Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
DittyDotDot

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

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Sam killed Emma.

 

:)

True, but Emma was about to kill Dean. We saw when she looked at Sam... and as she took out her knife that all of her pleading to Dean was not genuine.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

2 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

True, but Emma was about to kill Dean. We saw when she looked at Sam... and as she took out her knife that all of her pleading to Dean was not genuine.

Maybe she would have, maybe not (probably would've). But after he killed her, he took pains to remind Dean that he'd killed Amy.

Edited by gonzosgirrl
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

That's not even including all of the "Sam was even worse than Dean as a demon" things the writers kept throwing at us to show us Sam was wrong.

Especially when GOD himself says it.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I've always found the argument "Sam is the writers favourite" to be a rather weak and biased one that doesn't hold up to much scrunity, as one only needs to look at the shows narrative to date to realise this is not true. In fact it is quite the opposite, usually the characters of Sam, and later on Castiel, are sacrificed in order to prop up Dean. They are made to be the villains of the piece, so that poor Dean has good reason to feel hard done by. Furthermore, when Sam and Cas mess up the consequences are usually wide reaching and hurt many. When Dean makes questionable decisions usually the biggest victim of said decision is Dean himself. Let's look at some of the key plot lines of the show that highlight this. 

 

The Apocalypse Arc

Who is to Blame:

Dean: Initially it could be argued that the writers placed the blame on Dean when they revealed he broke the first seal. However, they took care to ensure that this reveal was made in the most sympathetic light possible and the blame placed on Dean was flimsy at best . He wasn't truly to blame because he was the victim of decades of torture, and it would be wrong of us to blame him for breaking under that type of pressure. It is for this reason that after season four Dean's part in starting the apocalypse is never spoken of again. 

Sam: Instead the writers spend the entirety of season four ensuring that the blame is well and truly shifted to Sam. They portray him as an addict who gets off on the power that comes with feeding on demon blood. He is portrayed as arrogant and callous; for example he describes Dean as "too weak" due to the influence of his post hell PTSD. The writers have made little effort to make Sam sympathetic and instead many of the audience have to spend time learning to "forgive" Sam. This arc climaxes in Sam's murder of an innocent nurse. The writers have made sure there is no sympathy for Sam's plight by allowing the nurse herself to appear while the demon hid in her psyche, rather than simply keeping the demon evil before he killed her. 

 

Supernatural Ally: Ruby

She is the first major supernatural ally to act as a source of discontent between the main characters. Ultimately, Dean was proven right and Ruby was evil just as he said all along. Sam is left to look like a fool for trusting her and he gets blame for "picking a demon over me (Dean). 

 

The Purgatory Arc

Who is to Blame: Castiel and to a lesser extent Crowley, but since Crowley was supposed to be a villain I'm going to focus on Castiel more. Once again there is a major conflict between the main characters in regards to handling a major issue. In this particular instance it's the question of; what are they going to do about the looming problem of Raphael and his plan to spring Michael and Lucifer out of the cage to get the apocalypse back on track? On the one hand you have the Winchesters, who as far as I can recall, offer no valid alternative to dealing with the problem. They simply object to Castiel's approach. Castiel on the other hand has a very concrete plan. He wishes to use the power of the souls in purgatory to gather the juice needed to stop Raphael. 

If the shows narrative were truly interested in being neutral and fair to all involved then there would have been a better acknowledgment that the brothers had no valid plan of their own. Instead of painting Castiel's plans as utterly wrong they would have acknowledged it was a plan and tried to work together to smooth things out and lessen the risks the brothers were worried about. 

Instead the show is more interested in sacrificing Castiel for the sake of propping up Sam and Dean. This is why sympathy for them is built by having Castiel lie to them and put them in dangerous positions, retrieve Sam's soul from the pit sans soul and of course break Sam's wall. Just as Sam was sacrificed in season 4 to prop up Dean and his pain Castiel is now being sacrificed to prop up both brothers. Of course the arc ultimately ends in disaster for Cas (thus vindicating  Dean's objections) by it resulting in the Levithian debate.

 

The Post Purgatory Debate

Central Issue: Sam's decision to not follow the established pattern of going heaven and earth to save Dean. 

Who is to Blame: Sam 

If the show had approached this with the intent to keep all characters sympathetic then each of them would have had valid reasons for their behaviour. Dean's less than stellar behaviour would have still been explained by the hurt and betrayal he felt as a result of Sam's decision. Sam's decision would have also been explained in proper detail to keep the audience ability to relate to him. They could have easily highlighted that Sam genuinely believed that Dean was dead. That he saw an explosion and assumed it meant certain death rather than dimensional travel. They could have had Sam explain that he thought he was doing the right thing by allowing Dean to rest in peace, that he remembered how the last time he actively tried to ensure Dean's resurrection he spiralled into a pool of addiction and hubris and figured Dean would not want him to risk becoming that person again, that he did not want to become that person again. Then there is the fact that it was Dean's deal to save him that set in motion the events that led to the consequence. He could have explained he didnt want to risk tampering with the natural order and causing that type of widespread hurt again. A proper narrative like this would have given both brothers valid reasons for behaving as they did. 

However, instead they opt to sacrifice Sam for the sake of propping up Dean and giving him a reason to resent Sam. They make him the victim of the narrative who was abandoned by his brother who drove off, knocked down a dog and shacked up with the girl. Dean was then forced to team up with a vampire ally instead. 

Questionable Supernatural Ally: Benny. 

As with Ruby and Crowley before him Benny proved to be a supernatural ally who acted as a point of discontent between the main characters. It was Dean's turn to be on the creatures side, while Sam was the one who didn't trust him. Did they continue the established tradition of making the ally evil as they did with Ruby and Crowley? Of course they didn't. Instead the writing team opted to make Benny a Gary Stu cuddly vampire who was the most genuine one we saw on the show. His motives were even purer than Lenore's, as she stopped feeding on humanity for self-preservation reasons. Now the behaviours Dean earlier exhibited towards Ruby and Sam were being displayed by Sam. However, while Dean was ultimately proven right about Ruby and thus his hostility was justified Sam was wrong and thus he came across as a selfish jerk. 

 

The Possession Drama 

Central Issue: Should Dean have made the deal with Gadreel? 

Who is in the wrong: Sam

Throughout the course of Supernatural possesion had been treated as something abhorrent. It had always been treated as a metaphor for rape and torture. However, suddenly it was portrayed as a reasonable course of action as Dean decided collaborating in the supernatural rape of his brother for months on end was a justified method to saving Sam's life. They also decided to lessen the pain previously mentioned by possessed humans (Meg, Jimmy) so that Sam was simply in a peaceful little bubble of his head space. When Sam finds out he is understandably angry and gives Dean hell for it! However, in order to ensure that sympathy remains with Dean, the speech goes too far and attacks Dean's personally rather than simply sticking to his misbehaviour in this situation. When the confrontation ends the camera even focuses on Dean's devastated expression. Apparently a harsh speech of Sam is actually meant to be comparable to months of Supernatural rape. Of course this makes sense because as always Dean is just a noble guy trying to save his brother and Sam is the ungrateful asshole. The writers belief that Sam's anger was unjustified is later cemented when he sickeningly calls Gadreel  "a friend" and admits he "lied" about not saving Dean in similar circumstances. 

