothing to do with the Ruby part of the discussion, since it related to the current issue in their working relationship. That whole dialogue was badly written and needed more fleshing out. In it's current state, it takes two issues that are separate points - Ruby and the current hunt scenario - and combines them when in reality they are only tangentially related. You're right in that it doesn't imply Dean was bossy. For me, the issue was *Sam said he needed to get away from Dean.* But instead of facing him, telling him (without anger or scorn, but just a heart-to-heart) Sam *chose* to run away, to hide, to lie *for almost a year* until Dean found out on his own, and then say it was because he wanted to get away from Dean. *Not* that he made him feel bad, or Ruby made him feel strong (because Dean could have reassured him, as he did so often, and given him more power, if Sam hadn't just proven that he *couldn't* be trusted with that power.) Even when Dean found out, Sam still kept insisting that what he was doing was right and better than anything Dean could do, and Dean was "holding him back" (which came later, but was obviously a thought in the background the entire time.) So maybe that wasn't quite "blame" but it certainly was resentment. But to me, the worse part was that if Sam honestly did feel that way, if he said he "had to get away" from Dean, then...why didn't he? He kept coming back and lying about where he'd been and what he'd been doing. Granted, he was grateful that Dean was back, but sneaking around, lying and pretending isn't a good way to show that he's glad his brother is back. Especially in the beginning, Dean seemed to be handling things well, so it wasn't that Sam was afraid that Dean was fragile and didn't want to leave him. The only explanation was that Sam wanted to have Dean around but didn't want him to know what he was doing--thus, didn't want to take responsibility or even think about Dean's disappointment in him--because he knew that Dean would disapprove. Instead, he kept flinging it in Dean's face as if he was trying to make Dean be the one to get fed up and leave, which is something that's been proven over and over will never happen. Dean has *never* been able make Sam do something he really didn't want to do. Maybe he picked the hunts (except when Sam found one), maybe he picked the motels, but he always listened to Sam's input (unlike Dad) when it was important, and usually wound up following Sam's lead when he insisted. And Sam...usually went behind Dean's back and did what he wanted anyway when Dean said no. The only time I can remember Dean flatly refusing to give in to Sam was in Scarecrow, which was also the only time I remember it being *Dean* who walked/drove away, and not Sam. 9 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6516067
TheGreenKnight December 24, 2020 Share December 24, 2020 Actually, Dean left the season following Lucifer being released--not that anyone could really blame him. The only reason he went back to Sam is because of the vision the angels showed him of Sam becoming Lucifer's vessel if he didn't. Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6516400
ahrtee December 24, 2020 Share December 24, 2020 14 minutes ago, TheGreenKnight said: Actually, Dean left the season following Lucifer being released--not that anyone could really blame him. The only reason he went back to Sam is because of the vision the angels showed him of Sam becoming Lucifer's vessel if he didn't. True. Except they split by mutual agreement and not because of a fight, or because one wanted to do something that the other didn't. (And if we're being literal, Sam was the one who hitched a ride and left Dean sitting behind, after they'd agreed to split.)😊 3 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6516422
AwesomO4000 December 25, 2020 Share December 25, 2020 (edited) 9 hours ago, ahrtee said: ...but he always listened to Sam's input (unlike Dad) when it was important, and usually wound up following Sam's lead when he insisted. And Sam...usually went behind Dean's back and did what he wanted anyway when Dean said no. The only time I can remember Dean flatly refusing to give in to Sam was in Scarecrow, which was also the only time I remember it being *Dean* who walked/drove away, and not Sam. Both brothers do that, though. It's just sometimes easy to remember one over the other. The argument in "Fallen Idols," for example was because Dean wouldn't listen to Sam's input, but insisted that the case was over, end of story. At the time I thought that was a little more closed minded than Dean usually was, but there had been a few hints previously ...like Gordon. Sam had to do a lot of convincing on that one, and the fact that Gordon "snaked the keys" was more the deciding factor than Sam's arguments. And there was the end of "99 Problems." Dean lied and went running off on that one (an example where Dean drove away.) Whether someone thinks Dean's plan was better than no plan at all or better than Sam's future plan still doesn't take away from the fact that Dean wasn't listening to anyone and went running off after saying he was coming back. And there was Amy. Dean didn't give in to Sam on that one. And Abaddon with sending Sam to the basement - after which he