DeeDee79 April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, ahrtee said: And Sam's speech in The Purge is one of my hot buttons for that reason--for putting all the blame for selfishness on Dean and, at the same time, negating his entire reason for being: "saving people, hunting things," making it seem to be purely selfish. To me, that's unfair. Word. That was grossly unfair and complete crap. The argument should have been limited to Sam's displeasure at being possessed without his consent. The rest of the speech was just to hurt Dean for which I was completely disappointed that the writers went there in order to shit on the history of the character. Edited April 23, 2017 by DeeDee79 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/22/#findComment-3207149
auntvi April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, ahrtee said: And Sam's speech in The Purge is one of my hot buttons for that reason--for putting all the blame for selfishness on Dean and, at the same time, negating his entire reason for being: "saving people, hunting things," making it seem to be purely selfish. To me, that's unfair. UO, I know, but at the time I agreed with Sam. Dean knew from the get go that Sam was ready to die, knew from Sam's own thoughts and knew that he'd have to trick Sam to get (and keep) permission for Gadreel to possess him. IMHO he acted for himself, not Sam. And after all that had happened to Sam as a result, I understand why he was uncharacteristically blunt to Dean. Edited April 23, 2017 by auntvi 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/22/#findComment-3207327
Myrelle April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 4 hours ago, Aeryn13 said: My entire problem with the Purge speech was that Dean wasn`t called out on the specific event but it devolved into blanket statements all over. Dean having been selfish with the Gadreel thing? Fair point. Dean supposedly being nothing but selfish, pathetic and cowardly all his life and never once anything different? Fuck you, show. Yeah, I'll never forgive the writers for never redressing that BS by having Sam take back those generalizations. But maybe they did it on purpose so that Dean could now feel like he's closer to 100% crap, instead of like the 90% crap that he used to feel like. 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/22/#findComment-3207357
Wayward Son April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 (edited) Honestly, IMO people take that aspect of Sam's words too seriously. Sam was angry, he was hurt and he lashed out, as people tend to do during emotionally charged moments. As far as I'm concerned it is no different than Dean telling Sam he wishes he was dead after the death of Charlie. And just to be clear, even though I'm more of a Sam fan boy, I don't condemn Dean for what he said after Charlie's death. I view it as a heat of the moment comment he didn't really mean just as I don't think Sam meant he thinks absolutely everything Dean does is selfish. Edited April 23, 2017 by Wayward Son 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/22/#findComment-3207369
ahrtee April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 8 minutes ago, auntvi said: UO, I know, but at the time I agreed with Sam. Dean knew from the get go that Sam was ready to die, knew from Sam's own thoughts and knew that he'd have to trick Sam to get (and keep) permission for Gadreel to possess him. IMHO he acted for himself, not Sam. Oh, I'm not denying that the main motivation was selfishness--that (as I said) he just didn't want Sam to die. And if Gadreel had just healed him outright without possessing him, I don't think there would have been any problem (or any backlash). It was the possession part that caused all the problems, IMO. Because Sam might have been willing and prepared to die, but I don't think he really wanted to if there was a reasonable way out. Otherwise, he could have said no to Dean outright, instead of that "yes" that was used against him. Dean/Gadreel told him he could save him, and did he want to be saved, and Sam said "yes." If he hadn't been tricked into agreeing to possession, Sam would have had no reason to be angry at or blame Dean for saving him. So if Sam had stuck to that as his argument in The Purge, I might have been annoyed but could understand and accept his point. But, as others have pointed out, it was those blanket statements that denigrated his entire life work that killed it for me. 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/22/#findComment-3207374
ahrtee April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 10 minutes ago, Wayward Son said: Honestly, IMO people take that aspect of Sam's words too seriously. Sam was angry, he was hurt and he lashed out, as people tend to do during emotionally charged moments. As far as I'm concerned it is no different than Dean telling Sam he wishes he was dead after the death of Charlie. And just to be clear, even though I'm more of a Sam fan boy, I don't condemn Dean for what he said after Charlie's death. I view it as a heat of the moment comment he didn't really mean just as I don't think Sam meant he thinks absolutely everything Dean does is selfish. There are a few things that make Sam's words different from Dean's, IMO. First is timing: Dean was standing over the burning body of a person he considered a little sister. Sam was calm and controlled and weeks (at least) after the events, which made it seem like he'd been considering it all the time and this was his thought-out opinion, not spur-of-the-moment anger. Second is the way it came out: Dean was talking about one specific event: Charlie's death. He didn't bring up any other things or times Sam might have done wrong. As I said above, if Sam had stuck to that one incident, I could have accepted it. He *did* have a right to be angry about Gadreel. But by making it an all-purpose blanket statement, that didn't seem like an emotionally charged response. It seemed like an absolute rejection of Dean and everything he stood for, and IMO was uncalled for. And finally, DEAN STILL HAD THE MARK ON HIS ARM. Sam had no excuse. 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/22/#findComment-3207413
Aeryn13 April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 Quote just as I don't think Sam meant he thinks absolutely everything Dean does is selfish. IMO when Sam is angry enough, that is when he says what he truly thinks. This speech wasn`t the first time that sentiment came out. And all the times he said the opposite was when he wanted to elicit a specific reaction or behaviour. At a certain point, I just have to come to the conclusion that is what Sam actually thinks deep down. He doesn`t want to think it and he still can`t help the crazy attachment he feels towards Dean, despite such a personal assessment making that attachment pretty damn insane. However, their relationship couldn`t even work if both weren`t bonkers. That is just the Sam part of it. Dean is just as crazy, only in another way. If I judge them purely on this, neither character comes out looking better than the other. I swear even Lucifer is less dysfunctional. At least some of his feelings about family make sense to me. 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/22/#findComment-3207418
SueB April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 I think in both cases, the hurt/angry brother went to the "global thermonuclear warfare" verbal toolbox. In both cases they said something with intention to inflict emotional pain on the other person. It wasn't about winning an argument (in either case), it was about making the other person hurt. I think Sam's trauma got him there and he felt Dean was unrepentant. I also feel a good deal of guilt (for Kevin's death) was in that moment. I think while Dean has the ability to throw those verbal nukes, his edge came more from the Mark for the Charlie funeral. Without the Mark, I think he STILL would have been fairly vicious but I don't think he would have said the bit about wishing Sam was up there. And as @ahrtee said, both of these arguments were heat of the moment and uncharacteristically brutal. If asked today, I'm CONVINCED Dean would not support Sam trading places with Charlie. He'd also blame the Mark (I suspect). 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/22/#findComment-3207439
Bessie April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 22 minutes ago, ahrtee said: And finally, DEAN STILL HAD THE MARK ON HIS ARM. Sam had no excuse. The one that bothered me the most with Sam was hands-down The Purge, but the one that bothered me the most with Dean was Sacrifice. And he had no excuse. That's where Dean's cruelty matched Sam's. For me, it was just as painful to hear Dean say those things to Sam as he's about to go up against then King of Hell as it was to hear Sam's hurtful words to Dean. Both of those scenes were hard to watch. 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/22/#findComment-3207478
catrox14 April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 (edited) IMO, and maybe this should go in the UO thread, I'm not particularly convinced that selling your soul to save another person's life is in and of itself a selfish act. You're (the royal YOU) is choosing to give up your human existence for an eternity of torture and torment so that another person can live. IMO, John selling his soul to save Dean IMO wasn't the truly selfish act. It was saddling Dean with the Save Sam/Kill Sam mission, which IMO messed up Dean at least as much as John's death itself, if not more, given that now he's having to consider killing the person he's protected his entire life. As to the Purge speech, well, that was awful and I have a lot of thoughts. Sam had a valid, legitimate beef with Dean lying to him but Sam veered way out of bounds. It's a god awful speech that I think somehow the writers THOUGHT was profound and a real beatdown of Dean but it failed miserably if that was the goal. Unfortunately, it is what Sam said so I took issue with it and Sam. Supposing Sam is correct and Dean thinks he is Sam's savior, Sam seems to have forgotten or is choosing to disregard that Dean was RAISED to be Sam's savior. 