Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
DittyDotDot

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

Recommended Posts

They hurt Dean's leg so he couldn't be part of the fight, instead giving him the job of 'saving' Mary. They even made him talking her out of her brainwashing all about Sam and what her deal did to him. The one thing Dean got to say for himself was that he was forced to be father and mother to him, and then that he failed at it. Seriously, fuck that. He did manage to fight off Ketch while injured, but once again had to be saved by Mary, while Sam is off leading the battle. And this is Dean 'growing'? Fuuuuuuuuuuuuck that.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know if anyone has seen the movie Hairspray but Dabb reminds me so much of Velma Von Tussle who threatened the camera man if they didn't keep focus on her daughter, Amber and give her the most screen time despite there being multiple other dancers in the cast.

Dabb seems to think Sam is the only character worth giving screen time time.

In the first ep alone, Sam comes up with all the ideas, of course finds the spell in the lore books, Sam also comes up with the solution to the Virgin problem.  When it came time to find the clue that would lead them to Cas and Kelly was anyone surprised it was Sam who found it.

I did not like the brains/brawn distinction either.  This season Sam is both.  It wouldnt' surprise me if in the orginal version of the script it was Sam using the grenade launcher. 

So I don't think Cas meant both when Singer made sure the camera was focused on Sam.  If he meant both he would have framed both. 

Obviously when Dabb talked about them being generals he meant just Sam.

The only thing left for Sam to do is to rip open his shirt, and reveal the big red S and fly. 

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

I don't know if anyone has seen the movie Hairspray but Dabb reminds me so much of Velma Von Tussle who threatened the camera man if they didn't keep focus on her daughter, Amber and give her the most screen time despite there being multiple other dancers in the cast.

Dabb seems to think Sam is the only character worth giving screen time time.

In the first ep alone, Sam comes up with all the ideas, of course finds the spell in the lore books, Sam also comes up with the solution to the Virgin problem.  When it came time to find the clue that would lead them to Cas and Kelly was anyone surprised it was Sam who found it.

I did not like the brains/brawn distinction either.  This season Sam is both.  It wouldnt' surprise me if in the orginal version of the script it was Sam using the grenade launcher. 

So I don't think Cas meant both when Singer made sure the camera was focused on Sam.  If he meant both he would have framed both. 

Obviously when Dabb talked about them being generals he meant just Sam.

The only thing left for Sam to do is to rip open his shirt, and reveal the big red S and fly. 

I am too much of a Dean person not to realize this and  I also agree with it.

What I don't understand is WHY? It's not just this show runner - Dabb, we have Singer too who has been involved with the show from the very beginning. There was Kripke who gave some amazing episodes to Jensen ( WIAWSNB for one,comes to my mind, among others) but then decided to make sure the credit for saving the world goes to Sam/Jared and took away Michael from Dean/Jensen. Then of course there was Sera Gamble - Sam girl through and through. Carver gave so much angst that their relationship suffered. Purge - cannot get over that, despite all the posts and arguments that i have read. ( Although I maintain that season 4 demon blood drinking Sam was the worst) At least Carver gave us DemonDean, even if it was for a very short period.

I am not Dean vs Sam debater. I rarely even bother to go through those intense passionate debates!!

 I remember some of the posters in another forum had discussed this issue in detail.

What I am trying to understand is how come these show runners have issues with Dean/Jensen ? Don't they realize Jensen is a stronger actor  - ok ok - that is not the right thing to say - IMHO - Jensen is a strong actor who can carry the whole episode on his shoulders. Jared - IMHO - no. Again my opinion.

Let me make it clear - Both of them are good actors but - IMHO - Jensen has better impact - emotional scenes or physical fights. IMHO.  And since both of them - Sam and Dean in many ways complement each others abilities/competence - 250th episode First Blood comes to mind as an example - they are close to perfection together, why is it that show runners discriminate and give preference to one over the other? 

I know Dean/Jensen has had some really amazing episodes over the years and so has Sam/Jared. 

I suppose I wish for more balance - yes - something every third post that I read ask for - BETTER WRITERS/WRITING AND STRONGER STORY LINES/MYTH ARCS. 

Anyways, for what its worth, I think separating Sam and Dean in 1222 was playing on the actors strengths - Dean emotional and Sam physical - and it worked at certain levels - I am going to leave it at that.

Edited by flyinghigh
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, flyinghigh said:

I am too much of a Dean person not to realize this and  I also agree with it.

What I don't understand is WHY? It's not just this show runner - Dabb, we have Singer too who has been involved with the show from the very beginning. There was Kripke who gave some amazing episodes to Jensen ( WIAWSNB for one,comes to my mind, among others) but then decided to make sure the credit for saving the world goes to Sam/Jared and took away Michael from Dean/Jensen. Then of course there was Sera Gamble - Sam girl through and through. Carver gave so much angst that their relationship suffered. Purge - cannot get over that, despite all the posts and arguments that i have read. ( Although I maintain that season 4 demon blood drinking Sam was the worst) At least Carver gave us DemonDean, even if it was for a very short period.

I am not Dean vs Sam debater. I rarely even bother to go through those intense passionate debates!!

 I remember some of the posters in another forum had discussed this issue in detail.

What I am trying to understand is how come these show runners have issues with Dean/Jensen ? Don't they realize Jensen is a stronger actor  - ok ok - that is not the right thing to say - IMHO - Jensen is a strong actor who can carry the whole episode on his shoulders. Jared - IMHO - no. Again my opinion.

Let me make it clear - Both of them are good actors but - IMHO - Jensen has better impact - emotional scenes or physical fights. IMHO.  And since both of them - Sam and Dean in many ways complement each others abilities/competence - 250th episode First Blood comes to mind as an example - they are close to perfection together, why is it that show runners discriminate and give preference to one over the other? 

I know Dean/Jensen has had some really amazing episodes over the years and so has Sam/Jared. 

I suppose I wish for more balance - yes - something every third post that I read ask for - BETTER WRITERS/WRITING AND STRONGER STORY LINES/MYTH ARCS. 

Anyways, for what its worth, I think separating Sam and Dean in 1222 was playing on the actors strengths - Dean emotional and Sam physical - and it worked at certain levels - I am going to leave it at that.

I have come to the conclusion they are jealous. You have to admit Jensen seems to have it all. Anyway, that's all I can come up with because guest stars and the normal crew seem to love him. Even Pedowitz seems to love him. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

This season Dean not only lost Crowley, Cas and Mary but he also lost a lot of his dignity and self-respect because he doesn't seem to value anything he brings to the table even after 12 years.  This is why I just don't buy that there was any kind of character growth for Dean this season.  If anything he'll be worse next season since he'll blame himself for for the loses. 

As for the loses, I'm sure we'll get much more focus on Sam losing Mary and Cas again while Dean will get told to suck it up and the excuse will be he's doing it for Sam.    I don't deny its in character but I'm tired of the show using it as an excuse to push aside and ignore Dean's trauma's.  It's also not character growth if Dean doesn't realize its okay to think of himself in those moments.  It's not selfish.  Sam sure has no problem making things all about him.  (See the lame, follow me speech). 

Edited by ILoveReading
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I agree that Sam got the flashier wins this season. I disagree that Dean was generally neglected or disrespected.

There was a string of episodes where Sam got a disproportionate number of wins -- but in both the episode immediately before that string (Regarding Dean) and the one immediately after (Tasha Banes), Dean got the kill, so that doesn't strike me as a terribly meaningful pattern. In addition, Yes, Sam got three "big kills" (Alpha Vamp, hellhound, and Ramiel) to Dean's one (Hitler), but I think that is amply balanced by the fact that prior to this season, Dean had the bulk of big bad kills.

As for the finale: first of all, last season, Dean was the one who defeated Amara. So, if we're taking "turns" (which I don't think we need to), it was Sam's turn to get the finale spotlight. But it wasn't as if Dean was twiddling his thumbs. Dean got the Mary plot. Now, you may prefer Dean getting the badass action plot, and that's fine, but that's also a matter of personal preference, and I don't think it is insignificant that Dean had to do the emotionally hefty work of saving his mother. In fact, I suspect that part of the reason Sam had the more action-heavy season as a whole is that Dean was getting the emotional focus. Dean is also the one who came up with the plan that got them out of the bunker, in fairly awesome fashion, and who more than held his own against Ketch while injured. 

I also want to note that, despite dire predictions to the contrary, Dean DID get to be the one to use the grenade launcher, he DID get a chance to express himself to Mary without those feelings being invalidated, and Sam DID take responsibility for being the one to advocate for joining the BMoL. 

And of course, there are always ways to interpret things in such a way to feed into the idea of Super Sam and Poor Dean. You could argue that Hitler doesn't constitute a "big kill," or that the kill in Tasha Banes wasn't flashy enough, or that because Dean wound up defeating Amara without violence, it shouldn't have counted as Dean's "turn" to shine. But once we get to that level of parsing, I could also argue that while Sam was the "leader" of the BMoL raid, he actually didn't do anything more impressive than any of the other hunters, while Jodi got the biggest kill; that the Alpha Vamp, hellhound, and Ramiel were all killed in one-off episodes, which doesn't compare to Dean's numerous previous defeats of arc-villains like Azazel, Abaddon, Eve and Amara, and that Sam's "I've been a follower" speech was disrespectful to his character and an acknowledgment that he's always been Dean's sidekick. 

But I'm not going to go there, because what I see, overall, is two leads who are obvious epic badasses, however we parse out the details. I think it is only when you have a strong, strong preference for one brother over the other, and see everything through that prism, that every achievement of Brother A becomes an insult and no amount of acknowledgment of Brother B is ever enough. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

8 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

As for the finale: first of all, last season, Dean was the one who defeated Amara.