told Sam (paraphrase) "it's my way or nothing. Take it or leave it." So not really listening to Sam's input there either. I think Dean also insisted on keeping the First Blade if I remember correctly, even though that was a bad idea, and Sam's arguments to that effect were solid, and it wasn't so easy to get it away from him. Dean went running off to get the mark in the first place also. He didn't exactly do it behind Sam's back per se, because he told Sam he was leaving... he didn't say to do what, however. And the lying in season 9. So there have been some times Dean flatly refused to give in to Sam or went behind Sam's back. It's not all one-sided. I think maybe Sam's instances might end up being more glaring, because generally the narrative is more likely to impose bad consequences when Sam does it versus when Dean does it. Quote But to me, the worse part was that if Sam honestly did feel that way, if he said he "had to get away" from Dean, then...why didn't he? Guilt. I think a lot of what Sam did in season 4 and in the time between season 3 and 4 had to do with guilt. Edited December 25, 2020 by AwesomO4000 1 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6516686
ahrtee December 30, 2020 Share December 30, 2020 On 12/24/2020 at 6:05 PM, AwesomO4000 said: Both brothers do that, though. It's just sometimes easy to remember one over the other. The argument in "Fallen Idols," for example was because Dean wouldn't listen to Sam's input, but insisted that the case was over, end of story. At the time I thought that was a little more closed minded than Dean usually was, but there had been a few hints previously ...like Gordon. Sam had to do a lot of convincing on that one, and the fact that Gordon "snaked the keys" was more the deciding factor than Sam's arguments. And there was the end of "99 Problems." Dean lied and went running off on that one (an example where Dean drove away.) Whether someone thinks Dean's plan was better than no plan at all or better than Sam's future plan still doesn't take away from the fact that Dean wasn't listening to anyone and went running off after saying he was coming back. And there was Amy. Dean didn't give in to Sam on that one. And Abaddon with sending Sam to the basement - after which he told Sam (paraphrase) "it's my way or nothing. Take it or leave it." So not really listening to Sam's input there either. I think Dean also insisted on keeping the First Blade if I remember correctly, even though that was a bad idea, and Sam's arguments to that effect were solid, and it wasn't so easy to get it away from him. Dean went running off to get the mark in the first place also. He didn't exactly do it behind Sam's back per se, because he told Sam he was leaving... he didn't say to do what, however. And the lying in season 9. So there have been some times Dean flatly refused to give in to Sam or went behind Sam's back. It's not all one-sided. If you notice, I didn't say it was all the time: I said Dean listened to Sam *when it was important* and "usually" gave in. I was actually thinking about Fallen Idols, because it was (IMO) the only time Dean, without being under any outside influence, flatly refused to listen to Sam's objections (as opposed to listening and then deciding otherwise), and it was specifically because Dean was so disappointed and hurt by Sam's betrayal throughout all of season 4 that he wasn't willing to listen. I have to say that that episode is probably the one that made me start to dislike Sam thoroughly. Before that, no matter what he'd done wrong, there was a reason (not necessarily good, but understandable) and I believed he thought he was doing the right thing. But in Fallen Idols, just 5 episodes after he'd turned Lucifer loose because he'd spent an entire year lying and going behind Dean's back, and after Dean explained how much Sam had hurt him by betraying him when he was the only person he ever trusted fully; after Sam apologized and said he'd do anything to make it better (and accepted when Dean said he didn't know if he could trust him any more); 3 episodes after he was still angry at Dean for not trusting him implicitly but then told Dean he didn't think he should be hunting yet; and 1 episode after he literally begged Dean to take him back and promised he wouldn't let him down again, he was bitching about being "on probation," angry about Dean making all the decisions, and insisting that Dean "let him grow up." That doesn't sound like someone who was accepting that he'd screwed up and was willing to face the consequences. There's not a time limit on forgiveness after a major betrayal. Sam seemed to think there was. Dean almost always listened to what Sam had to say, and just because he didn't always follow his advice doesn't mean he was ignoring it. The only other times he flatly told Sam to suck it up/take it or leave it was when he was under the MoC's influence, so if we (I) can give Sam a pass for the demon blood influence, surely influenced by a demon mark is equally understandable. On 12/24/2020 at 6:05 PM, AwesomO4000 said: I think maybe Sam's instances might end up being more glaring, because generally the narrative is more likely to impose bad consequences when Sam does it versus when Dean does it. I think it's because Sam does it more often and never actually shows remorse (though he usually gives a half-assed apology *after* things go spectacularly sideways.) On 12/24/2020 at 6:05 PM, AwesomO4000 said: Guilt. I think a lot of what Sam did in season 4 and in the time between season 3 and 4 had to do with guilt. Sam has never actually expressed any guilt for anything from seasons 3 or 4. Regret, maybe; again, because things went so badly wrong. In the immortal words of someone: You’re like the thief who isn’t the least bit sorry he stole, but is terribly, terribly sorry he’s going to jail. (This was actually attributed online to Rhett Butler, speaking to Scarlett.) 7 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6523925