30 years at least of Dean being the keeper of the Prime Directive: 'I can't live with you dead" which is completely different than "I can't live without you' Or "You can't stand being alone". It's a totally fallacious argument Sam made, which has been shown time and time again to be untrue. If Dean was unable to live without Sam, Dean would have committed suicide when Sam died. He would not have traded his life for Sam's in s2. The entire point was to SAVE SAM at any cost. I still find it rich that and my jaw dropped and still does that Sam was the one that threw out the "You can't stand to be alone" when it was Sam in S1 who launched the first salvo in the "unilateral attempts to save the others life" in s1 in Faith when he took Dean to a faith healer unbeknowst to Dean and an innocent man died instead of Dean (which lead to all of Dean's existential issues that IMO still kind of exist to this day). Prior to Dean's near death in Faith, there was no indication that Dean didn't value his own life or thought that his life had no meaning. In Faith, Sam said the following Quote SAM What are you talking about? I'm not gonna leave you here. DEAN (Serious) Hey, you better take care of that car. Or, I swear, I'll haunt your ass. SAM I don't think that's funny. DEAN Oh, come on, it's a little funny. There is a long silence, Sam looks down, fighting tears. DEAN sighs. DEAN Look, Sammy, what can I say, man, it's a dangerous gig. I drew the short straw. That's it, end of story. SAM Don't talk like that, alright? We still have options. DEAN What options? Yeah, burial or cremation. And I know it's not easy. But I'm gonna die. And you can't stop it. SAM Watch me. ******************************* SAM (Helping DEAN to a chair)I've been scouring the Internet for the last three days. Calling every contact in Dad's journal. DEAN For what? SAM For a way to help you. One of Dad's friends, Joshua, he called me back. Told me about a guy in Nebraska. A specialist. DEAN You're not gonna let me die in peace, are you? SAM I'm not gonna let you die, period. We're going. ****************************************** DEAN You never should've brought me here. SAM Dean, I was just trying to save your life. DEAN But, Sam, some guy is dead now because of me. SAM I didn't know. IMO, Sam is as much a hypocrite as Dean about the whole saving each other thing. IMO, the difference is that Dean acknowledges his hypocrisy. I'm not so sure Sam even realizes he's a hypocrite about it, given his words in the Purge. Maybe he saw it in s11 but that was more about the cost of them saving each other to the expense of the universe vs respecting the autonomy of the other one in a general sense. If Sam was really all about autonomous decision making, IMO he would have just let demon!Dean be, or tried to kill him or just let him live because as far as Sam knew, demon!Dean had killed one guy in self defense.Sam didn't know that Dean killed Lester until after the fact. Or maybe just on the principle that not all monsters or demons deserve to die, especially if they haven't done something to warrant the death penalty. Sam wasn't willing to kill Ruby until she flat out betrayed him. And even then it was Dean that killed her. Demon!Dean didn't seem to have done anything particularly monstrous, other than killing other demon chum, and Lester who wanted his wife murdered. Does that make demon!Dean a monster deserving death or having his demonity taken away against his will? But Sam chose to change Dean back and Sam said later that he was continuing to find a cure for the Mark because he couldn't stand to see Dean become that thing again. Yes, there is a difference because Dean was a demon but isn't it really the same principle of autonomy? Do I fault Sam for doing it? Notparticularly, just like I don't fault Dean for saving Sam's life via angel possession. IMO the difference is that Dean never once said he'd never do whatever it took to save Sam's life. Sam rails against it, but then does the same thing essentially. Sam saying Dean did more bad than good was terrible. Sam had every right to angry and hurt over Dean's continuing to lie. The problem is that Sam did not specify it was ONLY ever about that. He impugned all of Dean's life and the narrative made no attempts to separate Sam's issue with Dean's life of good deeds. Sam then went a step further and shifted this to being about Sam not thinking he should be alive which runs counter to what Sam decided in the church, which was the last time Sam was of reasonable-ish sound mind and body (much more than coma!Sam). The worst part, though was Sam saying Dean wasn't willing to do the sacrificing. Oh Sam, no. Just no. That was unnecessarily cruel and awful and another fallacious argument that he KNOWS is false. Dean has literally gone to HELL to save Sam's life. He's jumped in front of bullets, he used himself as bait to lure vampires, he's put himself in harm's way his entire life to save someone else starting with Sam. Quote DEAN [softly] You know, Sam, I saved your hide back there. And I saved your hide at that church... And the hospital. I may not think things all the way through. Okay? But what I do, I do because it's the right thing. I'd do it again. SAM And that... is the problem. You think you're my savior, my brother, the hero. You swoop in, and even when you mess up, you think what you're doing is worth it because you've convinced yourself you're doing more good than bad... But you're not. [DEAN's blank eyes stare at him] I mean, Kevin's dead, Crowley's in the wind. We're no closer to beating this angel thing. Please tell me, what is the upside of me being alive? DEAN [shocked] You kidding me? You and me -- fighting the good fight together. SAM [sighing in frustration almost leaves but then decides to explain. He come into the kitchen and sits down across from DEAN, who draws back unconsciously] Okay. Just once, be honest with me. You didn't save me for me. You did it for you. DEAN [totally confused] What are you talkin' about? SAM I was ready to die. I was ready. I should have died, but you... You didn't want to be alone, and that's what all this boils down to. You can't stand the thought of being alone. DEAN [drawing back and standing up] All right. SAM I'll give you this much. You are certainly willing to do the sacrificing as long as you're not the one being hurt. DEAN All right, you want to be honest? If the situation were reversed and I was dying, you'd do the same thing. 23 minutes ago, SueB said: I think while Dean has the ability to throw those verbal nukes, his edge came more from the Mark for the Charlie funeral. Without the Mark, I think he STILL would have been fairly vicious but I don't think he would have said the bit about wishing Sam was up there. 48 minutes ago, Wayward Son said: Honestly, IMO people take that aspect of Sam's words too seriously. Sam was angry, he was hurt and he lashed out, as people tend to do during emotionally charged moments. As far as I'm concerned it is no different than Dean telling Sam he wishes he was dead after the death of Charlie Dean was under the influence of the Mark of Cain when he said that. If Soulless Sam letting Dean be turned into a vampire, is put under the "disallowed" because Altered State!Winchester then nope I don't give Dean any grief for that. Sam was under no supernatural influence at all when he said what he said in the Purge Edited April 23, 2017 by catrox14 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/22/#findComment-3207480
Bessie April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 I agree with Sam on that narrow point. True sacrifice for Dean isn't giving up his life. It's giving up Sam's. 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/22/#findComment-3207489
ahrtee April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 5 minutes ago, Bessie said: I agree with Sam on that narrow point. True sacrifice for Dean isn't giving up his life. It's giving up Sam's. Which Dean did in Swan Song. 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/22/#findComment-3207501
Bessie April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 (edited) 4 minutes ago, ahrtee said: 9 minutes ago, Bessie said: I agree with Sam on that narrow point. True sacrifice for Dean isn't giving up his life. It's giving up Sam's. Which Dean did in Swan Song. Absolutely! I found Ackles portrayal of that heartbreaking. But, generally, he doesn't. Edited April 23, 2017 by Bessie 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/22/#findComment-3207504
companionenvy April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 12 minutes ago, catrox14 said: in Faith when he took Dean to a faith healer unbeknowst to Dean and an innocent man died instead of Dean (which lead to all of Dean's existential issues that IMO still kind of exist to this day). Prior to Dean's near death in Faith, there was no indication that Dean didn't value his own life or thought that his life had no meaning. I think it is a real stretch to trace Dean's existential issues to Faith. In the scheme of everything the boys have been through, Faith is a blip, and as far as I recall the events of the episode have never since been brought up. Also, Sam really didn't have any reason to think saving Dean in Faith would lead to the other guy's death, so I don't think it is an instance of gross irresponsibility -- although it does set up a pattern of the Winchesters putting others at risk to save each other. 18 minutes ago, catrox14 said: Sam was really all about autonomous decision making, IMO he would have just let demon!Dean be, or tried to kill him or just let him live because as far as Sam knew, demon!Dean had killed one guy in self defense.Sam didn't know that Dean killed Lester until after the fact. Curing Demon Dean (or Soulless Sam, for that matter) is not, IMO, a violation of autonomy - the better analogy would be making a medical decision for someone who has been deemed mentally incompetent. Dean with all his faculties -- soul included -- present would never want to live as a demon, and Sam knows it. The fact that the demon shell of Dean Winchester might object is immaterial. 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/22/#findComment-3207522
DeeDee79 April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 3 hours ago, catrox14 said: If Soulless Sam letting Dean be turned into a vampire, is put under the "disallowed" because Altered State!Winchester then nope I don't give Dean any grief for that. Exactly right; just as Soulless Sam is also given a pass for telling Dean that he didn't care about him or trying to kill Bobby because he was clearly not Sam. MOC and Demon Dean are clearly tainted Dean which is evident from his attempts to kill Sam, Cas and having no problem with palling around with Crowley who he barely tolerates on a good day. 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/22/#findComment-3207554
ahrtee April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 2 minutes ago, companionenvy said: Curing Demon Dean (or Soulless Sam, for that matter) is not, IMO, a violation of autonomy - the better analogy would be making a medical decision for someone who has been deemed mentally incompetent. Dean with all his faculties -- soul included -- present would never want to live as a demon, and Sam knows it. The fact that the demon shell of Dean Winchester might object is immaterial. IA, but it also is comparable to Dean forcing Soulless Sam to take back his soul. I don't know about this site, but the forum I was reading at the time was very, VERY opposed to it, equating it to rape. I even had a friend who was furious that Sam not only didn't blame Dean afterwards but actually *thanked* him. 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/22/#findComment-3207560
ahrtee April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 32 minutes ago, Bessie said: Absolutely! I found Ackles portrayal of that heartbreaking. But, generally, he doesn't. I'm sorry, I don't understand your point. Are you saying Dean is selfish because he only sacrificed Sam once? If so, shouldn't the opposite also hold true, and Sam should always be ready and willing to sacrifice Dean without complaining, arguing, or looking for other options? 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/22/#findComment-3207583