 

I have to to run out but I'll be back later to highlight how when Sam goes to save Dean against his wishes from the mark it leads to yet another apocalypse..

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

IMO, there is a difference between wanting power and exercising your own personal power to take control of your own life. 

Sam found the werewithall and desire to take more control of his life by getting such good grades in school and scoring well on standardized tests to score a full ride to Stanford, all on the DL from John and Dean. He clearly was taking control and IMO exercising his personal power by going to college despite the disapproval of John. He exercised his personal power and control over his life by not contacting Dean or John for 3 years when he was at college. Sam exercised his personal power when he chose to join Dean because he wanted vengeance on the YED for murdering Jessica. He exercised his personal power when he chose to walk away from Dean in Scarecrow. How did Sam come to be able to believe he could exercise that personal power if he always felt powerless in his life?

IMO, every choice Sam made when he learned he had been dosed with demon blood was out of fear.

Fear IMO is the worst of all emotions because it fucks you up in ways you don't even know and at times it's hard to even understand that you are fearful. It comes out as worry, sadness, depression, anger and  sometimes a person will make TERRIBLE choices out of fear. 

I am NOT saying that Sam is a coward, before anyone twists anything I'm saying into that. Sam is brave. Bravery is facing your fears. IMO Sam went off the deep end and started using the demon blood out of fear. What got him into the arrogance etc was the power he felt from being able to exercise exorcise  demons with his mind and because Ruby was working him, making him believe he could do anything. (and the sex...a little bit).

Edited by catrox14 · Reason: because exercise and exorcise are different things Although Sam making demons exercise would be pretty funny
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
48 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

So, I think Sam's decision to give her a second chance -- not a free pass to keep killing -- was totally reasonable, and in fact the right call.

I think Amy's story had more holes in it than a screen door. 

Yes, Amy had a sympathetic reason but that doesn't give her the right to decide someone deserves to die.  What about the drunk driver?  What if he was drunk because he found out his son had cancer. Did Amy find out their stories?  It reminds me of that movie John Q.  He finds out his son needs a heart transplant but because his insurance won't cover it so he take a hospital hostage and forces them to put his son the transplant list.  He's very sympathetic, and everyone can understand why but...  The movie is old but I'll spoiler tag the ending just in case.

Spoiler

He's arrested and gets a year in jail.  He wasn't given a free pass just because he was a father protecting his child.

Yes, she saved Sam's life but Sam doesn't know her.  How does he know she's being honest with him right there? He spent a couple hours with her one afternoon, didn't hear from her again for 15 (give or take) and when she first came to his attention, Sam, himself, was planning to kill her.   Then he literally found her with blood on her hands and she lays a sob story one him.

She tells him that her son was sick and needed fresh brains.  How does she know what will help him?  It seems to me it's because it happened in the past.  If he got sick from dead brains once its stands to reason its going to happen again.  So how many bodies are acceptable?   What happens if a drug dealer isn't available?  How long before she starts justifying a guy smoking weed is acceptable as a bad person?

She also tells Sam she had the last job at the morgue for the last 6 years.  It's been about 15 years (give or take) since Sam last saw her.  How was she feeding herself and her son for the 7 (or so) years when she wasn't working at the morgue.  Also at the end of this episode they were going on the run.  No job at the morgue anymore.  Where is she going to get her brains?

Just how high is Amy's body count.  I personally believe its a lot more than four.

Dean did lie to Sam.  Not right, but at least Dean did his own dirty work her instead of asking another hunter to do it.  What's forgotten is that Sam did lie to Dean, too.  He took off in the middle of the night with nothing but a vague note.  This is coming off Sam almost killing himself and Dean because his hallcinations are got the better of him.  He's still zoning out and losing touch with reality.  Sam disappears in the middle of the night, its only natural to wonder if Sam did that of his own free will.  Same with defending Amy.  How is Dean supposed to know if Sam was in the right mind when he made that decision.

Maybe if Sam has been open, and told Dean what he was up right from the start, Dean might not have been suspicious.  If you give people reason to questions your actions, don't be surprised if they do.

IMO, Amy and Benny are only comparable on the surface. Because as i mentioned, Sam didn't know Amy at all.  He only knew what she told him.  With Benny, he and Dean fought side by side.  In that situation you come to learn and trust someone to watch your back.  Plus, he demonstrated his loyalty by saving Cas.  It would have been easy to be a second to late in that situation.   If Benny was only using Dean, its in Benny's best interest to get rid of Dean.  He could have easily ripped his throat out when they hugged after the resurrection.  Plus, we saw that Benny stopped killing before he went to purgatory.

When Dean confronted Benny, he took a machete with him, so he never gave Benny a completely free pass. 

Edited by ILoveReading
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Quote

And how is any of that proving that the writers think Dean did it out of weakness and Sam did it only out of love? Wouldn't it make more sense to narratively reward the character the writers think is supposedly "doing right" not the one they think is "doing wrong?"

Which I think they are doing. To me, getting the pimpage scenes and flashy storylines IS the ultimate narrative reward. Like 5.22, like the hero speech in the latest episode. I consider stuff like that the reward.  

I would have happily taken consequences for killing Death for example. While the moment itself was silly, I thought it could yield a supernatural storyline for Dean. In every other genre tale it would have but on this show I knew better than to bother hoping. 

 

Quote

I've always found the argument "Sam is the writers favourite" to be a rather weak and biased one that doesn't hold up to much scrunity, as one only needs to look at the shows narrative to date to realise this is not true. 

That`s very much perception. I can turn your entire points around and claim that as the truth. 

If Dean is the favoured guy of these writers and Sam is not, then for all that`s holy, I want them to hate Dean because then it would stand to reason he would get the scenes I think are valuable.

To me, it`s like being Bobby`s "favourite". If that means being treated like trash in the latter years whereas Sam gets the real compliments that mean something "better hunter" and all that, then by all means, save him from being that kind of favourite. 

Quote

And one minute the writers are intentionally writing Dean badly (ie: the valiumDean complaints) but not intentionally writing Sam as an asshole - and it's the same writers!  smh...

It`s not unlike fanfiction (bad one) which this show has been like for some time now. If the fic writer stans a character too hard and writes them as a Mary Sue, they often come out looking like an asshole. Yet that is no way the intention of that writer. And often they will do their propping of their beloved at the expense of other characters, with full intention to trash them. And yet readers will look at the story and go "wow, that Uber Mary Sue sucks, I really kinda feel bad for the other guys".

Again, a multitude of shows have this exact same problem, not just the SPN writers.

Edited by Aeryn13
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

I've always found the argument "Sam is the writers favourite" to be a rather weak and biased one that doesn't hold up to much scrunity, as one only needs to look at the shows narrative to date to realise this is not true. In fact it is quite the opposite, usually the characters of Sam, and later on Castiel, are sacrificed in order to prop up Dean. They are made to be the villains of the piece, so that poor Dean has good reason to feel hard done by. Furthermore, when Sam and Cas mess up the consequences are usually wide reaching and hurt many. When Dean makes questionable decisions usually the biggest victim of said decision is Dean himself. Let's look at some of the key plot lines of the show that highlight this. 