ahrtee December 30, 2020 Share December 30, 2020 In thinking further, I know Sam has often been regretful about his choices. But it never really caused him to rethink future actions or, especially, how his actions affected Dean. I started thinking about the differences between "regret" and "remorse" and came across this definition in Psychology Today: What’s the difference between regret and remorse? Regret has to do with wishing you hadn’t taken a particular action. You may regret an action because it hurt someone else, but you may also regret it because it hurt you, it cost you something emotionally or financially, or led to a punishment or undesirable result. Regret can lead a person to feel sorrow, grief, hurt, and anger—but these can be for the pain he or she feels for the self, not necessarily for the other person who was hurt by the behavior. Remorse involves admitting one’s own mistakes and taking responsibility for one's actions. It creates a sense of guilt and sorrow for hurting someone else and leads to confession and true apology. It also moves the remorseful person to avoid doing the hurtful action again. Regret leads a person to avoid punishment in the future, while remorse leads to avoiding hurtful actions towards others in the future. [emphasis mine] So, to simplify IMO, Sam often expresses regret when his actions cause bad results, but doesn't really express remorse (because he still thinks he did "bad" things for the right reasons). Dean is remorseful when his actions hurt Sam, even if his actions are right/"good". 9 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6523979
Pondlass1 December 30, 2020 Share December 30, 2020 41 minutes ago, ahrtee said: because Sam does it more often and never actually shows remorse He doesn’t show remorse, maybe he feels it because he certainly is less secure than Dean, but I can’t remember him showing it. Dean drinks and beats himself up, his remorse is easy to spot. Sam just seems to lash out. Dean’s more my way or the highway type thing, which must get up Sam’s nose as he’s spent a lifetime being bossed by big brother. But when he gets loose he messes up (I don’t know if writers actually realize they’re doing this to this character; and I have no clue where they were going with Samelia). Dean’s moral compass hat is maybe a bit straighter. Yes, the Winchesters are bewildering. It’s what makes them fascinating and often frustrating to watch. I’d love a series featuring young Sam and Dean (ages maybe around 12 and 16) if only they could find competent young actors, writers and show runner. Jensen could play John. But I’m sure he wants to move away from this franchise. 1 1 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6524017
MAK December 31, 2020 Share December 31, 2020 IMO, I don't think Dean was meant to be as important and/or popular as he became. We knew a lot about Sam and what he went through and felt, but Dean? It left us wanting more. We knew there was more to him and his story. The way JA took the material and gave such nuanced and subtle performances made the fans want more. JP seemed to take what was written at face value and his performances, although some were really good, were pretty straightforward. The writers probably didn't intend that since Sam was supposed to be the main character/tragic hero (JP was #1 on the call sheet). Dean was probably supposed to be the comic foil, the damsel in distress type, with Sam always being shown as the stronger, smarter, more mature, more moral, more "good" brother. They have Dean saying these things to Sam way too often, hardly ever the other way round. That's why people are still talking about Dean (even when you discount the shippers) and hardly anyone is talking about Sam. (At least, that I've seen.) 3 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6526290