catrox14 April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, companionenvy said: I think it is a real stretch to trace Dean's existential issues to Faith. In the scheme of everything the boys have been through, Faith is a blip, and as far as I recall the events of the episode have never since been brought up. Also, Sam really didn't have any reason to think saving Dean in Faith would lead to the other guy's death, so I don't think it is an instance of gross irresponsibility -- although it does set up a pattern of the Winchesters putting others at risk to save each other. It's not a reach in the least. Dean said it himself. He said before the end of s1 and he was further troubled by his not being dead after IMTOD in s2 if you want to not include Faith as part of his existential crisis. Quote Dean, what is it? Pause. DEAN I'm sorry. SAM You -- For what? DEAN The way I've been acting. (SAM crosses to sit on the hood, close but not touching.) And for Dad. I mean, he was your dad too. And it's my fault that he's gone. SAM What are you talking about? DEAN I know you've been thinking it -- so have I. Doesn't take a genius to figure it out. Back at the hospital, I made a full recovery. It was a miracle. And five minutes later Dad's dead and the Colt's gone. SAM Dean. DEAN You can't tell me there's not a connection there. I don't know how the demon was involved. I don't know how the whole thing went down exactly. But Dad's dead because of me. And that much I do know. SAM We don't know that. Not for sure. DEAN Sam ... (He starts crying) You and Dad ... you're the most important people in my life. And now ... I never should've come back, Sam. It wasn't natural. And now look what's come of it. I was dead. And I should have stayed dead. You wanted to know how I was feeling. Well, that's it. It's literally in the narrative of the show. It doesn't matter if it's a blip to a viewer, Faith, in the show, was a sea change for Dean and Sam. It's a part of their lives. Sam refused to accept that Dean was going to die and was willing to do anything to prevent that from happening. I'm not sure how that's any different that what Dean has ever done. But to that end Sam was also not willing to let Dean give up his life from the jump aside from Faith: s2- Wouldn't accept Dean dying with him in Croatoan. s3- Tried to find any way to get Dean out of his deal and then proceeded to find the Trickster to get him to resurrect Dean s4 -Tried to make whatever deal he could to get Dean out of Hell s5- Not letting Dean say yes to Michael and locking him in the panic room s9 - Was going to make a deal with Crowley to bring Dean back in the end s10 -Trying to find any way to rid Dean of the Mark Sam has just as much of a history with not accepting Dean dying as Dean not accepting Sam's death. The difference IMO is that Dean doesn't pretend he won't do whatever it takes to Save Sam Edited April 23, 2017 by catrox14 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/22/#findComment-3207585
catrox14 April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 (edited) 43 minutes ago, companionenvy said: Curing Demon Dean (or Soulless Sam, for that matter) is not, IMO, a violation of autonomy - the better analogy would be making a medical decision for someone who has been deemed mentally incompetent. Dean with all his faculties -- soul included -- present would never want to live as a demon, and Sam knows it. The fact that the demon shell of Dean Winchester might object is immaterial. That wasn't a demon shell. It was Dean's own twisted messed up soul in Dean's own meatsuit. If someone didn't know that Dean was a demon how would anyone have been able to say he was not competent to make his own choices? He had a relationship with Ann Marie who didn't know he was a demon AFAIK. HE WAS EVIL-ish and a liar, but that's not the same as being unable to make his own autonomous decisions. He wasn't possessed and he wasn't possessing anyone else. Even people who commit murder aren't declared mentally incompetent to stand trial because they murdered. Sam was in a coma and he couldn't make ANY decisions coma!scape or not. Edited April 23, 2017 by catrox14 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/22/#findComment-3207611
catrox14 April 23, 2017 Share April 23, 2017 1 hour ago, Bessie said: The one that bothered me the most with Sam was hands-down The Purge, but the one that bothered me the most with Dean was Sacrifice. And he had no excuse. That's where Dean's cruelty matched Sam's. For me, it was just as painful to hear Dean say those things to Sam as he's about to go up against then King of Hell as it was to hear Sam's hurtful words to Dean. What did Dean say to Sam in Sacrifice that was cruel? I legit don't remember that at all. 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/22/#findComment-3207675
Katy M April 24, 2017 Share April 24, 2017 (edited) 37 minutes ago, catrox14 said: What did Dean say to Sam in Sacrifice that was cruel? I legit don't remember that at all. I don't think he was being cruel, and honestly as far as hurtful conversations, to me it's pretty low down on my ratings list (which I don't actually have). Sam did give Dean permission to suggest sins to confess. But, Ruby was pretty obvious and Sam had already heard about how he hadn't looked for Dean in Purgatory ad nauseam all season, so, nothing new or particularly cruel, IMO. Plus, it didn't seem to be said mean-spiritidly. Edited April 24, 2017 by Katy M 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/22/#findComment-3207763
catrox14 April 24, 2017 Share April 24, 2017 Just now, Katy M said: I don't think he was being cruel, and honestly as far as hurtful conversations, to me it's pretty low down on my ratings list (which I don't actually have). Sam did give Dean permission to suggest sins to confess. But, Ruby was pretty obvious and Sam had already heard about how he hadn't looked for Dean in Purgatory ad nauseam all season, so, nothing new or particularly cruel, IMO. Plus, it didn't seem to be said mean-spiritidly. Oh ...the list of sins. I didn't even think about it as being a cruel thing like what Sam said in the Purge. Thanks for answering! 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/22/#findComment-3207773
companionenvy April 24, 2017 Share April 24, 2017 We'll have to agree to disagree with Faith; I simply see no evidence that that one-off episode has major emotional ramifications for Dean. IMTOD is different; in that case, it is John dying for Dean, and doing so fully consciously. 2 hours ago, catrox14 said: That wasn't a demon shell. It was Dean's own twisted messed up soul in Dean's own meatsuit. If someone didn't know that Dean was a demon how would anyone have been able to say he was not competent to make his own choices? He had a relationship with Ann Marie who didn't know he was a demon AFAIK. HE WAS EVIL-ish and a liar, but that's not the same as being unable to make his own autonomous decisions. He wasn't possessed and he wasn't possessing anyone else. Even people who commit murder aren't declared mentally incompetent to stand trial because they murdered. I'm a little unclear on the exact metaphysical status of DemonDean, but I think he was substantially altered so as to at the very least be considered not in his right mind. The fact that this may not have been evident to every person he encountered doesn't change that, IMO. There are plenty of real world conditions that would not be obvious if one hadn't known the person previously -- sudden change in personality is a diagnostic criteria for a variety of illnesses, which is one of the reasons why it is so important for doctors to talk to patients' families. Sam not trying to cure Dean would have been a terrible betrayal, not a sign of respect for his autonomy. 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/22/#findComment-3208105
auntvi April 24, 2017 Share April 24, 2017 4 hours ago, ahrtee said: IA, but it also is comparable to Dean forcing Soulless Sam to take back his soul. I don't know about this site, but the forum I was reading at the time was very, VERY opposed to it, equating it to rape. I even had a friend who was furious that Sam not only didn't blame Dean afterwards but actually *thanked* him. I can see where they're coming from: it was really difficult watching Death forcing the soul back into Sam while he's screaming, "please don't!!" However, I agree it had to be done somehow. As dramatic as it was, I wish the storyline had gone straight to Castiel admitting it was his fault and fixing Sam. 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/22/#findComment-3208167
DittyDotDot April 24, 2017 Author Share April 24, 2017 13 minutes ago, auntvi said: I can see where they're coming from: it was really difficult watching Death forcing the soul back into Sam while he's screaming, "please don't!!" However, I agree it had to be done somehow. Yeah, Soulless Sam was a threat to the general population that couldn't be contained. It was either kill Sam or get him his soul back. Same with Demon Dean. It was either kill Dean or cure him. Was there really a choice there? 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/22/#findComment-3208221
rue721 April 24, 2017 Share April 24, 2017 Also, they couldn't just leave Sam's soul to be tortured in the Cage for all time. I mean, they had to try and rescue his soul somehow. Might as well stuff it back into his perfectly healthy meatsuit once they've gotten it out. Where else were they going to put it? 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/22/#findComment-3208252
ahrtee April 24, 2017 Share April 24, 2017 1 hour ago, auntvi said: I can see where they're coming from: it was really difficult watching Death forcing the soul back into Sam while he's screaming, "please don't!!" However, I agree it had to be done somehow. As dramatic as it was, I wish the storyline had gone straight to Castiel admitting it was his fault and fixing Sam. 1 hour ago, DittyDotDot said: Yeah, Soulless Sam was a threat to the general population that couldn't be contained. It was either kill Sam or get him his soul back. Same with Demon Dean. It was either kill Dean or cure him. Was there really a choice there? 49 minutes ago, rue721 said: Also, they couldn't just leave Sam's soul to be tortured in the Cage for all time. I mean, they had to try and rescue his soul somehow. Might as well stuff it back into his perfectly healthy meatsuit once they've gotten it out. Where else were they going to put it? Yeah, I made all those points when I was arguing *for* Sam getting his soul back. But the consensus (or at least loudest voices) on that site said that Dean was EVIL for not allowing Sam to make the choice for himself, and nothing I said was going to change minds. So now I try to stay out of those sorts of discussions. 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/22/#findComment-3208375