I don't really think Dean defeated Amara last season.  She just decided she was going to be good.  But, OTOH, Sam didn't kill anything this finale either.

And, I agree about Who We Are.  I think Dean got the better of the two stories.  All Sam did was apologize and run around shooting at some people.  Dean saved his Mom. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

There was a string of episodes where Sam got a disproportionate number of wins

It wasn`t just the wins. Sam did everything that usually would have been split between Dean and Sam. If someone comes up with an idea or some out of the box/quick thinking, it is now always Sam. If someone gets an inspirational speech, it is now always Sam. 

Sam used to have some specific areas of expertise the writers nearly always would give to the character and Dean used to have them as well. Not anymore. Sam has almost completely taken over any of Dean`s.

The only thing that remains is Dean mainly driving the car and that has BTS-reasons because apparently Jared always fiddled with something or other that broke in the prop cars and for time/money reasons Jensen got to be the main guy driving. Other than that, leadership abilities? Apparently gone. Innovative thinking? Gone. Physcial badassery? Eh. Weapon`s guy? Gone.    

Meanwhile Dean certainly didn`t get anything of Sam`s. Not one iota. 

The badassery was transferred to Mary as well so apparently that left next to nothing for Dean.

On top of that, any previous mytharcs of Dean`s don`t get acknowledged or if they do, the character is belittled and mocked.

This Season I really learned what the show would be like if Dean Winchester got killed off but the producers wouldn`t let Jensen out of a contract. And it truly sucked.

Edited by Aeryn13
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

The only thing that remains is Dean mainly driving the car and that has BTS-reasons because apparently Jared always fiddled with something or other that broke in the prop cars and for time/money reasons Jensen got to be the main guy driving. Other than that, leadership abilities? Apparently gone. Innovative thinking? Gone. Physcial badassery? Eh. Weapon`s guy? Gone.    

Meanwhile Dean certainly didn`t get anything of Sam`s. Not one iota. 

Sam's plan for getting out of the bunker failed. Dean finally came up with the one that worked. Dean didn't defeat Ketch (because he was wounded), but he was pretty physically badass, as he has been in a number of episodes this season. He got to use the grenade launcher. He saved Mary. Whether or not this is enough for you, it doesn't back up the idea that Dean is as good as dead and totally useless. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

it doesn't back up the idea that Dean is as good as dead and totally useless. 

He was a tad more involved in the Finale, in the first one with emo busywork and the second one with some stuff that wasn`t really exciting but it didn`t stand out so badly because noone else had anything exciting either. But the stretch from ep 12 to 19 certainly felt to me like the character was in a freaking coma. And even then he barely woke up now.

That`s a LONG stretch of episodes to be continually disappointed by. Previously there was 8.B. starting with the first Trials episode and 9.A which led to First Born but even in those times it was never this bad for me. Last year I thought the MOTW truly sucked for Dean`s character but at least he had the Amara arc. Even if it was underused and underplayed and they made sure to make the Finale - that, lets be fair was the only chance Dean ever got to get a win like Sam got in 5.22 for himself - as anticlimactic as possible to downplay it.

Even then I tried to make my peace with it because it was something but the total lack of acknowledgment for the character afterwards soured it again.

For me this Season was the kind of fanfic I would read the summary of and click the back-button.       

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Katy M said:

And, I agree about Who We Are.  I think Dean got the better of the two stories.  All Sam did was apologize and run around shooting at some people.  Dean saved his Mom. 

That's pretty much how I felt. I thought it was pretty well balanced, more or less, but Dean was far more interesting to this viewer. But, Dean is usually far more interesting to this viewer, so... .

Edited by DittyDotDot
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, SueB said:

1) If you feel it's Sam's Season, that absolutely your prerogative.
2) Your statement was that no one could "reasonably deny" that to be true. I disagree.
3) Per the mods note:
 

So, let me make it clear... I have no problem with this being your opinion. To state that it is essentially unreasonable to think otherwise is where I disagree.

Having SAID that, I'll give you my rationale in a "take it or leave it" kind of manner (i.e. I don't intend to debate each point):
- Dean has had PLENTY of BadAss moments this year for me (beyond Hitler). Now MY definition of "BadAss" is quite possibly NOT the same as the BDH moments you are using as your criteria. Still, I think of BadAss moments as being a sign that Crowley was right to "pity the fool" (quoting Mr. T) who goes against either Winchester.  BadAss moments: Liam Neeson speeches to both Lady Toni & Secret Service Asshat (in the woods) -- including breaking a phone with his bare hands out of frustration. Saving Mary from Lady Toni (because 'this monkey DID read a book'). Wrapping a vengeful possessing ghost in iron. Killing Hitler. Rolling thru the glowing front door at Asa Fox's, demon knife in hand. Holding off said demon until he broke the meatsuit's neck. Getting Enochian cuffs on Lucifer (which made him expend his energy to remove the cuffs). Just about EVERYTHING he did in First Blood in the woods including single-handedly taking out TWO Special Forces guys with a relatively small knife and nothing else. Personally, I thought he WAS magnificent riding the mechanical bull.  Taking the lead (twice) against Ramiel. Facing down a Prince of Hell with nothing but Enochian Brass Knuckles. Subduing TWO werewolves without killing them. Hand-to-hand combat with a god. Killing the ancient evil witch that made twig people. Cool disarming of Ketch in most recent episode along with behind the back kill and single shot kill of BMoL redshirt.
- Dean has had a GREAT year of actually expressing himself in a more healthy fashion than I've ever seen. He no longer refers to himself as a killer -- even when others do. He sees what he does as important and is proud of that. He's been dealt multiple emotional body-blows between both Mary and Cas and he's not just fumed on it (like he did in the past). He's expressed his issues to that individual.  Yes, he let Mary off the hook because she's his MOM and he realizes he needs to have her in his life.  When he and his mother are on more solid footing, I think they will have the ability to argue in a more healthy fashion. 
- Dean is STILL the one people defer to for plans.  He is still the leader of Team Free Will and Sam and Cas may disagree with his approach but they generally fall in line.  The latest exception (Cas taking off with the Baby Mama) was potentially an "altered state" for Cas or one where Cas felt he couldn't explain but knew Dean would ultimately approve.

So, up until tonight (when the last two episodes have yet to air), I see S12 as a good Dean year.  And from a series-level perspective, he's no longer internally struggling with his own value -- that's a HUGE deal IMO.  He started off brainwashed to think his purpose was to Save Sam and that he was never good enough.  He's so VERY far from that abused child.  Doesn't mean he's not still hurt.  He IS.  and the healing is not over.  But he's functioning well without alcohol and he's deal with issues in a healthy way.  I'm happy about this.  

So true.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

The only way I could classify this as a good Dean-Season would be to expand (or lower) my criteria so much that I would also see Season 3 as a good Castiel-Season. 

And the truly heartbreaking thing is that I don`t believe things will switch around next Season and Dean suddenly gets the embarassment of riches and play the role of both Dean and Sam simultaneously. That`s what would be fair in my eyes but I would never expect it from anyone on the show. I don`t even expect the character to be written any better. 

As much as I hated how Kripke just could not let go of his mytharc!Sam and sidekick!Dean fetish, I do believe he would have allowed Dean to shine in leadership abilities in the one scene in the entire show that was all about leadership of the hunters. 

Berens has got to be the true disappointment of this Season. From Dabb, I did not expect any better and Perez was like that right from the start but it`s like Berens got possessed by Becky the Dean-hating Samfangirl.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I thought that Dean was awesome in these two episodes, and the show was firmly in his POV. Whereas Sam, god help him, was a bit of a blundering and blubbering mess.

I love Sam, but I was NOT feeling him in these finale episodes. Like, WTF is this leadership thing coming from? Why are you staring into the phone all teary-eyed when hearing about Rowena being horribly killed? ROWENA. Did you identify with her because it was Lucifer who had been hurting her? How are you on the one hand trying to be Mr. Soft Hearted and giving bear hugs while the same day shooting masses of human beings in the head? I get that it was basically a war and kill-or-be-killed, so I'm not going to be that down on the hunters for killing the BMOL, but it was pretty vicious, and just killing a bunch of human beings at point blank is pretty fucked up and as such, I would think pretty liable to fuck up any non-psychopath for at least a DAY. Dude.

IMO the writing for Sam in these finale episodes was really pretty weak. And this is coming from someone who both loves Sam and enjoyed the finale episodes!

On the other hand, Dean totally brought it. IMO his conversation with Mary was really inspiring. That was braver and more admirable than anything he could have done with a weapon IMO. It was the high point of the entire 2-hr finale for me. And it was in keeping with his behavior all season -- which IMO has likewise been awesome and has shown how much his character has grown over the years and even over the season. JMV.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, rue721 said:

Why are you staring into the phone all teary-eyed when hearing about Rowena being horribly killed? ROWENA. Did you identify with her because it was Lucifer who had been hurting her?

I don't really think he cared that much about Rowena.  It's just that she was the only way to lock Lucifer back up.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Katy M said:

I don't really think he cared that much about Rowena.  It's just that she was the only way to lock Lucifer back up.

Yeah, probably. Then Lucifer even mocked them about them not having any way to lock him up again, iIrc?

It just seemed like a weird time to be all teary eyed. Like, even if you're really upset, aren't you down to business and in problem-solving mode right then? Who gets a serious setback and immediately starts crying? Or, I guess people do...but Sam? Really? Eh.

Like I said, YMMV, I just wasn't feeling him in this particular pair of eps. I felt like he wasn't quite in character and he was really all over the place (in terms of both his emotions and his trains of thought).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, rue721 said:

 

Like I said, YMMV, I just wasn't feeling him in this particular pair of eps. I felt like he wasn't quite in character and he was really all over the place (in terms of both his emotions and his trains of thought).