Aeryn13 December 31, 2020 Share December 31, 2020 (edited) 21 minutes ago, MAK said: IMO, I don't think Dean was meant to be as important and/or popular as he became. We knew a lot about Sam and what he went through and felt, but Dean? It left us wanting more. We knew there was more to him and his story. The way JA took the material and gave such nuanced and subtle performances made the fans want more. JP seemed to take what was written at face value and his performances, although some were really good, were pretty straightforward. The writers probably didn't intend that since Sam was supposed to be the main character/tragic hero (JP was #1 on the call sheet). Dean was probably supposed to be the comic foil, the damsel in distress type, with Sam always being shown as the stronger, smarter, more mature, more moral, more "good" brother. They have Dean saying these things to Sam way too often, hardly ever the other way round. That's why people are still talking about Dean (even when you discount the shippers) and hardly anyone is talking about Sam. (At least, that I've seen.) While in general I agree Dean was never supposed to be even an equal but he became one despite the worst efforts of some writers. I think the discourse, outside of ships, over the Finale is because Dean had the much shittier ending. I've seen lots of Sam-people on tumblr really happy with the ending for Sam. And since Dean was certainly not an equal in Dabb's ideas, he did make the Finale and show message to take away from it pretty Sam-centric and as drab and demeaning to Dean as he possibly could. That they are together in heaven as a "happy ending" is likely only because if not, it would have angered the other ship crowd as well. Just because it's a "through the lens of Sam" ship as Destiel is a "through the lens of Castiel" ship doesn’t mean either don't want their technical endgame. And they gave it to one, Dean would have been an afterthought in either scenario. Though I do think no previous showrunner would have made his death this drab and without fanfare, this unacknowledged and this much about tongue-bathing Sam. Not even Gamble. Edited December 31, 2020 by Aeryn13 3 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6526326
Castiels Cat January 1, 2021 Share January 1, 2021 On 12/30/2020 at 11:54 AM, ahrtee said: In thinking further, I know Sam has often been regretful about his choices. But it never really caused him to rethink future actions or, especially, how his actions affected Dean. I started thinking about the differences between "regret" and "remorse" and came across this definition in Psychology Today: What’s the difference between regret and remorse? Regret has to do with wishing you hadn’t taken a particular action. You may regret an action because it hurt someone else, but you may also regret it because it hurt you, it cost you something emotionally or financially, or led to a punishment or undesirable result. Regret can lead a person to feel sorrow, grief, hurt, and anger—but these can be for the pain he or she feels for the self, not necessarily for the other person who was hurt by the behavior. Remorse involves admitting one’s own mistakes and taking responsibility for one's actions. It creates a sense of guilt and sorrow for hurting someone else and leads to confession and true apology. It also moves the remorseful person to avoid doing the hurtful action again. Regret leads a person to avoid punishment in the future, while remorse leads to avoiding hurtful actions towards others in the future. [emphasis mine] So, to simplify IMO, Sam often expresses regret when his actions cause bad results, but doesn't really express remorse (because he still thinks he did "bad" things for the right reasons). Dean is remorseful when his actions hurt Sam, even if his actions are right/"good". That Osiris episode in s 7 still gives me chills. Dean blames himself for people dying in the Apocalypse yet Sam who released Lucifer by draining a living human body dry to do so and betraying his brother at the same time... Sam feels no remorse because he himself suffered in the cage. 2 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6527685
Cobalt Stargazer January 2, 2021 Share January 2, 2021 On 12/17/2020 at 9:15 AM, ILoveReading said: Sam needs Dean. He doesn't want him. (As evidenced by how miserable Sam seemed even though he had the normal life he wanted). Dean wants Sam. He doesn't need him. (As evidenced by Dean finding some peace in knowing his family was in heaven with him and being happy driving around even if he missed Sam). Well, that's not entirely true, is it? And we see that in the pilot, that the person Dean comes to for help because John went missing is the "abusive" brother who "abandoned the family". If Dean had never needed Sam, I expect there were others he could have gotten in touch with to help look, but that's not what happened. I've been lurking here for a while, even before the finale, but I just had to say that because it never fails to annoy me that Dean shows up wanting a favor/help from Sam after (apparently) following John's lead and cutting off all contact with his brother (because, y'know, it's such a damn betrayal to go to college) and then stands there and flirts with Jessica right in front of him. If Ackles wasn't quite so engaging on screen, that first impression would have been my last one. Regardless, if Sam was so "abusive", which is a word I've seen used more than once to describe him, you'd think Dean would have been afraid to step out of line, or at least remember that he was there to ask for help and so maybe shouldn't act like a jerk. But appearances can often be deceiving, yeah? 🙂 At the very least, Dean needed Sam alive to the point that he allowed him to be used as an Uber without his knowledge or consent, which just makes me wonder why he hung around after that. Dean, not Sam. The entire premise of the Gadreel business was that if Sam found out about the possession he would evict Gadreel, which would result in his death either immediately or soon after. That's why Dean "had to" lie to his brother even when he was worried about losing hours of time and not always knowing what was real and what wasn't. Did he stay just to make sure Sam got healthy enough to survive kicking his "passenger" out or because he actually wanted to be around him? Unless maybe he just wanted to watch Sam think he was going crazy, which is even weirder. And jerky. 2 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6529061