AwesomO4000 April 24, 2017 Share April 24, 2017 6 hours ago, Aeryn13 said: IMO when Sam is angry enough, that is when he says what he truly thinks. This speech wasn`t the first time that sentiment came out. And all the times he said the opposite was when he wanted to elicit a specific reaction or behaviour. I completely disagree, because to me this doesn't make much sense. Why would Sam only say what he truly thinks when he's angry? What purpose would that serve? I also think that saying that whenever Sam says nice things he only wants to "elicit a specific reaction or behavior" may be your opinion, but it's not really supported by the show history. You may dislike seasons 6 and 7, but they had - once Sam got his soul back - many things Sam said to Dean that had nothing to do with getting Dean to do anything and were complimentary, telling Dean how much he appreciated him and needed him (which implies that Sam thinks Dean is both competent and has Sam's best interest at heart.) I would say that season 5 had its share as well. And season 2, also. I myself can only off the top of my head think of maybe 3 instances that might fit what you are talking about - and that's only because others pointed it out, not because I initially saw it that way - the "I'm the worst of you" thing in season 5, the "light at the end of the tunnel" speech... and I actually forgot what I thought the 3rd thing might be unless it was "I just want you to be my brother"... but I actually think that was an on purpose one, because I think Sam knew that would work and he wanted/needed Dean out of his depression at the time. 6 hours ago, catrox14 said: Sam had a valid, legitimate beef with Dean lying to him but Sam veered way out of bounds. It's a god awful speech that I think somehow the writers THOUGHT was profound and a real beatdown of Dean but it failed miserably if that was the goal. Unfortunately, it is what Sam said so I took issue with it and Sam. Ah, see I disagree. I don't think that was the goal at all. This was the Carver years after all. I think the speech was designed to do exactly what it did - make Sam look bad and set him up as the hypocrite. I'm sorry, but as you said, Sam had a legitimate beef here... but he wasn't even allowed in his argument to address the biggest part of this beef: that Dean not only lied to Sam, but continued to lie even when Sam was thinking he was crazy or "wrong." In other words, Sam had been suffering and had been being violated by Gadreel who had been wiping his memory and reading his private thoughts while he was possessing him... and Dean had allowed that to continue - even after Dean knew - in order to "save" Sam. But that wasn't even allowed to be addressed here. Instead they had Sam focus on the lesser thing that could have been a thing Dean maybe thought he should do based on what Dean knew - the possession part - and had Sam phrase things so that they could be interpreted wrongly* or were outright lies. I can only think this was done maybe due to more negative reaction to the whole possession situation by the fans than the writers expected or something, so they wanted to give more sympathy for Dean's point of view, and by the end of the season all of the legitimate argument against Gadreel's possession was swept under the rug and to do that, not only was Sam made to go back on his principals, but made to declare Gadreel a "real friend." Really? WTF? Why should Sam even say that? In what sick world would someone who used your body to kill people, wiped your memories, read your most intimate, private thoughts and used them against you be considered a "real friend?" Yet apparently according to the writers, Gadreel somehow was and he was then redeemed on top of that... so given that, why would I expect that the writers thought that what Dean did to Sam was all that wrong and deserved Sam's outburst from "The Purge"? Well, basically I wouldn't. Basically I would think that Sam had been being painted as being too harsh to poor Dean and then had later "seen the light" at the end of the season. So basically I think that "The Purge" speech was included to show that maybe Sam was ungrateful and was being unfairly angry at Dean. The POV of the scene was not with Sam. We didn't follow Sam back to his room and see his reaction after the outburst. Did Sam feel badly afterwards? Did he feel regret? Was Sam upset? Did he feel empty? Who knows, because instead we lingered on Dean's devastated face... the sympathy of the scene was with Dean, and setting up, in my opinion, the ending of the season when Dean would be proven right (yet again). * I say this because the statement that is often interpreted as a blanket statement against everything Dean did could actually be interpreted as being more specific, but it's left vague enough so that it can be interpreted as awful as well. It could have been phrased differently. "You think you're my savior, my brother, the hero. You swoop in, and even when you mess up, you think what you're doing is worth it because you've convinced yourself you're doing more good than bad... But you're not." The bolded part could mean that Sam is only referring to times when Dean messes up when he says "you're doing more good than bad, but you're not"... not all the times. But the phrasing leaves it open to interpretation. 4 hours ago, Katy M said: I don't think he was being cruel, and honestly as far as hurtful conversations, to me it's pretty low down on my ratings list (which I don't actually have). Sam did give Dean permission to suggest sins to confess. But, Ruby was pretty obvious and Sam had already heard about how he hadn't looked for Dean in Purgatory ad nauseam all season, so, nothing new or particularly cruel, IMO. Plus, it didn't seem to be said mean-spiritidly. I disagree. Sam wasn't asking for what to confess - I'm pretty sure Sam knew what to confess about - he was asking about the ritual surrounding the confession. To me that was shown through the dialogue Dean: Your blood's supposed to be purified, isn't it? You ever, uh -- you ever done the "forgive me, father" before? (the ritual) Sam: Well, once, when we were kids. Which is why I have no clue what to say now. (i.e. Sam doesn't remember the words to the ritual.) Dean was the one who used it as an opportunity to list off all of Sam's sins - and then some - that Sam thought that Dean had forgiven him for, but instead seemed to enjoy using the opportunity to list them all off. And Sam was frustrated and rattled with what Dean said, because I think it was part of the reason he got so morose afterwards and figured Dean wouldn't much care if he (Sam) died in the ritual. 6 hours ago, catrox14 said: But to that end Sam was also not willing to let Dean give up his life from the jump aside from Faith: s2- Wouldn't accept Dean dying with him in Croatoan. s3- Tried to find any way to get Dean out of his deal and then proceeded to find the Trickster to get him to resurrect Dean s4 -Tried to make whatever deal he could to get Dean out of Hells5- Not letting Dean say yes to Michael and locking him in the panic room Actually those two I'm not as sure about. I think Sam was going to eventually accept that Dean was going to stay with him in the hospital room until Sam turned... even if he'd told Dean that it was the stupidest thing Dean ever did. But Sam seemed to be swaying after Dean said that he was tired. And Sam eventually let Dean out of the panic room to make his own decision even though Sam warned him that he was going to say "yes." I do agree about the rest of the times though... and especially season 10. I don't blame Sam much for season 3, though. Sam knew that situation was going to be awful for him - and Dean - if he didn't find a way out for Dean. And he was right. Dean going to hell pretty much started Sam's decline into season 4's breakdown - even if the kickoff point was only an illusion Dean going to hell (Sam didn't know that though, and it was just as traumatic). 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/22/#findComment-3208473
ILoveReading April 24, 2017 Share April 24, 2017 8 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said: Ah, see I disagree. I don't think that was the goal at all. This was the Carver years after all. I think the speech was designed to do exactly what it did - make Sam look bad and set him up as the hypocrite. I disagree here, because regardless of how the audience saw it I think it was authorial intent that Sam meant what he said. If it was their intent just to make Sam look bad they would have made him take back the whole speech or given Dean a chance to rebutt it. The only part addressed was Sam saying he wouldn't save Dean. I thought that was what Sam was refering to when he said, I lied. The night the episode aired, the writers tweeted that Sam was coming from a place of honesty. Plus, this conversation took place weeks after it happened so while Sam might still be angry but he had time to think the matter over. Plus,, in Thinman they drove the point home again with the (IMO) weak and forced parallel with Ed and Harry. Even repeating a lot of the same dialogue. Then for good measure they drove it home again in Meta Fiction with Gadreel taunting Dean with it. Gadreel was long gone by the time The Purge aired. Since Sam kicked out Gadreel immediately after he knew he was possessed, for Gadreel to repeat this stuff, the only way he could have picked up on it is if some part of Sam believes it. 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/22/#findComment-3209080
Aeryn13 April 24, 2017 Share April 24, 2017 Quote I completely disagree, because to me this doesn't make much sense. Why would Sam only say what he truly thinks when he's angry? What purpose would that serve? I don`t think it serves a specific purpose so much as when he is angry enough, he can`t keep a lid on it anymore. Actually, I doubt he truly wants to speak those "truths", if he is angry or not because he `generally doesn`t want to acknowledge those thoughts. They just come out under certain circumstances. As for praise, I look at the things Sam has now repeatedly trashed Dean about which is pretty much always some variation of selfish/clingy/pathetic/dumb. His insults are always pretty specific about that. So does he equally specifically refute those insults? Or gives specific praise in those areas and not just something a lot more vague? Yes, he does. In the speeches like in Season 3 or the trials. Then we get dialogue like "you are a genius" and I look at the entirety of the show and pretty much every other episode and go "are you fucking kidding me?" If someone acts a certain way that implies a certain assessment - and not just jokes or jibes, be they in jest or not but pretty much by way of how they deliver 98 % of their dialogue - and then turn around and say "well, I have always believed the complete opposite", I`m not gonna find it believable. Sorry, I don`t. Then change at least 65 % of your other line delivery and then we`re talking. Those speeches come across as such emtpy gestures from the writers even because usually they can`t even prove them to be true within their own episodes. Let alone the one after or the one after that. If the writer shows me clear as day how little they think of a character`s intellect or competency by way of writing them, then don`t try to placate me with a speech every five Seasons or so. Like, don`t piss on my leg and tell me it`s raining. Quote The night the episode aired, the writers tweeted that Sam was coming from a place of honesty. Plus, this conversation took place weeks after it happened so while Sam might still be angry but he had time to think the matter over. Yup, I don`t for a minute think sympathies were supposed lie with Dean here. The writers were practically cheering Sam on. They are just often tone-deaf and seem continously baffled that people actually chose to have the "comedy relief sidekick" figure as their favourite character. The show`s meta episodes certainly make it seem like this is just.not.done. Other than the convention episode where they made it a paired off "package deal". 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/22/#findComment-3209436