 

The Apocalypse Arc

Who is to Blame:

Dean: Initially it could be argued that the writers placed the blame on Dean when they revealed he broke the first seal. However, they took care to ensure that this reveal was made in the most sympathetic light possible and the blame placed on Dean was flimsy at best . He wasn't truly to blame because he was the victim of decades of torture, and it would be wrong of us to blame him for breaking under that type of pressure. It is for this reason that after season four Dean's part in starting the apocalypse is never spoken of again. 

Sam: Instead the writers spend the entirety of season four ensuring that the blame is well and truly shifted to Sam. They portray him as an addict who gets off on the power that comes with feeding on demon blood. He is portrayed as arrogant and callous; for example he describes Dean as "too weak" due to the influence of his post hell PTSD. The writers have made little effort to make Sam sympathetic and instead many of the audience have to spend time learning to "forgive" Sam. This arc climaxes in Sam's murder of an innocent nurse. The writers have made sure there is no sympathy for Sam's plight by allowing the nurse herself to appear while the demon hid in her psyche, rather than simply keeping the demon evil before he killed her. 

You didn't mention though how the writers decided to have Dean torture souls in hell for ten years if they were trying to make Dean look better than Sam.  And yes, they had Sam do some awful unsympathetic things but then to end the arc they let Sam save the whole dang world ALL BY HIMSELF. Doesn't look to me like the writers intended Dean to have the redemptive arc and be the big hero.

Quote

Supernatural Ally: Ruby

She is the first major supernatural ally to act as a source of discontent between the main characters. Ultimately, Dean was proven right and Ruby was evil just as he said all along. Sam is left to look like a fool for trusting her and he gets blame for "picking a demon over me (Dean). 

See above. Sam got to save the whole world all by himself in spite of his past mistakes. That's called a flawed hero.

Quote

The Purgatory Arc

Who is to Blame: Castiel and to a lesser extent Crowley, but since Crowley was supposed to be a villain I'm going to focus on Castiel more. Once again there is a major conflict between the main characters in regards to handling a major issue. In this particular instance it's the question of; what are they going to do about the looming problem of Raphael and his plan to spring Michael and Lucifer out of the cage to get the apocalypse back on track? On the one hand you have the Winchesters, who as far as I can recall, offer no valid alternative to dealing with the problem. They simply object to Castiel's approach. Castiel on the other hand has a very concrete plan. He wishes to use the power of the souls in purgatory to gather the juice needed to stop Raphael. 

If the shows narrative were truly interested in being neutral and fair to all involved then there would have been a better acknowledgment that the brothers had no valid plan of their own. Instead of painting Castiel's plans as utterly wrong they would have acknowledged it was a plan and tried to work together to smooth things out and lessen the risks the brothers were worried about. 

Instead the show is more interested in sacrificing Castiel for the sake of propping up Sam and Dean. This is why sympathy for them is built by having Castiel lie to them and put them in dangerous positions, retrieve Sam's soul from the pit sans soul and of course break Sam's wall. Just as Sam was sacrificed in season 4 to prop up Dean and his pain Castiel is now being sacrificed to prop up both brothers. Of course the arc ultimately ends in disaster for Cas (thus vindicating  Dean's objections) by it resulting in the Levithian debate.

And that wasn't a character sacrificed for Dean. You say yourself it was Sam AND Dean.

 

Quote

The Post Purgatory Debate

Central Issue: Sam's decision to not follow the established pattern of going heaven and earth to save Dean. 

Who is to Blame: Sam 

If the show had approached this with the intent to keep all characters sympathetic then each of them would have had valid reasons for their behaviour. Dean's less than stellar behaviour would have still been explained by the hurt and betrayal he felt as a result of Sam's decision. Sam's decision would have also been explained in proper detail to keep the audience ability to relate to him. They could have easily highlighted that Sam genuinely believed that Dean was dead. That he saw an explosion and assumed it meant certain death rather than dimensional travel. They could have had Sam explain that he thought he was doing the right thing by allowing Dean to rest in peace, that he remembered how the last time he actively tried to ensure Dean's resurrection he spiralled into a pool of addiction and hubris and figured Dean would not want him to risk becoming that person again, that he did not want to become that person again. Then there is the fact that it was Dean's deal to save him that set in motion the events that led to the consequence. He could have explained he didnt want to risk tampering with the natural order and causing that type of widespread hurt again. A proper narrative like this would have given both brothers valid reasons for behaving as they did. 

However, instead they opt to sacrifice Sam for the sake of propping up Dean and giving him a reason to resent Sam. They make him the victim of the narrative who was abandoned by his brother who drove off, knocked down a dog and shacked up with the girl. Dean was then forced to team up with a vampire ally instead. 

The showrunner didn't realize he would get that kind of backlash for the Sam didn't look for Dean. He thought it was a good thing and by the time they reached the point in filming he could actually address it, I think he chose to just ignore it.  Its seasons later we get Sam apologizing and I think that's because the backlash just wouldn't go away.

Quote

 

Edited by Idahoforspn
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

To me, getting the pimpage scenes and flashy storylines IS the ultimate narrative reward.

Depends on what you think the flashy storylines are. I think you and I would vastly disagree on what "flashy" means, so why is it assumed the writers have the same definition as you?

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

Depends on what you think the flashy storylines are. I think you and I would vastly disagree on what "flashy" means, so why is it assumed the writers have the same definition as you?

Exactly @DittyDotDot! And I would further add that making a character ALWAYS right and ALWAYS sympathetic, while making the others around him look terrible is a greater sign of love than any number of "flashy" scenes. What is the point of getting to be the one jumping in to the pit say if eight years later large parts of the audience are still spend time learning to "forgive" earlier actions as several commenters in here have expressed. 

Edited by Wayward Son
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

What is the point of getting to be the one jumping in to the pit say if eight years later large parts of the audience are still spend time learning to "forgive" earlier actions as several commenters in here have expressed. 

Because the writers didn't realize that all the rest would not go away when Sam was given the huge hero moment culminating the arc.  They thought , IMO, that the one big self sacrificing act would negate in the viewers mind anything Sam did in the past. We are back to the writers really don't understand that the viewers often interpet things differently than they intend us to.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

What is the point of getting to be the one jumping in to the pit say if eight years later large parts of the audience are still spend time learning to "forgive" earlier actions as several commenters in here have expressed. 

Stuff like jumping into the pit in Jesus pose and rallying all the US hunters by himself IS the problem for me. The characters don`t always have to do everything together and there can be solo wins but the conclusion of the first five years and a Series-long "story" as hunters brought for the first time ever onto a bigger playground with other hunters are things I wanted done together. 

Also, TV is a visual medium and this is a genre action-adventure show, not giving the lead/favoured character the most flashy scenes would be an antithesis to me. It`s what draws the most to those kind of stories. Of course, you have shows like Smallville where Clarke was the lead and Lana the writer-favoured character so there had to be some balance.  

Quote

Depends on what you think the flashy storylines are. I think you and I would vastly disagree on what "flashy" means, so why is it assumed the writers have the same definition as you?