BabySpinach January 3, 2021 Share January 3, 2021 3 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said: Well, that's not entirely true, is it? And we see that in the pilot, that the person Dean comes to for help because John went missing is the "abusive" brother who "abandoned the family". If Dean had never needed Sam, I expect there were others he could have gotten in touch with to help look, but that's not what happened. I've been lurking here for a while, even before the finale, but I just had to say that because it never fails to annoy me that Dean shows up wanting a favor/help from Sam after (apparently) following John's lead and cutting off all contact with his brother (because, y'know, it's such a damn betrayal to go to college) and then stands there and flirts with Jessica right in front of him. If Ackles wasn't quite so engaging on screen, that first impression would have been my last one. Regardless, if Sam was so "abusive", which is a word I've seen used more than once to describe him, you'd think Dean would have been afraid to step out of line, or at least remember that he was there to ask for help and so maybe shouldn't act like a jerk. But appearances can often be deceiving, yeah? 🙂 Well, it's spelled out pretty clearly in the pilot that Sam (and John) was the one who chose to cut off contact with his family, not Dean (Dean: If I'd called, would you have picked up?). At least, there's less evidence for the other way around. And no, I don't believe that anyone here is arguing that Sam going to college is related to any interpretations of him being abusive. I do believe there are other natures of abuser besides "scary and violent," but I'm not an expert, so I won't wade into those waters any further. Still a dick move to cut off the brother who raised you, shielded you, and sacrificed his own dreams for you, though. Dean, who's devoted his life and soul to his family out of duty rather than desire, would reasonably be pissed at that. And, as the finale apparently told us, he was caustic and jerkish during their reunion as a defense mechanism against Sam's likely rejection. 3 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said: At the very least, Dean needed Sam alive to the point that he allowed him to be used as an Uber without his knowledge or consent, which just makes me wonder why he hung around after that. Dean, not Sam. The entire premise of the Gadreel business was that if Sam found out about the possession he would evict Gadreel, which would result in his death either immediately or soon after. That's why Dean "had to" lie to his brother even when he was worried about losing hours of time and not always knowing what was real and what wasn't. Did he stay just to make sure Sam got healthy enough to survive kicking his "passenger" out or because he actually wanted to be around him? Unless maybe he just wanted to watch Sam think he was going crazy, which is even weirder. And jerky. I'm not sure the relevance of this point. People were arguing that Dean didn't need Sam, which IMO is valid. Him needing Sam alive is entirely different. Dean was happy to sell his soul for Sam's life while only getting a year with him, because Sam being topside, even if not with Dean, was good enough. He let Sam freely choose between Amelia or hunting, which was a much greater courtesy than Sam's ultimatum regarding Benny. He made that terribly depressing speech in 8.14 about dying a dumb grunt and Sam living a long apple-pie life without him. He basically sees Sam as a parent would; he wants him to be happy and healthy, regardless of what that would look like. In other words, it's not a selfish or possessive attachment, which is what they're referring to when they say that Dean doesn't need Sam. 12 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6529426
ahrtee January 3, 2021 Share January 3, 2021 6 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said: Well, that's not entirely true, is it? And we see that in the pilot, that the person Dean comes to for help because John went missing is the "abusive" brother who "abandoned the family". If Dean had never needed Sam, I expect there were others he could have gotten in touch with to help look, but that's not what happened. I've been lurking here for a while, even before the finale, but I just had to say that because it never fails to annoy me that Dean shows up wanting a favor/help from Sam after (apparently) following John's lead and cutting off all contact with his brother (because, y'know, it's such a damn betrayal to go to college) and then stands there and flirts with Jessica right in front of him. If Ackles wasn't quite so engaging on screen, that first impression would have been my last one. Regardless, if Sam was so "abusive", which is a word I've seen used more than once to describe him, you'd think Dean would have been afraid to step out of line, or at least remember that he was there to ask for help and so maybe shouldn't act like a jerk. But appearances can often be deceiving, yeah? 