I agree with this!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Brought over from the "Who We Are" episode thread:

(Some stuff bolded for those who prefer to "too long: didn't read" this.)

6 hours ago, rue721 said:

But I thought the Sam-becomes-a-leader thing was not as well done. I couldn't follow his leap from "I was wrong about the BMOL" to "I should be a leader." Someone who has just displayed horribly poor judgement should NOT be a leader. When he made the speech to the other hunters about how he had been mistaken about the BMOL, I could only think that they also all knew about his similarly disastrously bad judgment with Ruby and how he'd started an apocalypse back in the day. Why in the world would any of them trust HIM as a leader? None of the others fell in with the BMOL and none of the others fell in a demon and started an apocalypse, so I have to say, I think if anything, he was the LEAST qualified out of everyone there to be a leader.

Also, I was aggravated by the thing that it's somehow lazy or bad to follow rather than lead. Being a good leader means having mutual respect and trust with the people following you -- so if you think that their decision to follow rather than lead themselves inherently makes them lazier or worse than you somehow, then I don't see how you can be a good leader. Sam actually can be a little bit of a snob from time to time, but that speech especially aggravated me. It was such an "upper management" attitude LOL. And illogical besides.

That said, I did like that Sam explained himself and his motives, and I do think it's sweet that he's still so passionate and idealistic. I mean, that's a good thing. But man, how about starting with trying to be a better judge of character and waiting on the "leadership" thing, you know?

I agree. But for me this was actually more of the writers' "Sam is wrong" stuff than anything else. I especially agree with the bolded part. I have even posted recently how I think that Sam is perfectly happy to follow Dean's lead - and has been shown to do so often, especially if Sam is given the chance to put in his thoughts and/or is given consideration in the decision process - and to me that doesn't make him any less. But in order to push the "Sam was wrong" for making the decision to follow the BMoL - which was completely contrived in my opinion in the first place - the dialogue had to imply that Sam was just looking for an easy way out to justify his decision, because apparently leadership was just something he was avoiding because it was too difficult or something, so now he has to man up and accept that he's been "less" somehow until now. To me it's more of the "Sam should be more like Dean" crap the show has been pushing the last few years... taking a lot of the things that are "Sam" and showing them to be "wrong" and how he should be more like Dean - and only then when he steps up and leads like Dean, can Sam get redemption. But then once pointing this out, the whole thing will be dropped, because the main point was just to show Sam's "wrongness." It annoys me.

As for the "horribly poor judgement" in a way I agree: Sam has shown some poor judgement. But I will clarify that statement with: Sam isn't the only one, and the show has often - in my opinion - stacked the cards against Sam by making Sam's mistakes (and Catiel's, as well) have huge, often cosmic bad consequences. This does not happen so much with Dean - who himself has made some horrible decisions: selling his soul, throwing in with the angels, lying about Gadreel until it was much, much too late, taking on the mark of Cain without finding out the consequences, killing Death! (I mean come on! Under what usual circumstances would that not be a monumentally stupid thing to do? - in SPNverse apparently.) Even some of his more minor decisions that could be considered poor judgment perhaps - his turn as Death for example - are underplayed and somehow turn out fine in the end: as in Death saved Sam's soul anyway.

I've always agreed that Dean is the leader of Team Free Will. He has the personality for it: the confidence and the balls to take on the responsibility of being the leader... however, I don't think it's because Dean somehow inherently makes the "better" decisions. I disagree. Dean, in my opinion, is luckier for sure and he's willing to take on the responsibility. But I also don't think that makes Sam less for being willing to follow... and I resent the current show runners - following Carver's lead - for implying this.

The sad thing is that as soon as Sam declared - inexplicably, in my opinion - that he suddenly changed his mind completely and was "in" with the BMoL that it was just a set up to show how "wrong" he would be and that he'd have to admit that he should have followed Dean's way of thinking... and I'm pretty sure I said as such back then, too. That's been the way of the show, in my opinion, since Carver took over... 1) Show how Sam thinks differently from Dean  about something (sometimes it doesn't even matter of it was a way that Dean had previously thought about something, but had changed his mind) 2) Show Sam following his own path anyway 3) Show how Sam was wrong and should've done it "Dean's way" 4) Drop anything gained from that "lesson" and repeat.

My question: Why can't Sam and Dean be different, with different points of view with both of them learning from each other and growing. Why does one (almost always Sam) have to be "wrong" all the time. Not everything has to have a "right" answer or one way to look at things. In my opinion anyway.

6 hours ago, bethy said:

This is really well said. I think part of my own struggle with this development is that it was simply, "Sam decides he should be a leader" rather than Sam actually displaying true leadership qualities. I think admitting he was wrong was a good start, but the next step, to me, is then being willing to listen to others and learn from their perspective. As @rue721 noted, Sam's been spectacularly wrong in the past. And usually because he refused to listen to anyone else's advice. 

I suspect, though, that "Sam is a leader" will actually be dropped in the future in terms of it having any real meaning for the show. Sam was the leader against the BMoL, but I doubt he'll now be seen as the leader of the hunting community going forward. Not because of Sam, but because the show won't follow up with that. 

I agree. Now that the writers have shown that "Sam is wrong" and should've been "more like Dean" (i.e. a leader, because Sam was apparently only following because it was "easier" and not because following a good leader in itself can be a smart decision), this will now be dropped, because the point has been made that Sam should be more like Dean, and so now he can go back to being "Sam" again until the next time Sam needs to be shown as "wrong" for not being like Dean.

The one thing I do disagree with is that Sam being "wrong" is just because he won't listen to anyone else's advice... or that the show even thinks that is wrong per se. Dean very often doesn't listen to anyone's advice either... sometimes even saying that he's right not to do so - like when he had the Mark of Cain - but apparently for Dean that's okay, because Dean is "right." Sometimes listening to others - especially if you're Dean on this show - is shown to be wrong. Like this season which showed Dean shouldn't have listened to Sam or Mary.

And to me, it's annoying if the message is just "Sam (or everyone, actually) should just do what Dean says, because Dean's instincts are always right no matter what logic might say." I'm fine with the notion that Dean should be the leader most of the time, because that's his personality. I'm not fine with the message that only being the leader is the noble and heroic thing, and not being the leader or wanting to follow someone else - for whatever reason - somehow makes someone "less." Sometimes understanding your own limitations can be a strength. It keeps you from doing stupid things that you know someone else can avoid and you can support them, rather than trying to do something you're pretty sure you can't (or even don't want to) do and screwing it up. So why can't the show let Sam be a follower in most things and not belittle him for that? I'm tired of the show - since Carver, especially - taking things that are "Sam" and showing them to be "wrong" and implying he should just be more like Dean - and there are so many ways the show did this including 1) wanting a normal life - shown to be wrong and even a betrayal 2) maybe not saving family at cost to the world - shown to wrong and a betrayal 3) complaining if your agency is taken away - ehn, it was for your own good, you ungrateful jerk 4) Wanting to believe in something and following a good cause - ehn, you're just being lazy and a loser, because you don't want to do it/lead yourself.

52 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

And the truly heartbreaking thing is that I don`t believe things will switch around next Season and Dean suddenly gets the embarassment of riches and play the role of both Dean and Sam simultaneously. That`s what would be fair in my eyes but I would never expect it from anyone on the show. I don`t even expect the character to be written any better.

That's because you are assuming that the "role of Sam" includes only good things. If Dean next season were to take on the role of Dean and Sam simultaneously, that to me, wouldn't mean he just gets to do the research - which ironically in getting out of the bunker in 12.22 lead to nothing: it was Dean's plan that worked and saved everyone - and be the leader and do all the badass killing. It means that Dean has to make a non-sensical decision with no apparent reasoning - like Sam had to do at the end of "The Raid" - and screw up or be monumentally wrong somehow, preferably start an apocalypse, as that has been "Sam's role" for the past few seasons. In my opinion, if Sam had truly taken on "Dean's role" this season, then the BMoL would've somehow turned out to be good - beyond logical reasoning, because that's often lately how it happens with Dean - and the BMoL's role would have somehow been critical in defeating Lucifer... And if that sounds ridiculous, I give killing Death and Billie as an example (since Billie turned out to be critical in persuading Amara to stand down). And the MoC being needed to kill Abbadon. And Gadreel being a needed piece in saving the world - of course.

And the purpose - in my opinion - of Sam being the leader this time was to show that Sam was somehow taking the "easier" route by not being the leader before. Now that that has been established - i.e. Dean's role as leader = brave and good, Sam's role as usual follower = "easy" and lame - I don't expect Sam as leader to continue. It was done to show that Sam was "wrong" in my opinion, but once he realized that, and it was shown that being the leader is the "right" way... Sam will likely - in my prediction - go back to not being the leader.

41 minutes ago, rue721 said:

IMO the writing for Sam in these finale episodes was really pretty weak. And this is coming from someone who both loves Sam and enjoyed the finale episodes!

I think that's because, in my opinion, the writers weren't as much concerned with Sam's part here. They gave him the "wins" earlier in the season. Here, I think as long as they showed Sam as "wrong" for following the BMoL - which Sam's "reasoning" was already weak and made no sense back in "The Raid" so any "speech" they gave Sam here had little hope of making sense - the writers did pretty much what they wanted to do. Since this show is generally about Family anyway, Sam's raid on the BMoL was secondary in context anyway. It was obvious - to me anyway - that the writers thought that "saving family" - i.e. getting Mary back - was the most important thing, and that's where the writers spent their time and creative energy in the episode.

I, too, love Sam, but sadly since the Carver era, for me the writers have been trying their best to show him up as inferior to and a pale imitation of Dean rather than let him actually be Sam. And for the most part, the writers don't really put the effort into making sure Sam's POV makes sense, because Dean's POV is the one that matters most. For me that's usually been the case since at least season 8 (with some exceptions - see below.) What I loved about the Gamble years is that Sera at least made sure that Sam's POV made sense and was presented sympathetically.