I think the stories the writers babble about most and most excitedly in interviews and at Comic Cons are where their interest lies.  

Edited by Aeryn13
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

1 minute ago, Aeryn13 said:

Stuff like jumping into the pit in Jesus pose and rallying all the US hunters by himself IS the problem for me. The characters don`t always have to do everything together and there can be solo wins but the conclusion of the first five years and a Series-long "story" as hunters brought for the first time ever onto a bigger playground with other hunters are things I wanted done together. 

I think the stories the writers babble about most and most excitedly in interviews and at Comic Cons are where their interest lies.  

Ditto

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

What is the point of getting to be the one jumping in to the pit say if eight years later large parts of the audience are still spend time learning to "forgive" earlier actions as several commenters in here have expressed. 

I never needed Sam to redeem himself for releasing Lucifer.  I needed Sam to acknowledge he treated Dean like crap and chose a demon over him. 

I never disliked Sam in s4.  I didn't like what he was doing, and I was looking forward to the redemption arc.  I thought it got off to a great start.  With Sam admitting he needed a break and Dean not being willing to just let it go.  But something changed after Fallen Idols.  Somehow things got twisted that it was Dean who somehow failed Sam,  and Dean who needed to learn to trust Sam. 

IMO, they redeemed Sam for the wrong thing. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

I think Amy's story had more holes in it than a screen door. 

 

But we were never shown on screen that she was lying. This show isn't normally that subtle. I think the way the episode was written, we were supposed to take her story at more or less face value, even though I'll agree it had some holes. What was left in question was whether or not she could be trusted not to do the same thing should a similar situation arise in the future. 

 

9 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

 

49 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

 

Yes, Amy had a sympathetic reason but that doesn't give her the right to decide someone deserves to die. 

 

Of course not, but it might legitimately be considered a mitigating factor in deciding whether she herself should be executed for that choice. It isn't like Sam had the option of sentencing her to jail time. In addition, I think when we're dealing with a creature that naturally lives off killing others, we are no longer in the realm of human morality. Obviously, if Sam and Dean encountered a kitsune who preyed on living humans as a matter of course, the fact that she was a natural predator wouldn't be a good reason for allowing her to kill others, but for putting her down as a danger. But the fact that the default for Amy's species -- like that of many carnivores -- is killing to survive complicates matters, IMO, especially as, if you take her at her word, her son actually did need living blood to survive. In that case, I'd say the relevant question is whether or not she is a future threat, rather than what she deserves. To me, the fact that she had apparently lived peacefully for many years, had a prior history that included saving Sam at the cost of her mother's life, and seemed genuinely to have killed as a last resort justifies giving her a second chance with the understanding that if she comes onto Sam's radar by killing again she isn't getting a third. It isn't risk-free, but neither is killing a pleading single mom to whom you owe a debt of gratitude and has some credibility when she makes a vow not to kill again, even under duress, a no-brainer or less than morally fraught choice. 

 

25 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

What's forgotten is that Sam did lie to Dean, too. 

I haven't forgotten that at all; my point is simply that it cuts both ways. 

 

25 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

This is coming off Sam almost killing himself and Dean because his hallcinations are got the better of him.  He's still zoning out and losing touch with reality.  Sam disappears in the middle of the night, its only natural to wonder if Sam did that of his own free will.  Same with defending Amy.  How is Dean supposed to know if Sam was in the right mind when he made that decision.

Sam's departures from reality were generally fairly blatant and occurred in pretty specific kinds of circumstances. There really wouldn't have been any precedent for assuming that Sam was hallucinating or compromised in the confrontation with Amy. Persuading Sam to let a small potatoes monster go through a fake sob story was very much not Hallucifer's MO. 

 

28 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

Maybe if Sam has been open, and told Dean what he was up right from the start, Dean might not have been suspicious.  If you give people reason to questions your actions, don't be surprised if they do.

But Dean wasn't shown to be at all suspicious of Sam's story. He was suspicious of Amy's, which is his prerogative, but if Sam can be blamed for acting unilaterally when he and Dean disagree, then I'm not sure why Dean can't be blamed for acting unilaterally when he and Sam do.

 

32 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

MO, Amy and Benny are only comparable on the surface. Because as i mentioned, Sam didn't know Amy at all.  He only knew what she told him.  With Benny, he and Dean fought side by side.  In that situation you come to learn and trust someone to watch your back.

Sam did known that Amy had killed her own mother to save him. That's pretty compelling. And if we're going by fighting side by side, what about Ruby, who had been consistently fighting on the right side, by all appearances, for months, including  putting her life in danger and allowing herself to be tortured for the good of the cause? In addition, even if Dean assumed Benny was a good guy, he was still a good guy with a powerful biological compulsion to kill humans if he fell off the wagon. Dean was, IMO, absolutely in the right not to kill Benny the second they left purgatory -- that would have been an awful betrayal -- but let's not pretend he wasn't making a choice to put humans in real danger. 

 

37 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

whereas Sam gets the real compliments that mean something "better hunter"

Bobby said that Sam was a "better hunter" "lately, anyway." Which, we soon learn, was only because Sam had no soul and was thus a totally ruthless killing machine who didn't even need to stop for sleep. That's hardly a "real compliment" for Sam, IMO.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Idahoforspn said:

On a different topic, the Dean storyline of Purgatory was cut way short. The major reason they GAVE was the extra cost for the special effects although I have my doubts that was it. There is arguably less money for special effects now with higher J2 salaries and other regulars in the cast. Season 13 has an alt universe that is very heavy on special effects and is not a Dean storyline. Do you think it will get cut short too? 

We know nothing about S13. Why do you think the alt universe is not a Dean storyline? Because he's not currently trapped there? Because, until they rescue Mary from there, I would surmise that it's going to be about getting BACK to the alt universe for the boys.  Do you see a difference between Sam and Dean's relationship to the S13 storyline?  I'm trying to figure out why Dean was highlighted in your question.  

Edited by SueB
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

It`s not unlike fanfiction (bad one) which this show has been like for some time now. If the fic writer stans a character too hard and writes them as a Mary Sue, they often come out looking like an asshole. Yet that is no way the intention of that writer. And often they will do their propping of their beloved at the expense of other characters, with full intention to trash them. And yet readers will look at the story and go "wow, that Uber Mary Sue sucks, I really kinda feel bad for the other guys".

If Sam is a Mary Sue, how do you explain how often he fucks up (and starts multiple Apocalypses) as @AwesomO4000 has pointed out?  And the whole not looking for Dean thing in S8?  Seriously.  If Sam were a true Mary Sue (Marty Stu, whatever) he would have singlehandedly gotten Dean out of Purgatory all the while still romancing Amelia and carrying Kevin on his back.  If that's your idea of the writers 'stanning' or 'favoring' a character, then I wish they liked Sam a little less and Dean a LOT fucking more.  

I think I'm getting a crick in my neck from all this head shaking.

If any character is getting "propped" lately it's Dean by showing that he's always proven right.  Now that's drifting perilously close to Mary Sue waters.

2 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

I think the stories the writers babble about most and most excitedly in interviews and at Comic Cons are where their interest lies.  