🙂 I don't think I've ever heard Sam called "abusive" (Dean, sure, plenty of times, together with overbearing, bossy, and other insulting terms). The only form of abuse Sam might have been guilty of is emotional, and more emotional blackmail than abuse IMO. As @BabySpinach said above, it seemed pretty clear that Sam was the one who wanted to be away from the family; but they still kept an eye on him to make sure he was safe and Dean left him alone, apparently at his request, saying that he "hadn't bothered him" for two years (which also implies that he did stay in contact for a while, if Sam was in his final year when Dean showed up.) 'And remember, there was a reason why John didn't want Sam to leave, and it wasn't just to control him or punish him--it was to protect him, because, yes, demons *were* always watching him. John's problem was in not telling anyone (especially Sam) his reasons. But IMO the biggest proof of Sam needing Dean more than wanting him (or more than Dean needs him) is the fact that, no matter how many times Sam walked away, *he always came back.* Dean doesn't like being alone, and *wants* to have Sam nearby, both to protect and to help with hunts, but he can and has hunted on his own many, many times, as long as he knows Sam is safe; and the times when Sam left, Dean continued on his own. Sam could have (and *did*) get out of hunting (or hunted with different partners) several times, and yet he always came back to Dean as soon as he could. I don't think anyone would disagree that *both* brothers have done stupid things in order to save/protect the other, including things that they would never have agreed to on their own. But no matter how bad or painful the fights on either side, Sam always came back, and Dean always took him back gratefully. We can say that Dean was trained to protect--whether brainwashed or just because he honestly does love his brother--so that's why he was glad to have him back, but the question for me is always, "why does *Sam* come back?" If Dean is abusive, if Dean does these horrible things, if Sam feels ignored/belittled, why? Sam had walked away any number of times. All he had to do was stay gone--Dean would have honored his decision, as he did with Stanford, with the Campbells, with Becky, with Amelia, after the Ruby and Amy fiascos, with the BMoL, etc., but instead Sam came back and made demands--Dean had to treat him better. Had to "let him grow up." Had to trust him, even when he'd proved himself untrustworthy, listen to him at all times, and for a while, had to *not* be brothers but just work as partners. That does seem rather abusive to me--again, emotionally, not physically, because he did know he was playing on Dean's weak spot. So to me--Dean *wants* Sam around, and does stupid things and is willing to accept demands in order to keep him around and safe. Sam wants to be on his own, but keeps coming back to Dean, making more and more demands to make Dean do things his way. That doesn't seem much like wanting (or even liking) his brother, so...why? 12 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6529529
MAK January 3, 2021 Share January 3, 2021 8 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said: Dean had never needed Sam, I expect there were others he could have gotten in touch with to help look, but that's not what happened There are other things going on here. Their whole conversation about "I can't do this alone"--"Yes you can"--"Well I don't want to" points to other issues. Dean obviously can do this on his own. He has been for years, now he's suddenly incompetent? Dean had a message (mostly garbled) from John, telling him to be careful, that things were happening. John wasn't talking about his current case. Dean went to Sam to get him, and keep an eye on him. Dean's making excuses ("well, I don't want to") to make Sam go with him. Like someone already said, Dean looks at Sam through a parental lens, and Sam looks on Dean as someone who, even being less intelligent than himself (Sam's opinion), is trying to boss him, control him, etc. When they go their separate ways, Dean continues being Dean, but what does Sam do? What exactly did he do for that year with Amelia? What did he pursue that was just for himself? Did he even figure out what he wanted? Dean has said that he embraced the hunter's life for himself when he was 16, before Sam went off to college or "betrayed" him or anything. Whether, brainwashed or not, it was a decision he came to on his own. He no longer thought of alternate careers, hunting was it for him, and he has always been up front with this. Did Sam want to be a lawyer so bad, or was it just something he picked out of a hat? Anything, as long as it took him away? Of the both of them, Sam seems to have more trouble defining himself without Dean than the other way around. 11 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6529592