The exception to this is the second half of season 10 - mostly - and season 11 where I though there was an effort - finally to letting Sam have a sympathetic POV. Not that there weren't problems there as well, but at least it was better. Now, I think we're back to status quo for some reason even though I thought the second half of season 10 and season 11 was the best the show had been in at least 2 seasons.

I get that this is all my opinion only though.

Edited by AwesomO4000
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Quote

That's because you are assuming that the "role of Sam" includes only good things.

In the face-value-writing that this show does, I`d say that is pretty much the case. Like the entire Sam-becomes-the-general scene with Dean and the other hunters looking at him in awe was meant to showcase the character in a more than positive way. And his nonsensical decision to work with the BMOL was thus swept under the rug because he was just so awesome. 

So even if Dean were to make stupid mistakes in that scenario, he would have a teflon armour to protect him and the fault would be somehow transfered to Sam then.

Not to mention the mytharc acknowledgment I`ve always wanted. 

To me the writing is incredibly shallow. If they want to pimp a character, you will see it. If they want to trash a character, equally you will see it. And this Season was a pimp-Sam-Season. With at worst intentional trashing of Dean or at best no interest in the character. 

And of course it comes down to what you value in seeing. To you the big wins Sam got this year may not have been a priority but I would have been over the moon to see stuff like that for Dean because that is really important to me.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

In the face-value-writing that this show does, I`d say that is pretty much the case. Like the entire Sam-becomes-the-general scene with Dean and the other hunters looking at him in awe was meant to showcase the character in a more than positive way. And his nonsensical decision to work with the BMOL was thus swept under the rug because he was just so awesome. 

So even if Dean were to make stupid mistakes in that scenario, he would have a teflon armour to protect him and the fault would be somehow transfered to Sam then.

Not to mention the mytharc acknowledgment I`ve always wanted. 

To me the writing is incredibly shallow. If they want to pimp a character, you will see it. If they want to trash a character, equally you will see it. And this Season was a pimp-Sam-Season. With at worst intentional trashing of Dean or at best no interest in the character. 

And of course it comes down to what you value in seeing. To you the big wins Sam got this year may not have been a priority but I would have been over the moon to see stuff like that for Dean because that is really important to me.

This!!

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

And of course it comes down to what you value in seeing. To you the big wins Sam got this year may not have been a priority but I would have been over the moon to see stuff like that for Dean because that is really important to me.

But the fact that different people see things so differently should at least argue against the position that there's some sort of anti-Dean conspiracy among showrunners who hate Dean and want to minimize his role as much as possible without killing him off. 

If you so desire, the show gives you plenty of room to be offended on behalf of either Sam or Dean, whether because they aren't doing enough, are doing too much of the wrong thing, aren't getting the POV, are only getting the POV and not action, and so on. There's very little objective data here, and even DementedDaisy's attempts run into all sorts of judgment calls and questions of proportionality (killing the arc villain can't be compared to ganking a run-of-the-mill ghost). So, to think that the writers all a) share your perspective on what is and isn't a significant or positive character contribution and b) are nonetheless committed to depriving one of their two leads of all opportunities to so contribute strikes me as a real stretch. 

Far more likely that Dabb, like plenty of people on the boards, thinks that Dean saving Mary through an intensely emotionally raw process was a good plot for him. And it is fine to disagree, obviously, but that doesn't require assuming that the writer hates your character. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Sam isn't the only one, and the show has often - in my opinion - stacked the cards against Sam by making Sam's mistakes (and Catiel's, as well) have huge, often cosmic bad consequences

Oh true, of course. Everyone makes bad decisions and trusts the wrong people sometimes.

I felt for Sam that, apparently, his idealistic goals had blinded him to the reality of what he was doing. Albeit back in S2 when Henriksen described John as a survivalist militiaman who had brainwashed his sons into becoming violent criminals in the name of wonderful ideals (saving people! family duty! etc) the "idealistic goals blind Winchester Character to the reality of what he's doing" felt like a fresher realization. And albeit this concept has already been explored ad naseum with Dean over the years as well. But OK, I can get on board with Sam learning this lesson AGAIN, I guess.

I just didn't AT ALL understand the jump from "I made the wrong choice" to "I should be a leader." No, you shouldn't, you should think about what you can do differently to make the right choice next time! Not start making MORE huge decisions right away, only dragging more people into the drama this time.

ETA: The irony is that IMO it's actually very difficult to figure out how to make better choices without becoming cynical or jaded or giving up on the hopes/dreams/ideals that drove you to make the (bad) decisions or take the (bad) risks that you did before anyway. That is a FINE character arc or storyline for Sam to have! How does refusing to be a follower (which IMO in and of itself is a poor decision) relate to that, though? LOL.

I think you're right that they weren't really thinking through Sam's POV, and that's why it's so confusing and disjointed.

Although honestly, I have found it difficult this season to sort through whether what the writers are telling us and what they're showing us are different on purpose or not. Like with the BMOL, I could not imagine that Sam legitimately thought that they had a lot to bring to the table in terms of hunting monsters, because from my POV, it was like the Keystone Kops over there. But then in the end it became clear that Sam DID legitimately think that. So now the question is, is Sam supposed to be crazy/stupid for believing in them or were the BMOL actually supposed to come off as more persuasive and impressive than they did? I honestly don't know.

Edited by rue721
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

@AwesomO4000 , there are ACTUALLY parts I agree with in you comment.

1) The "leader is good, follower is easy/bad" was A BAD CONCEPT.  As Rue said last night, SOMEONE has to follow.  Doesn't mean you have one good guy and seven schmucks.  I think they were going for something else (and I'll write it up later tonight... I'm late for something right now), but no matter what they intended, the message you expressed is what came off.
2) Sam's POV was NOT clear. Sam leading the raid - works. Sam changing "we" to "I" was just confusing.  I THINK it was to claim responsibility for 'creating a mess' (your "Sam is WRONG thesis) but then I kinda hate that this was their intent (that Sam was wrong and Dean bore no responsibility -- WTH? Dean worked with them for weeks).  The speech regarding HIS role was clumsy.  The "yay American hunters" part was good.

where we'll differ:
3) I think the writers DO care about Sam's POV but they sacrificed logical story telling to get to the point that Sam was in a leadership role.  I think this ties into where they will take the show in the future. But I think they fell back on a "Sam wants to take ownership" POV rather than provide greater nuance because they thought it was not the critical point.  The critical point (I think) in their minds was that Dean trusted Sam to do this and Sam believed in himself enough to lead.   

Note: I'm OBVIOUSLY of the unpopular opinion that the writers love both boys. I'm not trying to convince you that you are wrong, I just wanted to let you know what parts worked for me and what didn't.  

Edited by SueB
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, SueB said:


3) I think the writers DO care about Sam's POV but they sacrificed logical story telling to get to the point that Sam was in a leadership role.  I think this ties into where they will take the show in the future. But I think they fell back on a "Sam wants to take ownership" POV rather than provide greater nuance because they thought it was not the critical point.  The critical point (I think) in their minds was that Dean trusted Sam to do this and Sam believed in himself enough to lead.  

Sue, are you saying that you think that the show wants to have Dean trust Sam to lead the two of them in the future? And that Sam wants that role? (the critical point) If so, why do you think that's their direction going forward?

Share this post


Link to post

1 minute ago, FlickChick said:

Sue, are you saying that you think that the show wants to have Dean trust Sam to lead the two of them in the future? And that Sam wants that role? (the critical point) If so, why do you think that's their direction going forward?

No, sorry... let me clarify.  I think the show wanted to have Dean show trust in Sam's leadership for this critical activity.  I think when it's Sam and Dean, Dean will generally have the lead. That is still their hunting dynamic.  But Dean didn't feel the need to oversee Sam on this.  This was the climax of the relationship with BMoL.  Something that Dean would normally be involved in.  And Dean was "you got this."  Dean wanted to focus on Mary and he was okay with Sam going in with other hunter backup but not himself.  Dean has followed Sam's lead in the past but like last year, when Sam was planning to confront Luci in limbo, he insisted Sam wait for him to be there.  Now it didn't work out that way, but here is Sam ... going into an epic battle... and Dean is 100% confident, Sam will be successful without Dean's backup.  

This is different than, say, when Sam was providing a diversion for the rabids in early S11.  There it was very dangerous but it was pretty much a diversion only.  Here, Sam is leading a team of hunters into a heavily guarded BMoL facility with non-trivial skills.  This was a much bigger operation. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, rue721 said:

I just didn't AT ALL understand the jump between "I made the wrong choice" to "I should be a leader." 

I'm not sure that Sam was saying he should be a leader as much as he was saying he should stop being a follower. I think Sam was basically saying that he's gotten too comfortable letting other people make the calls so he doesn't have to. That he needed to stop putting his trust in others and start trusting himself more. 

TBH, I thought it was a veiled political statement of sorts, myself. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

 

Brought over from the "Who We Are" episode thread:

(Some stuff bolded for those who prefer to "too long: didn't read" this.)

8 hours ago, rue721 said:

But I thought the Sam-becomes-a-leader thing was not as well done. I couldn't follow his leap from "I was wrong about the BMOL" to "I should be a leader." Someone who has just displayed horribly poor judgement should NOT be a leader. When he made the speech to the other hunters about how he had been mistaken about the BMOL, I could only think that they also all knew about his similarly disastrously bad judgment with Ruby and how he'd started an apocalypse back in the day. Why in the world would any of them trust HIM as a leader? None of the others fell in with the BMOL and none of the others fell in a demon and started an apocalypse, so I have to say, I think if anything, he was the LEAST qualified out of everyone there to be a leader.