AwesomO4000 April 24, 2017 Share April 24, 2017 4 hours ago, ILoveReading said: I disagree here, because regardless of how the audience saw it I think it was authorial intent that Sam meant what he said. If it was their intent just to make Sam look bad they would have made him take back the whole speech or given Dean a chance to rebutt it. The only part addressed was Sam saying he wouldn't save Dean. I thought that was what Sam was refering to when he said, I lied. I never said that the authorial intent wasn't that Sam meant it. I said that the authorial intent was to make Sam look badly as he said it... and then to show how wrong Sam was. Which is why, in my opinion, Sam wasn't allowed to take it back or allowed to argue the things that he honestly should have been angry about in that speech. I agree that the "I lied" was for the not saving Dean part. That is what made Sam a hypocrite in the finale and was the main point of the "The Purge" speech. I think the writers thought that Dean was right to save Sam via Gadreel, and this is why that even though they paid lip service to all the awful things Gadreel did to Sam, they ignored that aspect of it in the "The Purge" speech and in the end Gadreel was a "real friend" and helped Castiel save the world from Metatron. So all of Gadreel's bad deeds were brushed under the rug in a "see, Sam shouldn't have even gotten angry for that" kind of way, because "see, Sam's fine with it after all." 4 hours ago, ILoveReading said: Plus, this conversation took place weeks after it happened so while Sam might still be angry but he had time to think the matter over. The reason I argue that Sam was angry and not thinking rationally was because Dean wouldn't. Let. It. Go. Dean started the argument with (reading between the lines) "Oh by the way, I saved your ass again. Just like I always (have to) do. And just like I did with Gadreel, so I don't understand why you're being such a bitch about this." Gee, I wonder why Sam was angry all over again. Based off of this, it looked to me - and probably to Sam - that whatever Dean had said before concerning Gadreel was being shown as just Dean saying what he had to say. He really didn't mean it, and now Dean's true feelings were coming out. Dean was basically annoyed because Sam wasn't thanking him for Gadreel, and that pissed Sam off. And Sam had encountered this before in "The Mentalists" when Dean talked Sam into doing the case with him - (paraphrase) "I understand that you're angry, so we'll just stick to the case." Until Sam did stick to the case, even being pretty nice about it, I thought, and then Dean was "how dare you just work this like a case and not see that I was right? Stop being such a bitch." In that case, Sam relented, but I don't think he was having it this time (yet). So yes, Sam having seen this tactic before was understandably angry. Unfortunately, I think the writers agreed with Dean that Sam should just be grateful, because... 2 hours ago, Aeryn13 said: Yup, I don`t for a minute think sympathies were supposed lie with Dean here. The writers were practically cheering Sam on. My opinion only here: If the writers were supposedly "cheering Sam on" then why didn't we hear about the things Gdareel did to Sam in the argument rather than have Sam just spout stuff that was missing most of the point and/or wasn't true, but that would hurt Dean's feelings? Why didn't we follow up with Sam's point of view on the fight (as in follow Sam back to his room) rather than get the hurt Dean face at the end of the episode, showing the viewers just how much crappy Sam had hurt poor Dean? Why have at the end of the season Sam do an entire 180 and see just how right Dean was? Why have Gadreel be redeemed and actually do more to help save the world from Metatron than Sam did? See, it's hard for me to believe that the writers' sympathies are going to be with the character that they usually make be wrong and screw up most of the time. To me, that just makes very little sense. If the sympathies were with Sam, couldn't the writers, I don't know, maybe make Sam ultimately right about Gadreel for example and not make Gadreel almost a hero? (And for me, the ultimate insult in that regard was to have Sam - of all people - declare Gadreel a "true friend.") Or maybe let Sam hold to his convictions that he wouldn't do the same thing as Dean if the circumstances were the same? Or barring that - since apparently no, they couldn't let Sam have that - at least not punish Sam for then doing the same thing by having him start another apocalypse? But nope, the writers not only didn't let Sam hold on to his convictions, they had to punish him for not agreeing with Dean in the first place... first by making Sam fail to save Dean, and then by having Sam start an apocalypse when he did presume to save Dean. So, no, I don't think the sympathies were for Sam in that scenario. They may have tweeted that Sam was coming from a place of honesty but that doesn't mean that the writers were with Sam on that. What happened in terms of the POV of that scene and what ultimately happened in the rest of the season said to me that the writers' sympathies and opinion were very much with Dean. And yup even when Dean became a demon, because they accounted for that, too by painting Sam - with the Walter(?) situation - as being worse even than Dean as a demon, and of course making sure the Darkness was Sam's fault. And I don't see why the writers would have any of that happen if their sympathies were supposedly with Sam, because to me that wouldn't make much sense. Your miles may obviously vary. 3 hours ago, Aeryn13 said: So does he equally specifically refute those insults? Or gives specific praise in those areas and not just something a lot more vague? Yes, he does. In the speeches like in Season 3 or the trials. ... and in episodes like "Something Wicked" and "What Is..." and "All Hell.... Pt 1" and "Heaven and Hell," and "Mannequin 3..." and "Season 7, Time for a Wedding" and on and on until as recently as "The Devil in the Details." (There's probably something this season, but I haven't done a proper rewatch yet.) It's not like Dean doesn't have his specific insults for Sam that he goes to - i.e. that Sam is arrogant, is a junkie, is weak, is a traitor, abandons his family, is untrustworthy, etc. (and those are the ones when Dean's not under the influence of anything) - and how often does Dean refute those specific insults? And mean it? My point is I think you are asking maybe for too much from the narrative. Sam and Dean are human with a lot of baggage. They insult one another and they don't always verbally apologize for those insults. Instead they do so through actions. I'm sure that you would like to see Sam specifically apologize for every wrong he's ever done or said to Dean, but it doesn't go the other way either so I'm glad it's not one-sided like that. And it wouldn't be realistic either, in my opinion. 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/22/#findComment-3210573
Katy M April 24, 2017 Share April 24, 2017 38 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said: (And for me, the ultimate insult in that regard was to have Sam - of all people - declare Gadreel a "true friend.") Oh, yeah, don't even get me started on that. Not only that, but Cas asked Sam if he felt like Gadreel meant to hurt him, or felt evil, or something, and Sam said he just felt misunderstood. AARGH. Misunderstood people don't kill cute little prophets just because someone else told them, too. the end of the season totally invalidated everything Sam had the right to be feeling. Even though, oh yeah, Kevin's still dead. 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/22/#findComment-3210697
Reganne April 24, 2017 Share April 24, 2017 I have to agree that with the purge speech, the narrative and sympathies seem to remain with Dean, especially how the cameras stay with Dean afterwards so we the viewers get to see his emotions and what he is feeling. They never really explored Sam's emotional state after what he said. Though I like both brothers, Sam is my favourite and even I was mad at Sam when I first watched it. I still don't like that scene. Lol. 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/22/#findComment-3210726
catrox14 April 24, 2017 Share April 24, 2017 (edited) 17 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said: ctually those two I'm not as sure about. I think Sam was going to eventually accept that Dean was going to stay with him in the hospital room until Sam turned... even if he'd told Dean that it was the stupidest thing Dean ever did. But Sam seemed to be swaying after Dean said that he was tired. And Sam eventually let Dean out of the panic room to make his own decision even though Sam warned him that he was going to say "yes." I do agree about the rest of the times though... and especially season 10. I don't blame Sam much for season 3, though. Sam knew that situation was going to be awful for him - and Dean - if he didn't find a way out for Dean. And he was right. Dean going to hell pretty much started Sam's decline into season 4's breakdown - even if the kickoff point was only an illusion Dean going to hell (Sam didn't know that though, and it was just as traumatic). Don't get me wrong. I'm not BLAMING Sam or Dean for their choices. My point was more that both made unilateral decision that violated the autonomy of the other in some way, shape or form in varying degrees and they both have struggled with fully accepting the other's actual death or pending death and make extreme decisions to alter that outcome one way or another. Re: s5 In PoNR, Dean didn't get any kind of choice in that matter because he was literally rendered unconscious by Cas and woke up in the panic room. Dean escaped and Sam put him back in again, only the 2nd time he handcuffed him to the bed. Sam made that call based on his assumption that since Dean took off to see Lisa, he was going to say yes to Michael, whether he really had 100% clear evidence or not. Sam made a choice based on what he thought was right. Whether Sam relented in the end, he still made the original choice to take away Dean's autonomy. As to s9: IMO the narrative from 9.01 to the speech in the Purge was driving home the point that Dean was pretty much 100% wrong for violating Sam's autonomy even if Dean believed he did it for the right reason (saving Sam's life). Dean was written to be an asshole by his actions which included the following: the act of allowing Gadreel to possess Sam without Sam's 100% informed consent continuing to lie about the situation which cost Kevin his life kicked Cas out of the bunker after Cas' grace was stolen which rendered him human and homeless, and under attack by the other angels works with Crowley, the demon that killed Sam's friend Sarah, tried to kill Jody and whom Sam despises and wants to stab in the face receives a Mark that is of the Devil himself which imparted onto Dean by an actual demon because Dean is worth because he's a 'killer Dean lies to Sam when they meet up on a mutual hunt leading them to Garth in Sharp Teeth and Dean had a callous, harsh attitude with Sam (which IMO was the Mark starting to work on Dean but it could also just be that Dean was defensive and struggling because he knows he fucked it all up. Dean never apologized for his actions (IMO because Dean knows he would never NOT try to save Sam's life regardless) All of that was framing Dean in the