Airmid January 3, 2021 Share January 3, 2021 19 hours ago, ahrtee said: All he had to do was stay gone--Dean would have honored his decision, as he did with Stanford, with the Campbells, with Becky, with Amelia, after the Ruby and Amy fiascos, with the BMoL, etc., I always forget but Dean was willing to let Sam go after they went to work the case in the pilot - Sam telling him that he had an interview in a few hours and Dean letting it go. It wasn't until he walked in to witness Jess' murder and Dean hearing him scream that Sam really re-entered the hunting life, mainly to get revenge for the murder of his girlfriend [like father like son]. And it always struck me as Sam purposefully separated himself from John and Dean, he even talks about being free from John later to an upset Dean while they're in heaven. And 11 episodes later, in Scarecrow, Sam ditches Dean to go find John and Dean even encourages him and praises him on his supposed self-determination and drive to follow what he wants to do. Seriously. Sam later comes back and helps Dean with the case after not being able to reach him by phone [though it could be argued just why Sam was calling Dean for hours worried sick when he spent years not giving a damn if his family died on a hunt, unmourned and unknown anywhere in America but I digress] and it ends up well for both of them as it gets Sam away from Meg [not that he knows that yet] and helps Dean. Sam does gloat a little but Dean doesn't give him any crap about it and Sam does admit to Dean being all he has and they should stick together. Too bad that final sentiment isn't a constant throughout the rest of the series, along with how Sam views Dean. While at times Dean does get bitter about Sam coming back to him I think I would too, and not necessarily rely on Sam to be there. Sam seems to fear Dean 'replacing' him - even his speech in Sacrifice revolves around that, without ever really coming to an understanding that he's never going to be replaced in Dean's eyes. Dean may try to find people he can rely on and be close to but Sam always comes first, often unfortunately to Dean's determent. It's a character flaw that I've never really liked and one of the reasons why I hate the front half of S8 so much. Sure, Sam having an actual breakdown and having to give up a search for Dean/Kevin/Cas would be fine, or Sam still researching on the side while trying to not be consumed by it like Dean did for him at the start of S6 would have been fine and arguable healthy for him. Sam just prancing off with a woman that never really knew him, even if he did decide to stay with Dean in the end, not so much. I can't think of a time when Dean fully abandoned Sam outside of when he died and became a demon and even then he at least left a note and it was rather obvious on what he was up to. Sam's wandered off quite a few times on his brother and has often enough, come back to make demands to pull the relationship more in his favor. Thinking about this makes the series ending even more depressing for me - just what is their heaven going to be like? 7 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6530413
AwesomO4000 January 4, 2021 Share January 4, 2021 On 12/30/2020 at 11:26 AM, ahrtee said: If you notice, I didn't say it was all the time: I said Dean listened to Sam *when it was important* and "usually" gave in. Sorry about that. I missed the nuance. The section I quoted seemed to be saying that Dean always listened to Sam's input. I disagreed, because I was including the times when Dean was under the influence, just as I generally include when Sam is under the influence. There was also season 5 where yes, there was Sam's betrayal, but again if Dean is going to work with Sam - which was Sam's main point in "Fallen Idols" - it needed to be a partnership - Dean running off to say "yes" to Michael after Sam followed Dean's lead all season wasn't exactly listening on Dean's part in my opinion. But... On 12/30/2020 at 11:26 AM, ahrtee said: Dean almost always listened to what Sam had to say, and just because he didn't always follow his advice doesn't mean he was ignoring it. The only other times he flatly told Sam to suck it up/take it or leave it was when he was under the MoC's influence, so if we (I) can give Sam a pass for the demon blood influence, surely influenced by a demon mark is equally understandable. ... can't the same be said for Sam? Sam's main beef that I have seen is when Dean seems not to be listening to him and just makes a decision. What Sam mainly seems to want is to be consulted. He often seems to be perfectly happy with a "go in guns blazing" and following Dean's lead strategy as long as he gets to ask "so what's the plan?" and give some input. And just because if he hears Dean's explanation and still doesn't agree with it - as with the above season 5 Michael example - it doesn't mean he wasn't listening. Even in season, 4 Sam listened to Dean's advice and followed it for a while. He just ended up coming to the conclusion that doing nothing wasn't working... fairly similar to Dean in season 5, actually. I guess I don't understand why it's okay for Dean not to take Sam's advice, but it's somehow not okay for Sam not to take Dean's advice. The show seems to think it's bad based on all of the horrible consequences it gives Sam any time he dares to try to decide anything on his own, but I don't think it is. And I do