Also, I was aggravated by the thing that it's somehow lazy or bad to follow rather than lead. Being a good leader means having mutual respect and trust with the people following you -- so if you think that their decision to follow rather than lead themselves inherently makes them lazier or worse than you somehow, then I don't see how you can be a good leader. Sam actually can be a little bit of a snob from time to time, but that speech especially aggravated me. It was such an "upper management" attitude LOL. And illogical besides.

That said, I did like that Sam explained himself and his motives, and I do think it's sweet that he's still so passionate and idealistic. I mean, that's a good thing. But man, how about starting with trying to be a better judge of character and waiting on the "leadership" thing, you know?

I agree. But for me this was actually more of the writers' "Sam is wrong" stuff than anything else. I especially agree with the bolded part. I have even posted recently how I think that Sam is perfectly happy to follow Dean's lead - and has been shown to do so often, especially if Sam is given the chance to put in his thoughts and/or is given consideration in the decision process - and to me that doesn't make him any less. But in order to push the "Sam was wrong" for making the decision to follow the BMoL - which was completely contrived in my opinion in the first place - the dialogue had to imply that Sam was just looking for an easy way out to justify his decision, because apparently leadership was just something he was avoiding because it was too difficult or something, so now he has to man up and accept that he's been "less" somehow until now. To me it's more of the "Sam should be more like Dean" crap the show has been pushing the last few years... taking a lot of the things that are "Sam" and showing them to be "wrong" and how he should be more like Dean - and only then when he steps up and leads like Dean, can Sam get redemption. But then once pointing this out, the whole thing will be dropped, because the main point was just to show Sam's "wrongness." It annoys me.

As for the "horribly poor judgement" in a way I agree: Sam has shown some poor judgement. But I will clarify that statement with: Sam isn't the only one, and the show has often - in my opinion - stacked the cards against Sam by making Sam's mistakes (and Catiel's, as well) have huge, often cosmic bad consequences. This does not happen so much with Dean - who himself has made some horrible decisions: selling his soul, throwing in with the angels, lying about Gadreel until it was much, much too late, taking on the mark of Cain without finding out the consequences, killing Death! (I mean come on! Under what usual circumstances would that not be a monumentally stupid thing to do? - in SPNverse apparently.) Even some of his more minor decisions that could be considered poor judgment perhaps - his turn as Death for example - are underplayed and somehow turn out fine in the end: as in Death saved Sam's soul anyway.

I've always agreed that Dean is the leader of Team Free Will. He has the personality for it: the confidence and the balls to take on the responsibility of being the leader... however, I don't think it's because Dean somehow inherently makes the "better" decisions. I disagree. Dean, in my opinion, is luckier for sure and he's willing to take on the responsibility. But I also don't think that makes Sam less for being willing to follow... and I resent the current show runners - following Carver's lead - for implying this.

The sad thing is that as soon as Sam declared - inexplicably, in my opinion - that he suddenly changed his mind completely and was "in" with the BMoL that it was just a set up to show how "wrong" he would be and that he'd have to admit that he should have followed Dean's way of thinking... and I'm pretty sure I said as such back then, too. That's been the way of the show, in my opinion, since Carver took over... 1) Show how Sam thinks differently from Dean  about something (sometimes it doesn't even matter of it was a way that Dean had previously thought about something, but had changed his mind) 2) Show Sam following his own path anyway 3) Show how Sam was wrong and should've done it "Dean's way" 4) Drop anything gained from that "lesson" and repeat.

My question: Why can't Sam and Dean be different, with different points of view with both of them learning from each other and growing. Why does one (almost always Sam) have to be "wrong" all the time. Not everything has to have a "right" answer or one way to look at things. In my opinion anyway.

8 hours ago, bethy said:

This is really well said. I think part of my own struggle with this development is that it was simply, "Sam decides he should be a leader" rather than Sam actually displaying true leadership qualities. I think admitting he was wrong was a good start, but the next step, to me, is then being willing to listen to others and learn from their perspective. As @rue721 noted, Sam's been spectacularly wrong in the past. And usually because he refused to listen to anyone else's advice. 

I suspect, though, that "Sam is a leader" will actually be dropped in the future in terms of it having any real meaning for the show. Sam was the leader against the BMoL, but I doubt he'll now be seen as the leader of the hunting community going forward. Not because of Sam, but because the show won't follow up with that. 

I agree. Now that the writers have shown that "Sam is wrong" and should've been "more like Dean" (i.e. a leader, because Sam was apparently only following because it was "easier" and not because following a good leader in itself can be a smart decision), this will now be dropped, because the point has been made that Sam should be more like Dean, and so now he can go back to being "Sam" again until the next time Sam needs to be shown as "wrong" for not being like Dean.

The one thing I do disagree with is that Sam being "wrong" is just because he won't listen to anyone else's advice... or that the show even thinks that is wrong per se. Dean very often doesn't listen to anyone's advice either... sometimes even saying that he's right not to do so - like when he had the Mark of Cain - but apparently for Dean that's okay, because Dean is "right." Sometimes listening to others - especially if you're Dean on this show - is shown to be wrong. Like this season which showed Dean shouldn't have listened to Sam or Mary.

And to me, it's annoying if the message is just "Sam (or everyone, actually) should just do what Dean says, because Dean's instincts are always right no matter what logic might say." I'm fine with the notion that Dean should be the leader most of the time, because that's his personality. I'm not fine with the message that only being the leader is the noble and heroic thing, and not being the leader or wanting to follow someone else - for whatever reason - somehow makes someone "less." Sometimes understanding your own limitations can be a strength. It keeps you from doing stupid things that you know someone else can avoid and you can support them, rather than trying to do something you're pretty sure you can't (or even don't want to) do and screwing it up. So why can't the show let Sam be a follower in most things and not belittle him for that? I'm tired of the show - since Carver, especially - taking things that are "Sam" and showing them to be "wrong" and implying he should just be more like Dean - and there are so many ways the show did this including 1) wanting a normal life - shown to be wrong and even a betrayal 2) maybe not saving family at cost to the world - shown to wrong and a betrayal 3) complaining if your agency is taken away - ehn, it was for your own good, you ungrateful jerk 4) Wanting to believe in something and following a good cause - ehn, you're just being lazy and a loser, because you don't want to do it/lead yourself.

2 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

And the truly heartbreaking thing is that I don`t believe things will switch around next Season and Dean suddenly gets the embarassment of riches and play the role of both Dean and Sam simultaneously. That`s what would be fair in my eyes but I would never expect it from anyone on the show. I don`t even expect the character to be written any better.

That's because you are assuming that the "role of Sam" includes only good things. If Dean next season were to take on the role of Dean and Sam simultaneously, that to me, wouldn't mean he just gets to do the research - which ironically in getting out of the bunker in 12.22 lead to nothing: it was Dean's plan that worked and saved everyone - and be the leader and do all the badass killing. It means that Dean has to make a non-sensical decision with no apparent reasoning - like Sam had to do at the end of "The Raid" - and screw up or be monumentally wrong somehow, preferably start an apocalypse, as that has been "Sam's role" for the past few seasons. In my opinion, if Sam had truly taken on "Dean's role" this season, then the BMoL would've somehow turned out to be good - beyond logical reasoning, because that's often lately how it happens with Dean - and the BMoL's role would have somehow been critical in defeating Lucifer... And if that sounds ridiculous, I give killing Death and Billie as an example (since Billie turned out to be critical in persuading Amara to stand down). And the MoC being needed to kill Abbadon. And Gadreel being a needed piece in saving the world - of course.

And the purpose - in my opinion - of Sam being the leader this time was to show that Sam was somehow taking the "easier" route by not being the leader before. Now that that has been established - i.e. Dean's role as leader = brave and good, Sam's role as usual follower = "easy" and lame - I don't expect Sam as leader to continue. It was done to show that Sam was "wrong" in my opinion, but once he realized that, and it was shown that being the leader is the "right" way... Sam will likely - in my prediction - go back to not being the leader.

2 hours ago, rue721 said:

IMO the writing for Sam in these finale episodes was really pretty weak. And this is coming from someone who both loves Sam and enjoyed the finale episodes!

I think that's because, in my opinion, the writers weren't as much concerned with Sam's part here. They gave him the "wins" earlier in the season. Here, I think as long as they showed Sam as "wrong" for following the BMoL - which Sam's "reasoning" was already weak and made no sense back in "The Raid" so any "speech" they gave Sam here had little hope of making sense - the writers did pretty much what they wanted to do. Since this show is generally about Family anyway, Sam's raid on the BMoL was secondary in context anyway. It was obvious - to me anyway - that the writers thought that "saving family" - i.e. getting Mary back - was the most important thing, and that's where the writers spent their time and creative energy in the episode.

I, too, love Sam, but sadly since the Carver era, for me the writers have been trying their best to show him up as inferior to and a pale imitation of Dean rather than let him actually be Sam. And for the most part, the writers don't really put the effort into making sure Sam's POV makes sense, because Dean's POV is the one that matters most. For me that's usually been the case since at least season 8 (with some exceptions - see below.) What I loved about the Gamble years is that Sera at least made sure that Sam's POV made sense and was presented sympathetically.

The exception to this is the second half of season 10 - mostly - and season 11 where I though there was an effort - finally to letting Sam have a sympathetic POV. Not that there weren't problems there as well, but at least it was better. Now, I think we're back to status quo for some reason even though I thought the second half of season 10 and season 11 was the best the show had been in at least 2 seasons.

I get that this is all my opinion only though.

Edited 1 hour ago by AwesomO4000.

 

Brava!!! The definitive defense of Sam.  I am not worthy!!

727f70b71effda166d355f50d5f9fbec_the-def

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, DittyDotDot said:

I'm not sure that Sam was saying he should be a leader as much as he was saying he should stop being a follower. I think Sam was basically saying that he's gotten too comfortable letting other people make the calls so he doesn't have to. That he needed to stop putting his trust in others and start trusting himself more. 