narrative as a pretty big jerk and asshole and in some viewer's eyes as borderline irredeemable. IMO the speech in the Purge was purposefully harsh on Dean to continue with that narrative and to compound it by Dean being convinced that no matter the consequences, Dean thought he had done the right thing. And to make the audience question if Dean was still a good guy. Now, having said all that, IMO why it may have come across worse on Sam than the narrative intended was due to Jensen's performance in that scene because IMO Jensen played it that Dean was crushed by Sam's words because Dean himself believes that Sam would have done the same for him even if Dean didn't given his permission. IMO, when the camera zoomed in on Dean, I don't think the message was that Sam was wrong and Dean was right but that Dean was a blockhead who didn't get why he was wrong; that Dean was still be seen as wrong even if his feelings were crushed. And IMO for the audience to start to become afraid of Dean, as the season progressed, especially since Dean refused to apologize to Sam for any of it. IMO, that's not Jensen subverting the writing to get sympathy for Dean but IMO a pretty honest portrayal of someone who will not be moved from their position no matter what things are said. I remember arguments at other venues than here when it aired that Sam's speech was ONLY about THAT situation ; that Dean was doing more bad than good was about Dean making those unilateral decisions because he thinks they are good, and that it was being purposefully mis-interpreted by Dean fans. I suppose it doesn't matter whether it was misinterpreted or not, the end result that is the writing left it too ambiguous IMO so it made Sam look worse than intended. From Sam's perspective IMO, he was carrying a shit ton of righteous anger with a side of hurt and bitterness that Dean didn't apologize and that Dean really doesn't get it. Hope that makes some kind of sense, I got to rambling. Edited April 24, 2017 by catrox14 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/22/#findComment-3210833
catrox14 April 24, 2017 Share April 24, 2017 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/22/#findComment-3210949
MysteryGuest April 25, 2017 Share April 25, 2017 Well, if the writers do strike, let's hope it doesn't last too long. I have no idea how long they were on strike in 2007 before they settled. No writers means no new shows and major lack of revenue for the studios and networks, so it's certainly in their best interests to not let it go on too long, if it happens at all. 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/22/#findComment-3211038
auntvi April 25, 2017 Share April 25, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said: And yup even when Dean became a demon, because they accounted for that, too by painting Sam - with the Walter(?) situation - as being worse even than Dean as a demon, and of course making sure the Darkness was Sam's fault. The first time I watched the "Sam is worse" episode(s) was with my daughter, and we both had the same WTF??!! reaction. How could the 2 actions possibly be equivalent? Murder vs. manipulation? It's even worse than Dean's list of Sam's sins at the end of s. 8. Edit: The creep who wanted his wife killed was Lester. And while I was over at SuperWiki, I checked to see who wrote Soul Survivor - Buckner/Leming Edited April 25, 2017 by auntvi 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/22/#findComment-3211390
AwesomO4000 April 25, 2017 Share April 25, 2017 2 hours ago, catrox14 said: In PoNR, Dean didn't get any kind of choice in that matter because he was literally rendered unconscious by Cas and woke up in the panic room. Dean escaped and Sam put him back in again, only the 2nd time he handcuffed him to the bed. Sam made that call based on his assumption that since Dean took off to see Lisa, he was going to say yes to Michael, whether he really had 100% clear evidence or not. Sam made a choice based on what he thought was right. Whether Sam relented in the end, he still made the original choice to take away Dean's autonomy. Fair enough with one small tweak. It was Castiel who actually found Dean and brought him back that second time... I'm not sure what Sam was doing, because he said he was going to find Dean, but then he was there with Bobby when Castiel came back. I think he probably did put him back in again, or at least helped, because I suspect it was probably Sam who cleaned Dean up - unless Castiel just poofed him unhurt. (I can't remember now if Dean still had bruises or not - gonna have to rewatch.) Anyway, I actually also think part of Sam going after Dean was because he was a little ticked off - as was Castiel. Because Sam thought that Dean was potentially going to single-handedly change their plan and Sam had gone all in on Dean's keep saying no plan - and didn't want to give up on that plan. But you're right, I do agree that Sam took away Dean's choice to change his mind at first. 2 hours ago, catrox14 said: As to s9: IMO the narrative from 9.01 to the speech in the Purge was driving home the point that Dean was pretty much 100% wrong for violating Sam's autonomy even if Dean believed he did it for the right reason (saving Sam's life). Dean was written to be an asshole by his actions which included the following: Perhaps weirdly, I agree with you for the most part here - except for I think things started shifting earlier than "The Purge." I remember actually being surprised early on in season 9 that things seemed to be going in the direction that they were with all of the examples you gave of Dean seemingly going off the rails in committing to his position and that things might go horribly wrong, and things did go a little bit wrong with Kevin... but then even as early as "Road Trip" I started to become suspicious. The ambiguousness you mentioned concerning Sam's speech in "The Purge" was also present in Sam's parting words in "Road Trip." I remembered wondering "why didn't they have Sam say what he meant by 'that wasn't the reason?' Why leave it vague?" And then when Dean went off the rails more and got the mark, I started to put the pieces together that some of this was going to blow back on Sam... in other words, if only Sam had been more uderstanding, maybe Dean wouldn't have gone down that path. Then there was more vagueness from Sam in "Sharp Teeth" when he didn't finish his "if you want to work together, okay, but if you want to be brothers..." which could have ended so many different ways, but the writers left it unfinished and vague and therefore more ominous and up to interpretation. And by "The Purge" and Sam's speech with more vagueness and added nastiness, I pretty much guessed: yup, everything was shifting. The POV was changing over to Dean and his tragic decision and how Sam wouldn't forgive him. I even remember at the time that I saw "Thinman" differently than others did, because not only wasn't I sure about the parallels (because I saw the situation reflecting just as much the Dean/Benny thing and Sam making Dean give up Benny), but also the sympathy in the episode seemed to be more with Ed than with Harry... I disliked that episode so so much though, so I don't plan to ever rewatch it to see what I saw then. And then by "Mother's Little Helper" - which ironically I liked - things had firmly shifted halfway over to "Dean was right." In that episode, it was taking on the mark of Cain - because Sam signed off on it in that episode, agreeing that Dean was right. There was a moment - when Dean declared himself the dictator - that I thought "wait a minute, maybe I'm wrong here..." but nope, because by the end of the season, Gadreel's misdeeds were downplayed and he was redeemed, Sam would do the same thing to save Dean, just as Dean predicted in "The Purge," and Dean was tragically sacrificed, because Sam didn't see Dean's being right quickly enough and forgive him, so Dean tragically spiraled downward without Sam's support. Or at least that's what the narrative seemed to be saying to me. 3 hours ago, catrox14 said: From Sam's perspective IMO, he was carrying a shit ton of righteous anger with a side of hurt and bitterness that Dean didn't apologize and that Dean really doesn't get it. Hope that makes some kind of sense, I got to rambling. No, it entirely makes sense. The only thing I disagree with is that the ambiguous writing you mentioned for the "The Purge" speech unitentionally made Sam look worse than the writers intended. I might agree if it hadn't been the 3rd time in 4 episodes that the writers had left things that Sam said as "ambiguous," so it could be left up to interpretation and potentially seen in a bad light. But for me, by "The Purge," it was a pattern, and that's more of an on purpose than an accident. And what happened the rest of the season - with Dean taking out Abadon, the Gadreel redemption, Sam doing a 180 and seeing the error of his ways - just seemed to support my impression of the shift in POV and writer sympathies. So basically, I'm agreeing with you that the first part of the season seemed to be painting what Dean was doing in a negative light and showing us things from a Sam-sympathetic POV, but for me, starting with the end of "Road Trip," things started shifting and much like Sam's 180 in the finale, the season also 180'd over to Dean's POV and a more Dean-sympathetic stance. If the season had stayed Sam-sympathetic, I think the second half - and the last few episodes especially - would/should have turned out much differently, because the second half of the season, and the finale especially, was not what I would call sympathetic in terms of Sam's characterization. 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/22/#findComment-3211732
AwesomO4000 April 25, 2017 Share April 25, 2017 2 hours ago, auntvi said: And while I was over at SuperWiki, I checked to see who wrote Soul Survivor - Buckner/Leming Ironically, I actually really liked "Soul Survivor." Even more ironically, I actually really liked a lot of season 10. It was just unfortunate that the writers went with the predictable - to me at least - Sam doesn't listen to anyone's advice and ends up starting another apocalypse part of the arc. Because for me there were a lot of good episodes that season and Sam was at least acting more like Sam again. I guess the writers just couldn't help themselves. And sadly that "Sam is worse" bit of WTFery for me paled in comparison to some of the episodes in season 8 and 9. Like for example "Citizen Fang." That episode showed me that it was a really, really bad idea for Daniel Loflin to write without Dabb as a partner. If any episode pissed me off, that one was it. Well, that one and Carver's "We Need to Talk About Kevin." But I don't want to talk about season 8 any more - it makes me annoyed. 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/22/#findComment-3211885