give Dean a pass for his being under the influence of the demon mark... It's the before that, lying stuff that annoyed me, because he wasn't under the influence then. On 12/30/2020 at 11:54 AM, ahrtee said: So, to simplify IMO, Sam often expresses regret when his actions cause bad results, but doesn't really express remorse (because he still thinks he did "bad" things for the right reasons). Dean is remorseful when his actions hurt Sam, even if his actions are right/"good". Well, sometimes. Not so much the deal at first (Dean told Sam basically too bad, I earned the right to decide for you, deal with it... and then proceeded to make Sam feel guilty about it.) Later on he was remorseful, though. Or Amy. Dean felt bad about lying... but not enough to let Sam get over it in his own time. ("Stop being a bitch.") Or Gadreel. Dean didn't have to be remorseful for making the decision in the first place (I thought that was the entirely right decision), but he wasn't entirely remorseful about the lying either or how much that hurt Sam. He started to be, but in the end, he didn't even own up to it, saying he didn't have a choice (he did) and blaming outside influences for it. And again Sam was told to get over it. (see below). Sam implying they couldn't be brothers for a bit was harsh, but Dean wasn't making his case very well either. Even on that first case together Dean was making decisions for Sam and giving him the crappy work to do - when he wasn't lying to him and trying to ditch him - and then when Sam was trying to be conciliatory, he still gets the "I just think maybe we need to put a couple W's on the board and we get past all this," so I can see why Sam would be pissed off. And Dean couldn't have been too remorseful for the deal (Regretful, yes), because his lying about Gadreel was pretty similarly the same thing again, deciding something big for Sam in terms of Sam's agency without giving Sam a choice in the matter. So I would say both brothers have some trouble with remorse, myself. On 12/30/2020 at 11:26 AM, ahrtee said: and 1 episode after he literally begged Dean to take him back and promised he wouldn't let him down again, he was bitching about being "on probation," angry about Dean making all the decisions, and insisting that Dean "let him grow up." That doesn't sound like someone who was accepting that he'd screwed up and was willing to face the consequences. There's not a time limit on forgiveness after a major betrayal. Sam seemed to think there was. Apparently Sam doesn't corner the market on that one, either. If Sam's going to be criticized for asking Dean to be forgiving too soon, Dean should get the same criticism, in my opinion, for the example above. Yes, Sam's reaction was harsher, but Dean didn't tell Sam that Sam could be as angry as he wanted that he (Dean) deserved it either. Dean just wanted Sam to get over it. On 12/30/2020 at 12:15 PM, Pondlass1 said: He doesn’t show remorse, maybe he feels it because he certainly is less secure than Dean, but I can’t remember him showing it. Dean drinks and beats himself up, his remorse is easy to spot. Sam just seems to lash out. Sam does lash out, but I thought he did show remorse in season 5 in various places and in season 6B. On 1/1/2021 at 5:07 PM, Castiels Cat said: Dean blames himself for people dying in the Apocalypse yet Sam who released Lucifer by draining a living human body dry to do so and betraying his brother at the same time... Sam feels no remorse because he himself suffered in the cage. I'm pretty sure that's not exactly what Sam said. Sam said that he thought he had paid enough - and in my opinion he had - but Sam actually said that there was no wiping the slate clean ever. So he did feel remorse, he just thought that he had paid enough, so what was the use of letting guilt cripple you when you could be actively doing things to atone instead. That's how I interpreted what Sam said. Of course that episode was written by Adam Glass who hardly ever writes well for Sam or writes him in a positive light*, so my interpretation could be a kinder one than the writer intended. * There were only two episodes that I remember: "Mommy Dearest" and "About a Boy." "Mother's Little Helper" had a moment or two, but Glass spent most of that episode not writing about Sam, but about peripheral characters instead, so... The rest ranged from ehn to abysmal in terms of writing for Sam, especially without the influence of Gamble. In "Bad Boys," for example, Glass couldn't even bother to get Sam's age remotely right, never mind anything else, and he'd been writing for the show since season 6. 1 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6531909
ahrtee January 4, 2021 Share January 4, 2021 10 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said: Dean felt bad about lying... but not enough to let Sam get over it in his own time. ("Stop being a bitch.") The actual quote was: "You almost got us both killed, so you can be pissed all you want, but quit being a bitch." Not exactly the same. 8 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/54626-%E2%80%9Cbitch%E2%80%9D-vs-%E2%80%9Cjerk%E2%80%9D-where-we-discuss-who-the-writers-screwed-this-weekseasonever/page/216/#findComment-6531920
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.