TBH, I thought it was a veiled political statement of sorts, myself. 

I agree that that's what they were going for, esp about the veiled political statement. This whole season has been very heavy on the anti-fascist themes. Pretty explicitly so.

But at the same time, I think the show missed the boat in terms of the execution. I think they did a good job of setting the BMOL up to be conventionally fascist in that juuuuuuuuuuuust underneath the surface of its stated mission to save the world from monsters, it was all about oppression and control. But the show did such a good job of conveying that that it was unbelievable IMO that Sam wouldn't see beyond the BMOL's stated mission to what the org was really about. Sam says in E22 that he didn't see beyond it -- OK, but how/why didn't he? His answer of laziness and cowardice sort of work but...I dunno, why was he suddenly so lazy and cowardly? He really never seemed to be before, AFAIK? And laziness and cowardice don't make you outright stupid.

I would have bought that explanation a lot better from Mary. From basically Day 1, I was like, of course she would like them, they give her guidance and structure and kind of shield her from this big new world and decisions and responsibilities that she doesn't understand. Of course she would be tempted by that, maybe even so tempted that she was willfully blind. But Sam?

And I especially dislike this (supposed) dichotomy they set up between being a leader and being a follower. Sam was using the word leadership specifically, and then actually did lead the American hunters into a battle with the BMOL, and I think that was a misstep in the writing. IMO they should have made it clear that Sam's choice was between being a freethinker and being a leader/follower. Because IMO leader/follower are part of the same paradigm, so what difference does it REALLY make which one Sam is?

I think you're right that what they set up the payoff to be and maybe even what thought that what they were conveying was that Sam was going to think for himself now -- but by having him stress being a "leader," IMO they completely undermined that and kept him trapped in that same leader/follower paradigm that had gotten him in trouble in the first place.

ETA:

Not that I think that having leaders/followers is necessarily a bad thing! I just think that it undermined the theme to have Sam stressing about being a leader v. being a follower, rather than to have him concentrate on the need for people to think for themselves and take responsibility for their own actions/decisions.

Edited by rue721

Share this post


Link to post

I am sorry but Sam is 1/2 of the Winchester team.  He does have to contribute.  Dean can't do it all.  There were 2 tasks to be done on episode 22.  1. Save Mom  2. Defeat BMOL.  The guys needed to split up.

It is not the first time Sam took charge.  This reminded me of Season 5 episode 22 when Sam lead the charge to take over a factory and was essential on saving the workers.  The one where Bobby told Dean that they were really being too hard on Sam.

He had to lead the fight as there was no way he was going to get the emotional scene with his mother.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Macbeth said:

I am sorry but Sam is 1/2 of the Winchester team.  He does have to contribute.  Dean can't do it all.  There were 2 tasks to be done on episode 22.  1. Save Mom  2. Defeat BMOL.  The guys needed to split up.

It is not the first time Sam took charge.  This reminded me of Season 5 episode 22 when Sam lead the charge to take over a factory and was essential on saving the workers.  The one where Bobby told Dean that they were really being too hard on Sam.

He had to lead the fight as there was no way he was going to get the emotional scene with his mother.

I agree with this.  TBH, I thought Dean's storyline in 'who we are' was better even though I prefer Sam as a character.  It was more emotional and raw.  I think it's the scene most people are going to remember when they think back to this episode.  We see the boys shoot people/monsters all the time.  Sam's role with going into the BMOL headquarters was pretty standard stuff to what they've done before.  (And it was Jody who got the big kill and I'm definitely NOT complaining about that.  Go Jody!) The only difference this time is that they allowed his character to take on more or a leader role.  Though I don't expect him to be the leader of team free will or anything like that.  I don't think his role will change in that respect.  I'm ok with that though.  I'm not sure I would want it to change, but it was nice to see Sam take more of a leadership role for once.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

5 hours ago, rue721 said:

Why are you staring into the phone all teary-eyed when hearing about Rowena being horribly killed? ROWENA.

Heh, that didn't bother me because I lowkey shipped Samwena and I think he kind of liked her. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :P

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/18/2017 at 6:16 PM, Idahoforspn said:

Dean fans have learned though that Dean gets used to sell the episode because he is very popular.  They use any good stuff in the promo and he's hardly there the rest of the episode.

Dean is very popular.  So is Sam.  I don't think there is any hard evidence to suggest that Dean is any more popular than Sam (or vice versa) and so gets used to sell the episodes (with the implication that the majority of viewers wouldn't watch if it were Sam featured in the promos. )   

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, catrox14 said:

Heh, that didn't bother me because I lowkey shipped Samwena and I think he kind of liked her. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :P

Me too along with Dean/Donna :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, SueB said:

3) I think the writers DO care about Sam's POV but they sacrificed logical story telling to get to the point that Sam was in a leadership role.  I think this ties into where they will take the show in the future. But I think they fell back on a "Sam wants to take ownership" POV rather than provide greater nuance because they thought it was not the critical point.  The critical point (I think) in their minds was that Dean trusted Sam to do this and Sam believed in himself enough to lead.   

I can actually see this, except that it would have been much easier - in my opinion - to put Sam in that leadership role - if that was the goal - by not compromising Sam's POV in the first place. The weird thing was that the writers even had Sam's strong reaction to the BMoL having the Colt and the betrayal that represented by them and Mary in "The Raid", but then by the end of the episode, that was all forgotten and Sam was all on board. WtH? If they wanted to put Sam in a leadership role at the end of the season, then couldn't they have done that by having Sam stick to his convictions? Why does Sam need to learn a very special lesson - again, some more, as usual - in order for that to happen. As you said, it just makes for a very confusing message, and pretty much parallels what we already learned about Sam way back in season 2 in "All Hell Breaks Loose, pt 1." Sam can be the leader if he needs to be. Sam can get it done, but it's not a role he's naturally comfortable with and if he had his druthers, he'd have Dean to look to as the leader. I knew that already.

I'm not sure why we had to have a repeat of that, except this time with a monumental miscalculation on Sam's part along the way, and with Sam implying that it's some failing in himself that he was a follower. Maybe it was a failing that time - though personally to me that seems both an over-simplification and not-exactly in character for Sam, since typically I don't generally see Sam as doing things the "easy way" really - but even if it was a failing, I, as a person who generally prefers not to be the leader myself,* find that insinuation insulting.

And I agree with @rue721 above that it mostly just makes Sam look, well stupid, or willfully ignorant... well that's sort of the same thing in my opinion. Ignorant is one thing, willfully ignorant or "taking the easy way out" is another. What? Somehow I'm not supposed to equate that with something like "well, yeah I could've helped out when I saw that person break his ankle, but it was easier to just pretend I didn't see him?" How is that not supposed to sound... well, awful?

* I fully admit that sometimes being the leader is a pain in the ass, and I entirely admire those who can and do lead, and personally if someone else would rather do it, I say "go for it:" I'm fine with that. I've generally thought of myself as more of a head minion mentality... the kind of minion where the boss gives me a job to do or problem to tackle, and let's me do it how I want as long as I get the job done. And that's pretty much my job in real life. I have no set job hours. If I want to work from home for some reason one day, I don't go in to the office. Sometimes I call in, but it's not necessary. My boss pretty much let's me do what I want, when I want, as long as I get the job done, and my work reflects the amount of hours I'm paid. My job was pretty much created to utilize my skills and I do it well... my way. Am I lucky? Lucky as hell. Few people get to do what I do: do a job I love in exactly the way I want to do it and let someone else be the "leader" (i.e. write the grants, do the paperwork). Does that make me lazy? Maybe, but I work hard to make the boss and my institution look good by doing what I do, just not at being the leader. And I like my sanity and the lack of stress, so I'm okay with that. I don't think it makes me bad or "wrong" though, so I resent the implication - even if unintentional - by the show that maybe it is. *shrug*

6 hours ago, DittyDotDot said:

I think Sam was basically saying that he's gotten too comfortable letting other people make the calls so he doesn't have to. That he needed to stop putting his trust in others and start trusting himself more.

Which might make more sense, to me anyway, if Sam generally did just let other people make the call without questioning it so he (Sam) doesn't have to make the call, but does Sam actually do that normally? Sure, he'll ask Dean what the plan is, but in general, if Sam doesn't agree or thinks maybe they should try something else, does he generally just shrug and not voice an objection, because that's easier? I didn't think so, but maybe according to the narrative, I've been wrong about that? Also if the show actually let Sam make a right decision by trusting himself - which when was the last significant time that actually happened before this finale - I might get the message better, but the show in general lately usually seems to want to make Sam "wrong" about most things, so Sam having confidence in trusting himself seems more a fool's errand than something that actually makes sense. And in my opinion it didn't use to be that way on the show.

7 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

In the face-value-writing that this show does, I`d say that is pretty much the case. Like the entire Sam-becomes-the-general scene with Dean and the other hunters looking at him in awe was meant to showcase the character in a more than positive way. And his nonsensical decision to work with the BMOL was thus swept under the rug because he was just so awesome. 

But was it swept under the rug? Sam had to admit he was wrong. And the speech made it sound like Sam had to realize that he was somehow less than or lazy because he had blindly followed the BMoL - something that I personally thought was out of character and made no sense for him to do anyway based on what came before  - and perhaps Sam was just taking the "easy way out" for not being more like Dean. What a crappy message in my opinion. Where you saw Sam being lauded as "awesome," I saw Sam being looked up to only because he was now being more like "Dean" (by leading) instead of being like "Sam." To me it's not a ringing endorsement of a character to have that character basically say that he was wrong for doing for what he had been doing, but now by being more like someone else - in this case Dean - now he could be looked up to. I don't want Sam doing "Dean's role" any more than you do. I like them as different individuals. But I am more tired of Sam being punished or chastised for being Sam and praised mostly only when he's instead more like Dean.