Ah, now I think I start to see - through a glass darkly as it were.  I don't read, watch, or pay any attention to writer's interviews.  I don't even watch a lot of Comic Con stuff (honestly, most of it's either pretty boring to me or 'watch the monkey dance' cringe-worthy) and when I do, it's the actors I want to see, not the writers/showrunners.  I'll watch the show and decide for myself what the most interesting stories are, thank you very much.  

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, companionenvy said:

I will never understand how people reconcile the belief that Sam is the obvious favorite of the writers with the belief that they are pretty consistently writing him as a total asshole.

Of course, I also find Sam a largely sympathetic character who has made major mistakes but has proven time and time again that he deeply loves his brother, so MMV. 

I know this was on the previous page, but I just have to say that I completely agree with this and it's one thing I don't understand about some people's complaints.  I also agree with everyone who has brought up the fact that the writers are the ones who usually show Dean as always being right and Sam as always being wrong.  I don't believe the writers have accidentally got it wrong or thought it would come off differently onscreen either because they kept doing it for many seasons.  It's intentional.  A lot of the time it's simply to cause a rift and some angst between the boys, but the show itself is shown through Deans point of view IMO.

 

For example, in season 4, I think they could have shown more of Sam's struggle when Dean was in hell.  Give the audience more of a feel for his character at what was probably one of the..... if not the lowest point of his life instead of a few short glimpses.  This was a real missed opportunity IMO and if the writers were really so pro Sam, I believe this would have been a high priority on their list.  Sam coping with the guilt of Dean's deal for his life.  Trying to switch the deal for Sam's soul out of desperation only to fail at that as well. Did Sam contact Bobby for help?  Did he distance himself from Bobby?  Was he lonely before Ruby came back into the picture?  Maybe give the audience a view of what life was like for him?  His emotional state could have been shown onscreen a lot more IMO. How broken and alone he most likely was.  Then poof, here comes Ruby who has helped him before and how he can only believe to be helping him now.  How she manipulated and used him in this broken state. How strong the addiction of demon blood came.  I would have liked to see more of this.  Instead, we generally see things from Dean's point of view IMO.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

1 minute ago, SueB said:

We know nothing about S13. Why do you think the alt universe is not a Dean storyline? Because he's not currently trapped there? Because, until they rescue Mary from there, I would surmise that it's going to be about getting BACK to the alt universe for the boys.  

I hope your right and I'm wrong.. I was just going by what I have seen this season which leads me to believe alt universe is more a Cas, Mary, Nephilim,  or even Luci storyline rather than Dean (or even Sam).

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

If any character is getting "propped" lately it's Dean by showing that he's always proven right.  Now that's drifting perilously close to Mary Sue waters.

If Dean this Season was a Mary Sue/Gary Stu, then the writers might have opposite world dictionaries. In terms of hunting they actually made Mary a Mary Sue by making her a totally overblown badass. Closely following is Sam, the idea-man, lore-man, planner and destroyer of several Big Bads as well as the newly minted leader of the US hunting community. 

Dean never remotely measured up to either this Season. Some "propping" that was. I sympathize with the neck pains.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

Dean never remotely measured up to either this Season. Some "propping" that was. I sympathize with the neck pains.

Except in the end, Dean was Right about the BMoL (Sam should have just listened to Dean in the first place).  Dean was Right about using the grenade launcher to get out of the bunker (Sam should have just listened to Dean in the first place.)   Dean was Right about still being able to undo Mary's brainwashing (Sam believed Toni when she said it was irreversible.  Toni should have never doubted Dean, who can undo the BMoL's preeminent brainwasher's work in a single afternoon!) I don't think it's the writers who have that Opposite World Dictionary.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Except in the end, Dean was Right about the BMoL (Sam should have just listened to Dean in the first place).  Dean was Right about using the grenade launcher to get out of the bunker (Sam should have just listened to Dean in the first place.)   Dean was Right about still being able to undo Mary's brainwashing (Sam believed Toni when she said it was irreversible.  Toni should have never doubted Dean, who can undo the BMoL's preeminent brainwasher's work in a single afternoon!) I don't think it's the writers who have that Opposite World Dictionary.  

No one acknowledged that though.  The one time, when Dean should have allowed Dean to stick to his prinicples he rolled over and followed Sam.  Then Sam got a big fancy speech about how he was a leader and they should all follow him, while Dean just gazed at him adoringly.

Saving Mary, it was all about Sam's pain and how much Sam suffered because of Mary's deal. 

If it wasn't for Mary, Dean would be dead at Ketch's hand. 

Guess i don't define that as propping.  MMV

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'll reply properly tomorrow, but for me the writers intention comes down to one simple question. Which is more likely; Four show runners and numerous different writers all made the mistake and accidentally made Sam look bad, or that the consistent propping of Dean at the expense of Sam and Cas is deliberate. In my opinion it is the latter! I think it is much easier to believe that four show runners and dozens of writers did the same thing purposely than it is to believe dozen of writers and multiple show runners kept making the same mistake and "accidentally" let things play out this way. 

Edited by Wayward Son
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Except in the end, Dean was Right about the BMoL (Sam should have just listened to Dean in the first place).

 

But Sam got to be the one to take them out beginning with the big hero speech. What good is it for Dean to be right when Sam gets to end the arc as the hero all alone.

2 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

 

 Dean was Right about using the grenade launcher to get out of the bunker (Sam should have just listened to Dean in the first place.)  

When didn't Sam listen to Dean. It was Lady Dead Now that didn't like the plan. Sam was never shown doubting Dean's plan.

2 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Dean was Right about still being able to undo Mary's brainwashing (Sam believed Toni when she said it was irreversible.  Toni should have never doubted Dean, who can undo the BMoL's preeminent brainwasher's work in a single afternoon!)

I'll give you that one. Dean doesn't give up when it comes to family. Hell fix it or die trying.

2 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

 

Share this post


Link to post

I like this look into the production of an episode from J2

I like the mention of how they pepper in the throughline of the season, like a mention of "Did you hear from Mom" to remind the audience that this is still important to the plotting of the season. So I presume that applies to "Did you hear from Cas" that Cas is important throughline of the season. as well if he's not in an episode.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

If it wasn't for Mary, Dean would be dead at Ketch's hand. 

If it wasn't for Dean, they'd all be dead at Mary's hand.  

12 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

MMV

Definitely.  We also disagree on what Sam's speech meant, so there's really no point in me saying any more.

10 minutes ago, Idahoforspn said:

When didn't Sam listen to Dean. It was Lady Dead Now that didn't like the plan. Sam was never shown doubting Dean's plan.

They wasted precious time (and air) following Sam's plan, which amounted to nothing.  If he'd just asked Dean what to do in the first place, they'd have been out a lot sooner and could have saved more American hunters, don't you know!

10 minutes ago, Idahoforspn said:

What good is it for Dean to be right when Sam gets to end the arc as the hero all alone.

Because the Mary Sue is always Right.  And Sam didn't get to be the hero all alone - he went in with a whole team of hunters.  Jodi shot Hess.  Dean was the solo hero who single-handedly saved Mary.  