Boopsahoy April 25, 2017 Share April 25, 2017 6 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said: Ironically, I actually really liked "Soul Survivor." Even more ironically, I actually really liked a lot of season 10. It was just unfortunate that the writers went with the predictable - to me at least - Sam doesn't listen to anyone's advice and ends up starting another apocalypse part of the arc. Because for me there were a lot of good episodes that season and Sam was at least acting more like Sam again. I guess the writers just couldn't help themselves. And sadly that "Sam is worse" bit of WTFery for me paled in comparison to some of the episodes in season 8 and 9. Like for example "Citizen Fang." That episode showed me that it was a really, really bad idea for Daniel Loflin to write without Dabb as a partner. If any episode pissed me off, that one was it. Well, that one and Carver's "We Need to Talk About Kevin." But I don't want to talk about season 8 any more - it makes me annoyed. I liked season 10 a lot-and I really liked Soul Survivor. Jensen did a great job directing. 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/22/#findComment-3212234
ILoveReading April 25, 2017 Share April 25, 2017 6 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said: And sadly that "Sam is worse" bit of WTFery for me paled in comparison to some of the episodes in season 8 and 9. Like for example "Citizen Fang." TBH, when we first got the spoiler that Sam wasn't going to look for Dean, I didn't feel like they were throwing Sam under the bus because I felt he show was going to tell us that Dean was wrong for being hurt by it, and in my opinion that is what happened. I believe Carver meant for the audience to side with Sam. Singer gave an interview where he said Dean wasn't being fair to Sam. Dean got the lecture in Southern Comfort about appreciating Sam. Carver constantly referred to Sam as being mature. The only time Sam really got called out on it was when with Bobby mentioned that they never followed that promise not too look. In Citizen Fang, nothing Sam did was ever brought up or mentioned again. Sam left Dean chained to a radiator and put on unstable man to spy on Benny. It was all swept under the rug. Whereas Dean's text message was mentioned over and over. With Charlie even telling Dean he ruined Sam's chance at a normal life. When Dean tried to walk away, Cas forced them back together saying Sam was needed and in the end Sam got his own way when Dean cut ties with Benny. It was the same with s10 and the whole Lester thing, and Sam using the book of the Damned, and again with Sam forcing Dean to work the the Brits without his knowledge. (Imagine if the situation had been reversed, Dean would have been accused of taking away Sam's agency and being bossy and controlling). With its all brushed under the carpet and labelled "character growth" for Dean that he doesn't get upset. Plus, narrative framed s10 as Sam doing it because he didn't want to be without his brother and it was considered an act of brotherly love. He was doing it for he same selfish reason Dean did, yet other characters were brought in support Sam's actions. He was given dialogue like, Dean's getting worse, or Dean's given up to create a false sense of urgency. If it was prior to episode 13 I would have agreed with this, but after 13 I found that Dean figured out the way of control the mark was by his inner peace. His level of violence was no more than what Cas and Sam were displaying. But other people supported the tell, to reinforce Sam's actions. None of that suggests the writers wanted me to side with Dean, MMV 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/22/#findComment-3212296
DittyDotDot April 25, 2017 Author Share April 25, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, ILoveReading said: I believe Carver meant for the audience to side with Sam. I don't know, I always figured Carver and Co. didn't want us to side with either. I thought the point was they both had valid reasons for feeling the way they did, but their actions in the face of those feelings were petty, IMO. That's why I call the Carver years the era of the petty little jerks. Edited April 25, 2017 by DittyDotDot 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/22/#findComment-3212429
SueB April 25, 2017 Share April 25, 2017 I think Carver had a plan: break up the brother co-dependency that had started to get out of hand and leave them in a better place. I think he accomplished that goal. From the start of S8 to the end of S11, the brother got WORSE before they got better. But S11 was a renewed commitment to the "saving people" part of the bumper sticker -- and it worked. 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/22/#findComment-3212497
DittyDotDot April 25, 2017 Author Share April 25, 2017 Well, I'd say that Carver made them co-dependent so he could make them less co-dependent. IMO, they were never more co-dependent than during the Carver years. 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/22/#findComment-3212535
SueB April 25, 2017 Share April 25, 2017 7 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said: Well, I'd say that Carver made them co-dependent so he could make them less co-dependent. IMO, they were never more co-dependent than during the Carver years. Fair point. It was a criticism often raised (see Zachariah's speech to Adam) but it got REALLY bad in S8 & S9. 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/22/#findComment-3212552
Myrelle April 25, 2017 Share April 25, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, DittyDotDot said: I don't know, I always figured Carver and Co. didn't want us to side with either. I thought the point was they both had valid reasons for feeling the way they did, but their actions in the face of those feelings were petty, IMO. That's why I call the Carver years the era of the petty little jerks. Quote I don't think this season is boring just....calm. I mean Sam and Dean are pretty much on the same page (not fighting) and neither one of them has something supernatural wrong with them so its not angst all the time. I actually like that for a change. I like to watch them together and pretty much agreeing on everything or at least willing to give the others point of view a chance. Theyre not 20 somethings anymore-they have matured and I like it most of the time. I like that Dean is pissed at Mary (as he should be) and I like that Sam tries to keep the peace. Maybe I'm just boring! The second quote was brought over from the Dean thread, but I think this response is apropos to both posts. IDK. Looking back, I'd say he was trying to write the characters as simply being human(didn't he have another show with the same title? ;-) ). I've always felt that the Winchester brothers had a love/hate relationship from the moment that Sam pulled the trigger four times in Asylum. They carry a deep love/need for each other, of course-although I see it as more of a need for each other than genuine love, but I can buy that they, the characters themselves, likely see it as an example of familial love(but even Dean knows that it's not "normal" and a twisted sort of love as he said to Lisa in that one S6 episode) and I can also buy that some in the fandom think of it as a form of genuine familial "love", too. But both brothers also carry some very, very deep resentments, some of which trace back to childhood and might never go away, especially if they're never or rarely spoken of. And again, the characters themselves might, to this day, deny that those resentments ever existed or still do, if questioned on the matter. But the "show" would be different from the "tell" yet again where it concerns that, IMO. And that's very human to me. And that's why when it's interpreted as not bothering < insert character> because he said so or because he wants to just move on and forget about it by not bringing it up anymore, for whatever reason, I say that I'd have to disagree with the not bothering part there. Try as people might, to simply move on from the kind of hurtful stuff that happens to them in their lives, sometimes they just can't and a residual of that hurt will always remain-like that small bit of distrust that keeps them from trusting fully, for instance-and yes, even if and when they want to trust fully-and especially when the same behaviors keep happening. Dean told Sam that nothing would ever be the same after Ruby. Sam said something similar after the Gadreel business. And that's where we are now, IMO. And that's why to me the brothers getting along just fine is the brothers getting along as they always have-which is not really fine, but I guess for the purposes of the hunt it has to be fine enough and this, mainly because of the dysfunctional need that they have for each other. And round and round we go until someone wants to get off the merry-go-round for a while, but never for good because then there would be no show. Edited April 25, 2017 by Myrelle 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/22/#findComment-3212565
ILoveReading April 25, 2017 Share April 25, 2017 (edited) Brought over from the Dean thread Quote She (and you) may have that opinion, I do not. If MoC Dean is the now the new "required level of badass" then I think that's a misaligned expectation. I'm not looking for Mark of Cain level bad ass, I'm looking for Dean's character to be treated with respect and I find that lacking since ep 12. I've stated before that the first half of this season I've liked more than I disliked because I really liked how Jensen chose to play Dean. My favorite episode this season isn't Regarding Dean, its Asa Fox. Because all of my favorite Dean qualities were on display in that ep. In end in it was a group effort. Dean in that episode fits my definition of Badass. He didn't win the fight with the Nazi's in episode 5 but he held his own and gave as good as he got. So its not always about winning and its not always about the kill. But something changed after episode 12. I feel like Dean got left on the cutting room floor. He's on screen but that's about it. It can't be denied there are multiple episodes where Dean was kept out of the action. The hell hound ep wasn't random because in the end its a scripted show. If the writers wanted to give Dean the kill they could have. Not to mention that ep was written by Perez, who made it a point to say that Sam got to kill Ramiel because Dean got to kill The YED, where was this balance he was so concerned about during hell hound episode? I feel like Dean's lost all desire to hunt. He's there and going through the motions, but that's about it. Hence the valium Dean reference. *No, I don't think he's literally popping valium, but its a metaphor for his behavior since Valium mellows you out. It seems to getting progressively worse each episode. This last episode was particularly bad when Dean seemed distracted and checked out the entire time. His body language and demeanor seem to supporting this more and more each episode. (I'd like to believe its for storyline reasons but... Not really a spoiler but I'll tag just in case. Quote Spoiler Dabb's recent interviews indicate that Dean is onboard with the brits. The majority of your examples are from the first half. Dean looks like an amateur these past eps. He gets his ass handed to him easily by a single werewolf, or he gets taken out by Ramiel and has to be saved or drops his weapon, or gets it stuck in meat. He has to be saved more than he saves these days. IMO, the lengths the last episode went to, to prevent Dean from firing the colt or getting the kill was blatant. I don't' think the start of episode 15 did Dean any favors. Dean looked like and uncouth neanderthal. Since when does he beat monsters with a baseball bat? It didn't work for me. Plus, I want see Dean hunt, not hear about it. Imagine if First Born just told use Dean took out a bunch of demons, rather than showed up that fight scene. Not nearly as exciting. It's also bringing up things tied to Dean's past without mentioning them. When there was an episode where they were dealing with psychics, Sam got a significant amount of time, even writing Dean out for an entire act. But no mention of Michael, or letting Dean use the Michael lance, or his connection to hellhounds. Its taking away Dean's POV and his voice. (That was why I liked the first half). Why isn't he allowed to question things like the colt? He seems to take a back seat on hunts with Sam leading the questioning and bonding with the guest stars. He goes mute, like with Mick in the British Invasion. He started the speech, why wasn't he allowed to finish it? I'm not saying Sam has a lot of POV or voice either but at least the writers are letting him be a competent hunter. I realize that MMV, but this is why I feel badass Dean is gone. Since episode 12, I feel like I'm watching the cardboard cut out, 1 dimensional, comedic side kick Kripke first envisioned for the character. Jensen can only do so much. Edited April 25, 2017 by ILoveReading because I quoted instead of spoiler tagged 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/22/#findComment-3212780