Your miles might vary on that.

7 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

So even if Dean were to make stupid mistakes in that scenario, he would have a teflon armour to protect him and the fault would be somehow transfered to Sam then.

Doesn't that often happen with Dean anyway? A recent example: killing Death. No repercussions for Dean from that. Because Castiel killed Billie, if anything were to happen it was transferred to him, but pretty much nothing happened.

If Sam supposedly has teflon armor, Dean has his own set as well. It' just a more overt one in that Dean's decisions - not matter how reckless - generally turn out to be the right one somehow.

7 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

Not to mention the mytharc acknowledgment I`ve always wanted.

How was Sam any more part of the "mytharc" this season than Dean? It seems to me they each had stories relevant to the mytharc. But your miles may vary.

7 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

And of course it comes down to what you value in seeing. To you the big wins Sam got this year may not have been a priority but I would have been over the moon to see stuff like that for Dean because that is really important to me.

How was Sam killing a prince of hell (with help) or a hellhound (with help) any more of a "big win" than Dean killing the YED (with help) or the Phoenix (by himself) or Eve (by himself) or Dick Roman (with help)? Yet I've often seen it argued that those Dean kills were somehow not really relevant because Dean didn't use powers or something. Well, Sam didn't use powers this season either, so why are his kills somehow supposedly so much more epic or evidence that the story this year is "all about him" than Dean's kills above when supposedly despite Dean's "big wins" from above, somehow the story was still all about Sam? And that's not even including all of the big wins Dean had when he did have powers, and where Sam pretty much either got saved, was outright excluded from the action, screwed up, or some combination of those.

And even then, I might have just looked at those seasons as maybe evening the score in Dean's favor in terms of powers and such - except that the narrative didn't stop there. In addition to having Sam sidelined - a lot - the narrative usually made Sam 1) wrong 2) a complete jerk or 3) both of those. So if Dean was supposedly "sidelined" this season from the action so that the pendulum could swing back towards Sam a bit? ... at least Dean got to be right and supportive (i. e. not a jerk) while that happened. And Dean got to do some saving himself: in the final episodes alone Dean saved Sam in the bunker and he saved Mary. What big save did Sam have in all of season 8 and season 9? I think Bobby was about it*... plus he was wrong. And made to be a jerk. A lot.

* I might be missing something though, because I don't like those seasons... and not because the story wasn't focused on Sam, but because Sam's character was trashed. For me there's a huge difference. One is tolerable. The other pisses me off. I don't like season 4 either even though the story was arguably focused on Sam and Dean. But I thought the season did a disservice to both characters in terms of characterization. My opinion only on that one I understand.

5 hours ago, auntvi said:

Brava!!! The definitive defense of Sam.  I am not worthy!!

*Blushes* Thank you*, but mostly I just think I "get" Sam - or at least the way Sam used to be before the post Gamble era writers seemed to decide maybe he wasn't good enough any more - so I tend to defend him.

*And you're totally more than worthy! : )

Edited by AwesomO4000
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
24 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Me too along with Dean/Donna :)

I am a huge Dean/Donna shipper. I think they just have on DL and nobody is worried. Beer, pie, donuts, coffee and all the sex. LOL

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I am a huge Dean/Donna shipper. I think they just have on DL and nobody is worried. Beer, pie, donuts, coffee and all the sex. LOL

I missed seeing Donna make an appearance in season 12. :(

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

1 hour ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Dean is very popular.  So is Sam.  I don't think there is any hard evidence to suggest that Dean is any more popular than Sam (or vice versa) and so gets used to sell the episodes (with the implication that the majority of viewers wouldn't watch if it were Sam featured in the promos. )   

Did NOT say the majority of viewers wouldn't watch if Sam was featured in the promo. Don't put words in my mouth. I don't even not watch because Sam is featured in the promo and I lean heavily Dean. Did say that Dean is very popular ( there is plenty of anecdotal evidence for that statement) and it seems like, IMO, the PR Dept does a lot of bait and switch aimed at Dean fans. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Also if the show actually let Sam make a right decision by trusting himself - which when was the last significant time that actually happened before this finale - I might get the message better, but the show in general lately usually seems to want to make Sam "wrong" about most things, so Sam having confidence in trusting himself seems more a fool's errand than something that actually makes sense.

But see, I don't think that Sam should make decisions based on trust -- of himself or any random schmuck. Is that how people make decisions? Thoughtless instinct? Blind obedience? IMO Sam needs to make decisions based on reason FFS.

What about verifying facts and claims, analyzing the situation (cost/benefit), running scenarios, etc etc etc? You know, the normal prep work that goes into making life decisions? lol

I feel like Sam really didn't do his due diligence when he was deciding whether to work with the BMOL, which was stupid. Except that I know that Sam isn't stupid. So what was wrong with him? And I can come up with reasons that make sense to me, but apparently the cannon explanation is now that Sam was just being lazy? Yeah, OK.

It's hard for me to even evaluate his speech to the American hunters afterward, because there is a 0% chance I would have been persuaded in their shoes. That is, if I were them, I might have been persuaded to attack the BMOL, but I would never have been persuaded to do it with Sam at the helm. For all they knew, Sam was a mole for the BMOL and leading them into an ambush. Or he was using them to carry out his own personal revenge for Mary's brainwashing. Or whatever. IMO he needed to bring them more valuable information than he did in order to prove what side he was on, and they needed to have a more thought-out strategy for going in than they did considering that the stakes were so high and the BMOL were supposedly so ~impressive.~ But apparently every character lost his or her critical thinking skills whenever they came into contact with the BMOL storyline, so...*shrug*

To me, the whole thing felt very forced. I mean everything from Sam joining up with the BMOL to him "leading" the American hunters to victory against them. YMMV. 

1 hour ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Few people get to do what I do: do a job I love in exactly the way I want to do it and let someone else be the "leader" (i.e. write the grants, do the paperwork).

Wait wait wait, is being the "leader" writing the grants and doing the paperwork?!

Maybe I don't really know what being the leader is, now that I think about it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, rue721 said:

Wait wait wait, is being the "leader" writing the grants and doing the paperwork?!

Hee, in my profession it is. Some poor scientists and professors that end up in that kind of position hardly ever get to do the science at all. They spend most of their time doing the administrative stuff and end up having to hire people to do the actual science.

But I should clarify that in my profession "paperwork" = writing scientific papers* (which only one or two people I know actually enjoy - and they might be crazy ; ) ), keeping track of budgets, and writing up multitudes of progress reports on various government computerized forms (that change ever few years so you have to learn how to do them all over again.) Oh, and I forgot, those in the even higher leadership positions also have to "manage" all of the professors together as a team - with all of their potentially conflicting personalities and egos - in addition to writing the grants/government reports to get money for the department and doing the "paperwork" like writing papers and justifying budgets, deciding who gets what resources or loses their job when the budget gets cut, etc. etc.

So pretty much like many leaders: most of the responsibility and headaches and making choices that are generally going to suck for someone somewhere but have to be made. Just without the life or death circumstances that Sam and Dean have to contend with.**

* And "publish or perish" is very much a real thing for many. Basically your job security depends on it.

** Well mostly. There are the rare occasions where a student decides he/she doesn't like a professor's "leadership" and decides that he/she is justified in shooting said professor instead.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

How was Sam killing a prince of hell (with help) or a hellhound (with help) any more of a "big win" than Dean killing the YED (with help) or the Phoenix (by himself) or Eve (by himself) or Dick Roman (with help)?

I never said those aren`t big wins of Dean, I don`t put 5.22 and any of those on the same level but among each other, they are comparable. However, YED, Phoenix, Eve and Dick Roman were not all within a span of 8 or so episodes, they spanned years.

This Season bugged me so much because it was Prince of Hell with Michael lance (and that in itself sucked, sorry), followed by Alpha Vamp with Colt, followed by Alpha Hellhound, followed by God with Colt. While Dean wasn`t doing anything worthwhile for me in those episodes. If Dean had gotten the Alpha Hellhound and maybe, just maybe a little acknowledgment of his previous history with hellhounds? That would have already made it a lot better. 

My problem this Season (and last Season in terms of MOTW) was that Dean was too useless for way too long. One or two bad episodes in a row for the character are annoying but it happens but not freaking half a Season.       

Quote

I don't want Sam doing "Dean's role" any more than you do. I like them as different individuals. But I am more tired of Sam being punished or chastised for being Sam and praised mostly only when he's instead more like Dean.

But IMO it`s not acknowledged as "Dean`s role", it is now Sam`s and Dean might as well have never played it for all the show remembers it and has stripped him of it. 

That was the case with leadership in this last episode for me. It didn`t matter if Dean had ever shown any leadership in the previous 260+ episodes, that was erased because the one time the show specifically talks about it, it makes clear that Sam is the leader and Dean... sits around and gazed up at him in awe. So Dean is just as much of a flunky as the other American hunters were presented as.

And now for the US hunters, Sam is the one they know as leader and Dean the one they know as underling on a sofa. Which goes on my list of "fuck everything".

There would have to be an episode in Season 13 to correct this perception and I doubt it is coming. And why do people assume Sam hasn`t taken over leadership with flunky!Dean wholesale now? IMO it was a transferral of a previous attribute of Dean`s that the character is not getting back. Same as a few others. That means Dean LOST this attribute, he sure as hell hasn`t gotten anything valuable in return and he is now less than he was before. That is what annoys me about the whole scenario. 

This is also why I don`t believe Dabb and co aren`t doing it deliberately. The way this Season was weighed would be a statistical improbability to me if it wasn`t intentional. All the episodes from all the writers (except Yockey who somehow escaped the Dark Curse apparently) just happened to turn out like this? Noone could sell this to me, sorry.