Edited by RulerofallIsurvey · Reason: one more thing...
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

If it wasn't for Dean, they'd all be dead

They wasted precious time (and air) following Sam's plan, which amounted to nothing.  If he'd just asked Dean what to do in the first place, they'd have been out a lot sooner and could have saved more American hunters, don't you know!

And that has nothing to do with not listening to Dean which was what I was commenting about.

5 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Because the Mary Sue is always Right.  And Sam didn't get to be the hero all alone - he went in with a whole team of hunters.  Jodi shot Hess.  Dean was the solo hero who single-handedly saved Mary.  

Sam went in as THE LEADER of a bunch of hunters HE RECRUITED with his big speech. And IMO Jodi shot Hess because they didn't want Sam killing a human female which IMO is the same reason they had Ketch kill Toni.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

I'll reply properly tomorrow, but for me the writers intention comes down to one simple question. Which is more likely; Four show runners and numerous different writers all made the mistake and accidentally made Sam look bad, or that the consistent propping of Dean at the expense of Sam and Cas is deliberate. In my opinion it is the latter! I think it is much easier to believe that four show runners and dozens of writers did the same thing purposely than it is to believe dozen of writers and multiple show runners kept making the same mistake and "accidentally" let things play out this way. 

For me, the fact that Sam fans think Dean is the favored and the Dean fans think Sam is the favored actually tells me there is no one favored character by TPTB and the show is actually quite balanced. 

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

For me, the fact that Sam fans think Dean is the favored and the Dean fans think Sam is the favored actually tells me there is no one favored character by TPTB and the show is actually quite balanced. 

I don't know that it's necessarily balanced, but what I would like to know is what it is that draws us to one or the other.  There has to be some kind of reason why we sympathize with one more than the other, why we write flaws in one off as writing fails instead of intrinsic parts of the character, deny that said flaws even exist, defend the flaws, or accept the flaws and love the characters despite them.    

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

For me, the fact that Sam fans think Dean is the favored and the Dean fans think Sam is the favored actually tells me there is no one favored character by TPTB and the show is actually quite balanced. 

I think you just said "Everybody's wrong!"  That can't be right. Or can it?  LOL. 

Seriously though, I tend to agree with you.  I think everyone is just watching with their own eyes.  I don't think either one is necessarily favored over the other.  I think we're all just watching through our own lenses.  Which is fine.   But, if someone who had never seen the show before asked two people to describe it in a hundred words or less, they would probably think they were hearing about two completely different shows.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

1 hour ago, ILoveReading said:

I never needed Sam to redeem himself for releasing Lucifer.  I needed Sam to acknowledge he treated Dean like crap and chose a demon over him. 

I never disliked Sam in s4.  I didn't like what he was doing, and I was looking forward to the redemption arc.  I thought it got off to a great start.  With Sam admitting he needed a break and Dean not being willing to just let it go.  But something changed after Fallen Idols.  Somehow things got twisted that it was Dean who somehow failed Sam,  and Dean who needed to learn to trust Sam. 

IMO, they redeemed Sam for the wrong thing. 

I can see this, but I think Sam was redeemed for the right thing. He spent season 5 believing in Dean and telling him the truth even when it was difficult (like "Sam, Interrupted" and "My Bloody Valentine") when even in the past he might've lied or kept quiet. And he tried hard to gain Dean's trust back, in my opinion.

Yes, Sam did treat Dean like crap at times, and he probably should have apologized for that, but that isn't what these guys do apparently. Sam didn't get any significant apology for Dean making the deal, and he's not going to be getting one for anything Dean did or said to him in season 9 or 10 either.

No matter what happened later - and Sam's choices there were bad - Sam originally got involved with Ruby to try to save Dean. His intentions were not to hurt Dean. And if Sam had said "no" to Ruby when she said she could help Dean, how would Sam have lived with himself thereafter wondering "what if?" Dean was asking Sam to just let it happen, let him die. Would anyone think Sam could actually do that and not look horrible? And we have the answer to that in season 8, because apparently when Sam does nothing he does look horrible... good to know. Thanks Carver! <sarcasm>

What @catrox14 above says about fear makes a lot of sense. And Dean asking Sam to just let him die and Sam worrying - in season 3 - and then knowing - in season 4 - that he had absolutely no say in the matter or in changing the outcome must have been absolutely terrifying. So yes, Sam chose a demon over Dean... I think mostly because the demon was promising that with her, Sam could decide his own fate, he could do something - save Dean, kill Lilith, stop the apocalypse - rather than telling him there was nothing Sam could do, that is was all up to everyone else. Just let it happen. (You can't save me, don't use your powers, it's Dean's job to stop the apocalypse.) And sometimes a pretty lie sounds better than an ugly truth.

So Sam had to learn that doing something isn't all it's cracked up to be either, and I think he did. Sure the redemption could have been Sam learning that he had to sit on the sidelines and watch Dean save the world, but I don't think I would like the message that it would supposedly be a good thing that Sam had no control over his own life and fate and that somehow that was the lesson he was supposed to learn. Screw that, in my opinion. I think Sam needed a win.

And Sam having to apologize to Dean for "choosing Ruby" in my opinion would have been like Sam having to admit that he should have just accepted everyone else's plans for his life. Sam "chose" Ruby and it was the wrong choice, but it was his choice, and Sam admitted it was the wrong choice - and that he would "take it all back if he could." So, I think that was Sam's admission there. He admitted he made the wrong choice, but I don't think Sam should have had to apologize to Dean for daring to make his own choice in the first place. Dean had already chosen for Sam when he made the deal. I think it was okay for Sam to choose something else even if it ended up being wrong in the end. That's just my opinion on that one.

1 hour ago, Idahoforspn said:

Because the writers didn't realize that all the rest would not go away when Sam was given the huge hero moment culminating the arc.   They thought , IMO, that the one big self sacrificing act would negate in the viewers mind anything Sam did in the past. We are back to the writers really don't understand that the viewers often interpet things differently than they intend us to.

Interesting then that the writers themselves are often the ones who like to remind us of all of the mistakes that Sam made in the past. How many times did they bring up that it was Sam who raised Lucifer? Even random one-off hunters 5 seasons later are randomly bringing it to our attention. You would think that if the writers wanted it to "go away" maybe they would actually, you know, not keep bringing it up?

11 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

For me, the fact that Sam fans think Dean is the favored and the Dean fans think Sam is the favored actually tells me there is no one favored character by TPTB and the show is actually quite balanced. 

You are probably right. I jut wish that things being balanced didn't mean that often Sam is made out to be an asshat for no apparent reason.

I think what finally got me drinking the KoolAide was my being able to predict pretty well what's going to happened based on how it's going to make Sam look badly. I mean, I think my prediction track record has been pretty darn good these last few seasons. I remembered back a season or two getting one wrong - I don't now remember what it was I got wrong, but I remember being soooo happy that I was wrong, and admitting as such - but a lot of the stuff I've been predicting lately generally is what happens. Sadly, since I was hoping that Dabb would be different.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

For me, the fact that Sam fans think Dean is the favored and the Dean fans think Sam is the favored actually tells me there is no one favored character by TPTB and the show is actually quite balanced. 