SueB April 25, 2017 Share April 25, 2017 33 minutes ago, ILoveReading said: Brought over from the Dean thread I'm not looking for Mark of Cain level bad ass, I'm looking for Dean's character to be treated with respect and I find that lacking since ep 12. I've stated before that the first half of this season I've liked more than I disliked because I really liked how Jensen chose to play Dean. My favorite episode this season isn't Regarding Dean, its Asa Fox. Because all of my favorite Dean qualities were on display in that ep. In end in it was a group effort. Dean in that episode fits my definition of Badass. He didn't win the fight with the Nazi's in episode 5 but he held his own and gave as good as he got. So its not always about winning and its not always about the kill. But something changed after episode 12. I feel like Dean got left on the cutting room floor. He's on screen but that's about it. It can't be denied there are multiple episodes where Dean was kept out of the action. The hell hound ep wasn't random because in the end its a scripted show. If the writers wanted to give Dean the kill they could have. Not to mention that ep was written by Perez, who made it a point to say that Sam got to kill Ramiel because Dean got to kill The YED, where was this balance he was so concerned about during hell hound episode? I feel like Dean's lost all desire to hunt. He's there and going through the motions, but that's about it. Hence the valium Dean reference. *No, I don't think he's literally popping valium, but its a metaphor for his behavior since Valium mellows you out. It seems to getting progressively worse each episode. This last episode was particularly bad when Dean seemed distracted and checked out the entire time. His body language and demeanor seem to supporting this more and more each episode. (I'd like to believe its for storyline reasons but... Not really a spoiler but I'll tag just in case. Reveal hidden contents Dabb's recent interviews indicate that Dean is onboard with the brits. The majority of your examples are from the first half. Dean looks like an amateur these past eps. He gets his ass handed to him easily by a single werewolf, or he gets taken out by Ramiel and has to be saved or drops his weapon, or gets it stuck in meat. He has to be saved more than he saves these days. IMO, the lengths the last episode went to, to prevent Dean from firing the colt or getting the kill was blatant. I don't' think the start of episode 15 did Dean any favors. Dean looked like and uncouth neanderthal. Since when does he beat monsters with a baseball bat? It didn't work for me. Plus, I want see Dean hunt, not hear about it. Imagine if First Born just told use Dean took out a bunch of demons, rather than showed up that fight scene. Not nearly as exciting. It's also bringing up things tied to Dean's past without mentioning them. When there was an episode where they were dealing with psychics, Sam got a significant amount of time, even writing Dean out for an entire act. But no mention of Michael, or letting Dean use the Michael lance, or his connection to hellhounds. Its taking away Dean's POV and his voice. (That was why I liked the first half). Why isn't he allowed to question things like the colt? He seems to take a back seat on hunts with Sam leading the questioning and bonding with the guest stars. He goes mute, like with Mick in the British Invasion. He started the speech, why wasn't he allowed to finish it? I'm not saying Sam has a lot of POV or voice either but at least the writers are letting him be a competent hunter. I realize that MMV, but this is why I feel badass Dean is gone. Since episode 12, I feel like I'm watching the cardboard cut out, 1 dimensional, comedic side kick Kripke first envisioned for the character. Jensen can only do so much. The subject was a videographer doesn't watch anymore because Dean is no longer a badass. That implied more than the last 6 episodes. If it's only about the last 6 episodes, I can see your point. But those are episodes #253-#259. And while all 252 episodes prior did not have "BadAss Dean" in every episode, the limitation to the last 6 episodes is really different. Because to presume that the last 6 episodes means that the next 27 are going to lack Dean being a BadAss is a stretch. Further, I can see your point about Dean not being as "in it" in the last episode. He was definitely distracted. Personally, I think it was a plot point. He scammed his way out of research to go be with a babe. Not the greatest sin but it shows he wasn't sweating the case all that much. I thought he was fully engaged and in BadAss mode with the Claire episode. The Hell Hound episode and The Raid did not show Dean in a fight, so I get those concerns as well. Family Feud seems par to me. But I think it's appropriate to have this discussion in this thread because Dean's lack of fighting in the Hell Hound and The Raid is much more glaring when put in contrast with Sam's actions in those episodes. But I think Dean's attitude and actions were fine. It definitely IS a quieter season for Dean. But that's after 2 years of MoC and Darkness fallout. So, in context, I'm not sure it's that big of a deal. Especially since they went out of their way to point out Dean was heavily engaged in a literal 'monster mash' at the start of the Hell Hound episode. And you may have not LIKED the scene, but it's point still is made -- Dean was hip deep in a big violent battle (yes, off screen). So... there's a writing choice on what's on screen vs what's off. I would assert that with the exception of this last episode, Dean has been still in his regular BadAss mode. This last episode shows a distraction, which I think is a plot point. But I think the statement that someone who 'left the show a while ago because BadAss Dean has left the building' is someone who has a selective vision for Dean and is unhappy with the current story arcs. I don't think the character himself, has (in general) lost a step -- as implied by that comment. Note: On the spoiler, I disagreed with your use of the word "onboard" in the other thread. 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/22/#findComment-3212928
ILoveReading April 25, 2017 Share April 25, 2017 2 minutes ago, SueB said: The subject was a videographer doesn't watch anymore because Dean is no longer a badass. That implied more than the last 6 episodes. If it's only about the last 6 episodes, I can see your point. But those are episodes #253-#259. And while all 252 episodes prior did not have "BadAss Dean" in every episode, the limitation to the last 6 episodes is really different. Because to presume that the last 6 episodes means that the next 27 are going to lack Dean being a BadAss is a stretch. Further, I can see your point about Dean not being as "in it" in the last episode. He was definitely distracted. Personally, I think it was a plot point. He scammed his way out of research to go be with a babe. Not the greatest sin but it shows he wasn't sweating the case all that much. I thought he was fully engaged and in BadAss mode with the Claire episode. The Hell Hound episode and The Raid did not show Dean in a fight, so I get those concerns as well. Family Feud seems par to me. But I think it's appropriate to have this discussion in this thread because Dean's lack of fighting in the Hell Hound and The Raid is much more glaring when put in contrast with Sam's actions in those episodes. But I think Dean's attitude and actions were fine. It definitely IS a quieter season for Dean. But that's after 2 years of MoC and Darkness fallout. So, in context, I'm not sure it's that big of a deal. Especially since they went out of their way to point out Dean was heavily engaged in a literal 'monster mash' at the start of the Hell Hound episode. And you may have not LIKED the scene, but it's point still is made -- Dean was hip deep in a big violent battle (yes, off screen). So... there's a writing choice on what's on screen vs what's off. I would assert that with the exception of this last episode, Dean has been still in his regular BadAss mode. This last episode shows a distraction, which I think is a plot point. But I think the statement that someone who 'left the show a while ago because BadAss Dean has left the building' is someone who has a selective vision for Dean and is unhappy with the current story arcs. I don't think the character himself, has (in general) lost a step -- as implied by that comment. Note: On the spoiler, I disagreed with your use of the word "onboard" in the other thread. I also have issues with how Dean was portrayed last season, I felt he was entirely too passive. But at least he didn't lose his hunting skills. But i was speaking only about this season. As for the videographer, I'll don't feel comfortable speaking for her. I perfer proactive proactive Dean, not reactive. S11 was one of my least favorite (until this season) so its isn't just the last few episodes. The last few episodes just comfirms my theory. Dabb has no interest in Dean. I find it started last year and has been getting worse. In his eps last year, Form and Void, 11.17, 11.10, all followed the pattern we see in the back half of this season. Dean feeling like he's forced into episodes. So I don't see it being plot reasons, but again MMV Dean might have been a bad ass in First Blood but Dabb also made Dean be the one to crack and call Billy because 6 weeks of isolation is worse then hell. There is a difference between quieter and non-existent, and right now the need for Dean on screen feels non-existent, other than contract reasons. You can easily remove him from this season and not much would change. Even if Dean wanted out of research, it doesn't explain why he suddenly lost his hunting skill We can agree to disagree. 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/22/#findComment-3212995
DittyDotDot April 25, 2017 Author Share April 25, 2017 42 minutes ago, ILoveReading said: Dabb has no interest in Dean. Are you sure Dabb has no interest in Dean or that he just has a different interest in Dean than you do? 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/22/#findComment-3213138
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.