Quote

I am sorry but Sam is 1/2 of the Winchester team.  He does have to contribute.  Dean can't do it all. 

And yet the opposite was not a problem for a lot of episodes in the second half of Season 2. Why did none of those writers stop and think "hm, Sam can`t do it all, Dean has to contribute something" for their episodes? Because I sure wish they had since I do agree with the sentiment.

Edited by Aeryn13
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Aeryn13 said:

I never said those aren`t big wins of Dean, I don`t put 5.22 and any of those on the same level but among each other, they are comparable. However, YED, Phoenix, Eve and Dick Roman were not all within a span of 8 or so episodes, they spanned years.

 

That was the case with leadership in this last episode for me. It didn`t matter if Dean had ever shown any leadership in the previous 260+ episodes, that was erased because the one time the show specifically talks about it, it makes clear that Sam is the leader and Dean... sits around and gazed up at him in awe. So Dean is just as much of a flunky as the other American hunters were presented as.

And now for the US hunters, Sam is the one they know as leader and Dean the one they know as underling on a sofa. Which goes on my list of "fuck everything".

There would have to be an episode in Season 13 to correct this perception and I doubt it is coming. And why do people assume Sam hasn`t taken over leadership with flunky!Dean wholesale now? IMO it was a transferral of a previous attribute of Dean`s that the character is not getting back. Same as a few others. That means Dean LOST this attribute, he sure as hell hasn`t gotten anything valuable in return and he is now less than he was before. That is what annoys me about the whole scenario. 

Regardless of when the big kills happened, Dean had more than his fair share in earlier seasons.  Much more than Sam.  Sam's previous big kills were Alistair and Lilith.  Both of which were shown to be more of a 'bad' thing Sam did bc he used his powers.  Heck, Lilith's death resulted in an apocalypse.  Dean's big kills amounted to a lot more and were actually seen as good and heroic moments.  Yes, Sam killed Ramiel, but he was a one off YED.  Only appearing in one episode and not having nearly the relevancy that Azazel did to the story or the Winchesters entire lives.

As for showing leadership.  That will never be taken away from Dean because it has always be shown to the audience rather than told.  In story telling, it is far better to show things through the narrative than telling the audience what is happening.  Just like how Hess called Sam.... Dean.  I think she did that because he is known to be the leader, so when one of the Winchesters show up in what appears to be a leadership role, it is automatically assumed it must be Dean.  So Dean having leadership skills must be well known to at least some characters who haven't even met them.  As for the US hunters, there really wasn't that many there at the time to establish this will be the all end of who is the leader to the US hunters.  And I'm pretty sure some of them have already died.  There are more US hunters out there I am sure.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

That will never be taken away from Dean because it has always be shown to the audience rather than told. 

This show goes for "tell" over "show" any day of the week and twice on Sunday. IMO tell has always been what the writers intended. Show is sometimes different because of their limited capabilities in writing. But what they say is the thing that sticks with most viewers, casual especially.

That`s why one "tell" can easily erase and retcon years of "show". 

Quote

Sam's previous big kills were Alistair and Lilith. 

He single-handedly took care of both Lucifer and Michael. There was also Samhain. And one of the Horsemen. Not to mention way more flashy onscreen powers than Dean got as a demon or with the MOC. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

36 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

This show goes for "tell" over "show" any day of the week and twice on Sunday. IMO tell has always been what the writers intended. Show is sometimes different because of their limited capabilities in writing. But what they say is the thing that sticks with most viewers, casual especially.

That`s why one "tell" can easily erase and retcon years of "show". 

He single-handedly took care of both Lucifer and Michael. There was also Samhain. And one of the Horsemen. Not to mention way more flashy onscreen powers than Dean got as a demon or with the MOC. 

I have to disagree.  Most people make up their own minds about characters/situations based on what they've seen characters do and how things happen.  I have seen many people complain about being told something but not shown it onscreen.  (Not necessarily supernatural) No matter what they put in Sam's speech, the viewers will still view Dean as the leader IMO.  I have a strong feeling if a poll was conducted asking the audience who was more of a leader, the poll would heavily favour Dean as the leader.  IMO, this instance, they were giving Sam a chance to be a leader because it is usually Dean who leads and has been for 12 seasons.  1 episode/scene isn't going to change that, especially after we were shown Dean coming up with a plan and getting them all out of the bunker on his own.

As for the whole Lucifer/Michael thing.  Yes, there was a hero moment there for Sam, but it wasn't final.  They were never really after Michael, and Lucifer got back out of the cage anyway.  When Dean takes on the big bad, he gets the job done and finished.  Azazel and Dick Roman.  Never to be heard from again.  Lucifer out of the cage and still a villain in the series.  Well you know, except for the fact that Mary punched him back into the alternate timeline.  Sam's not even the only one to 'get him stuck somewhere' in the series. As for famine.  I knew I was forgetting one.. and that is it.  Once again only using his special "bad" demon powers.  TBH, I always liked his powers, but there is no doubt that they were shown in a negative light whenever he used them on the show.  I don't remember Samhain TBH, but will look it up.

Ahhh.... Samhain.  Where Sam uses his powers even though he was forbidden to do so.  It's almost as if Sam's only big kills revolved solely around his demon powers and not his skills as a hunter.  You know, before this season.

Edited by Reganne
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

When Dean takes on the big bad, he gets the job done and finished.  Azazel and Dick Roman.  Never to be heard from again.  Lucifer out of the cage and still a villain in the series. 

I think this is a case of when Dean does something, it is quickly forgotten. Which is normally a bad thing but in terms of his kills, he "lucks out" sometimes and Abaddon, Dick Roman, Cain etc stay dead.

Meanwhile Lucifer was brought back at first in terms of a continuing story for Sam, to reference things that happened to Sam and then later the writers apparently just couldn`t let him go. Dabb appears positively enamored with the guy. They had so many opportunities to kill him for real but even after the Finale he is still around. 

Quote

I have seen many people complain about being told something but not shown it onscreen. 

In my experience, yes, that absolutely happens in terms of stuff like "why didn`t they show this? that sounded so cool" or "how did the character change his mind on this? when did this happen, where was I?"

But character attributes are very much taken at face value. For instance Dean is seen as the "dumb" one because it has been repeated often enough. Sam could be shown doing insanely stupid things for 23 episodes in a row and it would not rattle the perception of him as a certified genius. Meanwhile Dean is, at best, seen as "street smart". In my country, this is actually an insult so admittedly I can never not see the negative connotations.

The same way Dean gets the "insensitive and uncouth" markers which are often used for jokes. I didn`t like it but as long as it was evened out by "badass" and "leadership", there was a balance there. To leave him with the negative ones but take away the positive attributes unbalances it.   

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

 

But character attributes are very much taken at face value. For instance Dean is seen as the "dumb" one because it has been repeated often enough. Sam could be shown doing insanely stupid things for 23 episodes in a row and it would not rattle the perception of him as a certified genius. Meanwhile Dean is, at best, seen as "street smart". In my country, this is actually an insult so admittedly I can never not see the negative connotations.

The same way Dean gets the "insensitive and uncouth" markers which are often used for jokes. I didn`t like it but as long as it was evened out by "badass" and "leadership", there was a balance there. To leave him with the negative ones but take away the positive attributes unbalances it.   

I don't think Dean is viewed as dumb by either the viewers or the show.  Some moments are used as humour, but overall Dean is the one who is usually seen as right or as having great instincts.  Dumb people don't generally have great instincts.

As far as badass moments, the part with the grenade launcher was pretty badass and I think most viewers agree.  Dean came up with the plan all himself and orchestrated it all himself while Sam pulled Toni out of the way.  Not to mention his behind the back shot last week was badass.  Also, just because Sam has one leadership moment through out the series, that doesn't mean Dean isn't a leader or that his leadership qualities are now suddenly defunct. So I have to disagree that being badass and a leader have been taken away from Dean.  They are still there.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Which might make more sense, to me anyway, if Sam generally did just let other people make the call without questioning it so he (Sam) doesn't have to make the call, but does Sam actually do that normally? Sure, he'll ask Dean what the plan is, but in general, if Sam doesn't agree or thinks maybe they should try something else, does he generally just shrug and not voice an objection, because that's easier? I didn't think so, but maybe according to the narrative, I've been wrong about that? Also if the show actually let Sam make a right decision by trusting himself - which when was the last significant time that actually happened before this finale - I might get the message better, but the show in general lately usually seems to want to make Sam "wrong" about most things, so Sam having confidence in trusting himself seems more a fool's errand than something that actually makes sense. And in my opinion it didn't use to be that way on the show.

Moving to the Sam thread...

Share this post


Link to post

Why is it in a season where everyone lied to Dean and worked behind his back, its Dean once again who has prove he trusts everyone else?

As for the General thing, I didn't believe Dabb when he said the Winchesters would have to step up.  I figured it would be Sam, and Dean nodding along and telling Sam how great he was. 

So I also don't think its just going to be a one time thing.  I wouldn't be surprised if its Sam storyline next season with him trying to organize and lead American hunters. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

I wouldn't be surprised if its Sam storyline next season with him trying to organize and lead American hunters. 

Please, don't even say that out loud.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

Why is it in a season where everyone lied to Dean and worked behind his back, its Dean once again who has prove he trusts everyone else?

I don't think it was about whether Dean trusted Sam, but about whether Sam trusted himself to do it without Dean.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I have to admit the longer Sam's speech went on, the more I giggled. Don't think that's what the writers intended but that was really, really over the top. Reached the point of a parody of all the great movie speeches for me. Sorry, I know a lot of folks loved the speech but I would have giggled if Dean had delivered that mess too. It went on and on and on and on. OK I will go to my room now.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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


×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size