I do agree with that.  Most of Sam's character flaws and being wrong all the time are in the narrative as a way to move the story along and not because the writers have anything against Sam.  And even though I do think a lot of the show is shown to us from Dean's point of view, I do think it was a way for the writers to balance it out bc Sam had more of a story arc in the beginning...... so they gave Dean the more emotional story arc with the narrative from his point of view.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, CluelessDrifter said:

I don't know that it's necessarily balanced, but what I would like to know is what it is that draws us to one or the other.  There has to be some kind of reason why we sympathize with one more than the other, why we write flaws in one off as writing fails instead of intrinsic parts of the character, deny that said flaws even exist, defend the flaws, or accept the flaws and love the characters despite them.    

To be honest, I tend to sympathise with them all. Even Mary. I understood what she was doing and why, even though I thought she had her head up her ass at times, I understood her. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:
Quote

Except in the end, Dean was Right about the BMoL (Sam should have just listened to Dean in the first place).

 

 

I'm not sure any of this is character propping at all.

Yep, Dean was right and yet it doesn't matter in the end.

Sam was wrong in the sense that he didn't cotton on to the BMOL's murderous ways as soon as he should have. Even if he did, he didn't know they were targets for execution, so I don't really see that Dean being right about the BMOL being bad news really makes Dean right and Sam wrong. 

And given the narrative throughout s12 was stressing that Dean had to let him and Mary do their thing, if Dean didn't do that then  Dean would be treating his family members poorly and not experiencing character growth as the show is defining it for Dean. I feel like it's kind of a wash on that front.  Maybe I'm misunderstanding something.

 

42 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Dean was Right about using the grenade launcher to get out of the bunker (Sam should have just listened to Dean in the first place

I don't get why this is even included. The grenade launcher never came up until Dean thought about it 2 days later. If Dean had wanted to use on Day 1 and Sam said no, then it's relevant. But he didn't nor did he attempt to prevent it.  Lady SheDead protested against it's use, not Sam.

41 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

 Dean was Right about still being able to undo Mary's brainwashing (Sam believed Toni when she said it was irreversible.  

Dean never said, 'This can't be done, Sam. Why should we trust her".  He just didn't trust her at all. So not sure of the relevancy to Dean right and Sam wrong on this one. They were both wrong to rely on her.

 

47 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Toni should have never doubted Dean, who can undo the BMoL's preeminent brainwasher's work in a single afternoon!) I don't think it's the writers who have that Opposite World Dictionary.  

No one should ever doubt Dean's tenacity to accomplish something when someone says Dean can't do something.  I'm not really sure why a villain doubting the hero...is a problem or character propping of Dean.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
24 minutes ago, CluelessDrifter said:

I don't know that it's necessarily balanced, but what I would like to know is what it is that draws us to one or the other.  There has to be some kind of reason why we sympathize with one more than the other, why we write flaws in one off as writing fails instead of intrinsic parts of the character, deny that said flaws even exist, defend the flaws, or accept the flaws and love the characters despite them.    

Do you really want to know?  If you really want to know, I'll tell you why I prefer Dean over Castiel over Sam.  If it was rhetorical, I'll go back to packing.  :-)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

It always surprises me just how much anger is directed at the characters of Sam and Dean as opposed to the writers who make them do and say all of these ridiculous, out-of-character things.  Both brothers have done some shitty things, made giant mistakes, etc., and it's the writers who made them do it.  I'm sure part of it is to add to the drama and the angst between the brothers and also between the fans, but I think most of it is just bad writing. 

Season 8 is always my go to example, because it was simply absurd to have Sam act the way he did.  He would never have just ridden off into the sunset and not even attempted to look for Dean.  He certainly would never have left Kevin to fend for himself against Crowley.  He wouldn't have been annoyed that Dean was actually alive.  His reaction to Benny was absurd, because Sam is the one who taught Dean that not all monsters are bad, so his immediate hatred of Benny just made no sense.  Not to mention involving another hunter whose mental capacity was sketchy at best.  And those are just a few examples from a few episodes in one season.  The writers have 12 years of that type of writing.

I certainly get angry and upset over perceived slights to my favorite character, but it's the writers I blame for all of it.  I just can't see them genuinely favoring one character over the other, especially when it comes to Sam and Dean.  And if they truly were doing that, I would like to believe that both Jensen and Jared would stick up for themselves and each other in those instances.  

I am a Dean fan, and I'd love for him to be in the center of all of the action and the hero in every scene.  But this is a show with two main characters, and multiple secondary characters, so that's never going to happen.   So instead, I wish the writers knew as much about their characters as the fans do, and cared about them even half as much.  Then maybe they wouldn't write these bullshit scenes, and we wouldn't have to constantly be battling over who's the favorite, who's neglected, etc.  Wouldn't it be nice to talk about some great scenes in every episode instead?  I have no issue with the characters being flawed, because all of us are flawed, but it should at least make sense.  It can't be that difficult.

Edited by MysteryGuest · Reason: Somehow my post got doubled...once was plenty!
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

52 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Except in the end, Dean was Right about the BMoL (Sam should have just listened to Dean in the first place).  Dean was Right about using the grenade launcher to get out of the bunker (Sam should have just listened to Dean in the first place.)   Dean was Right about still being able to undo Mary's brainwashing (Sam believed Toni when she said it was irreversible.  Toni should have never doubted Dean, who can undo the BMoL's preeminent brainwasher's work in a single afternoon!) I don't think it's the writers who have that Opposite World Dictionary.  

Sam never argued about the grenade launcher or Mary's brainwashing. I thought he TOTALLY supported Dean w/ the grenade launcher. In fact, I thought he gave the most adorable little smile while looking at Dean's glee.  And, at worst, Sam's plan was to take out BMoL, THEN worry about Mom. But he never said it's hopeless to Dean.  

You are right about Toni should never have doubted Dean -- but I think that's because our boys have been through mindscapes before. They've learned to understand the difference between reality and dream-walking. I was a LITTLE bummed they didn't go for the African Dream Root but I suspect Lady Toni's drugs were more efficient.

Don't get me wrong, I actually agree -- Dean's instincts are a major strong point.  Both his moral and hunting instincts.  He makes mistakes, but I'd bet on his gut more often than not.  I don't think Sam, OTOH, has shit instincts. I think Sam's logic is a strong point but also a weakness.  He can rationalize more easily if he can put together a thread of logic that in his opinion holds water.  That allows him to sort out complex issues but also makes him vulnerable to missing when he should listen to his gut and not his brain.  As an example, I'll give the BMoL.  Sam's first instinct was HELL NO.  He stood stiffly listening to their story and rejected what they were selling. UNTIL they brought out the hard data on how many vamps they had taken out.  Sam said he was taken in by their 'shiny toys.'  Personally, I think he was taken in more by their shiny data.  They were getting results and he ignored his instincts that they suck as people.  But the ability to overcome dislike of someone/something in order to accomplish good has been something they've done with great positive effect in the past.  Sam, in particular, DESPISED Crowley and worked with him anyway to get rid of The Darkness.  So, IMO, Sam's ability to adapt is both a strength and a weakness.  A strength in that they get a wider range of solutions. A weakness in that 'ends justify means' can be attractive sometimes, especially if it's reasonably camouflaged as some of the BMoL actions were .  

Wait.. I'm not bitching am I  ... I'll show myself out.... (interesting topic tho!)

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

You are probably right. I jut wish that things being balanced didn't mean that often Sam is made out to be an asshat for no apparent reason.

I think Sam and Dean are both made out to be asshats for different reasons and often no clear reason. I think Sam is often the victim of his errors in judgment and Dean is made out to be an asshat for how he behaves and IMO in some way who he is as a person moreso than for the decisions he makes, minus selling his soul for Sam and letting an angel possess Sam without Sam's consent. Hmmm. I need to noodle on this a bit more.  

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

It always surprises me just how much anger is directed at the characters of Sam and Dean as opposed to the writers who make them do and say all of these ridiculous, out-of-character things.  Both brothers have done some shitty things, made giant mistakes, etc., and it's the writers who made them do it.  I'm sure part of it is to add to the drama and the angst between the brothers and also between the fans, but I think most of it is just bad writing. 

Season 8 is always my go to example, because it was simply absurd to have Sam act the way he did.  He would never have just ridden off into the sunset and not even attempted to look for Dean.  He certainly would never have left Kevin to fend for himself against Crowley.  He wouldn't have been annoyed that Dean was actually alive.  His reaction to Benny was absurd, because Sam is the one who taught Dean that not all monsters are bad, so his immediate hatred of Benny just made no sense.  Not to mention involving another hunter whose mental capacity was sketchy at best.  And those are just a few examples from a few episodes in one season.  The writers have 12 years of that type of writing.

I certainly get angry and upset over perceived slights to my favorite character, but it's the writers I blame for all of it.  I just can't see them genuinely favoring one character over the other, especially when it comes to Sam and Dean.  And if they truly were doing that, I would like to believe that both Jensen and Jared would stick up for themselves and each other in those instances.  

I am a Dean fan, and I'd love for him to be in the center of all of the action and the hero in every scene.  But this is a show with two main characters, and multiple secondary characters, so that's never going to happen.   So instead, I wish the writers knew as much about their characters as the fans do, and cared about them even half as much.  Then maybe they wouldn't write these bullshit scenes, and we wouldn't have to constantly be battling over who's the favorite, who's neglected, etc.  Wouldn't it be nice to talk some great scenes in every episode instead?  I have no issue with the characters being flawed, because all of us are flawed, but it should at least make sense.  It can't be that difficult.

It always surprises me just how much anger is directed at the characters of Sam and Dean as opposed to the writers who make them do and say all of these ridiculous, out-of-character things.  Both brothers have done some shitty things, made giant mistakes, etc., and it's the writers who made them do it.  I'm sure part of it is to add to the drama and the angst between the brothers and also between the fans, but I think most of it is just bad writing. 

Season 8 is always my go to example, because it was simply absurd to have Sam act the way he did.  He would never have just ridden off into the sunset and not even attempted to look for Dean.  He certainly would never have left Kevin to fend for himself against Crowley.  He wouldn't have been annoyed that Dean was actually alive.  His reaction to Benny was absurd, because Sam is the one who taught Dean that not all monsters are bad, so his immediate hatred of Benny just made no sense.  Not to mention involving another hunter whose mental capacity was sketchy at best.  And those are just a few examples from a few episodes in one season.  The writers have 12 years of that type of writing.

I certainly get angry and upset over perceived slights to my favorite character, but it's the writers I blame for all of it.  I just can't see them genuinely favoring one character over the other, especially when it comes to Sam and Dean.  And if they truly were doing that, I would like to believe that both Jensen and Jared would stick up for themselves and each other in those instances.  

I am a Dean fan, and I'd love for him to be in the center of all of the action and the hero in every scene.  But this is a show with two main characters, and multiple secondary characters, so that's never going to happen.   So instead, I wish the writers knew as much about their characters as the fans do, and cared about them even half as much.  Then maybe they wouldn't write these bullshit scenes, and we wouldn't have to constantly be battling over who's the favorite, who's neglected, etc.  Wouldn't it be nice to talk some great scenes in every episode instead?  I have no issue with the characters being flawed, because all of us are flawed, but it should at least make sense.  It can't be that difficult.

Exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

. I think Sam is often the victim of his errors in judgment and Dean is made out to be an asshat for how he behaves and IMO in some way who he is as a person moreso than for the decisions he makes,

And I think that's a pretty fair assessment of the writing problems.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, CluelessDrifter said:

For me, the fact that Sam fans think Dean is the favored and the Dean fans think Sam is the favored actually tells me there is no one favored character by TPTB and the show is actually quite balanced. 

Eh, despite my posts on here, if anything I have a slight preference for Dean, who I certainly think is the more interesting character. I'm more reacting to a "the writers are mean to Dean" mentality that I find totally incomprehensible, as well as a tendency to vilify Sam well beyond what I think his actions warrant. 

I'll also admit that I see a clear pattern of Sam being ultimately shown to be wrong -- sometimes to disastrous consequences -- when potentially similar poor decisions by Dean either turn out to be the right call or don't wind up leading to a negative result. But I don't really think that it is because the writers hate Sam. I think it is because they often put plot before character, and because the large writing staff and multiple show-runners haven't always paid enough attention to what beats are becoming overplayed. In general, I think they like both characters, and depict them both as Big Damn Heroes. 

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

It always surprises me just how much anger is directed at the characters of Sam and Dean as opposed to the writers who make them do and say all of these ridiculous, out-of-character things.  Both brothers have done some shitty things, made giant mistakes, etc., and it's the writers who made them do it.  I'm sure part of it is to add to the drama and the angst between the brothers and also between the fans, but I think most of it is just bad writing. 

Season 8 is always my go to example, because it was simply absurd to have Sam act the way he did.  He would never have just ridden off into the sunset and not even attempted to look for Dean.  He certainly would never have left Kevin to fend for himself against Crowley.  He wouldn't have been annoyed that Dean was actually alive.  His reaction to Benny was absurd, because Sam is the one who taught Dean that not all monsters are bad, so his immediate hatred of Benny just made no sense.  Not to mention involving another hunter whose mental capacity was sketchy at best.  And those are just a few examples from a few episodes in one season.  The writers have 12 years of that type of writing.

I certainly get angry and upset over perceived slights to my favorite character, but it's the writers I blame for all of it.  I just can't see them genuinely favoring one character over the other, especially when it comes to Sam and Dean.  And if they truly were doing that, I would like to believe that both Jensen and Jared would stick up for themselves and each other in those instances.  

I am a Dean fan, and I'd love for him to be in the center of all of the action and the hero in every scene.  But this is a show with two main characters, and multiple secondary characters, so that's never going to happen.   So instead, I wish the writers knew as much about their characters as the fans do, and cared about them even half as much.  Then maybe they wouldn't write these bullshit scenes, and we wouldn't have to constantly be battling over who's the favorite, who's neglected, etc.  Wouldn't it be nice to talk about some great scenes in every episode instead?  I have no issue with the characters being flawed, because all of us are flawed, but it should at least make sense.  It can't be that difficult.

Yes, exactly this. We all get upset when our preferred character is written shitty but it's the fault of the writers who make them OOC in order to create more drama and destroying the show for the fans in the process. I'm a Dean fan but I've always enjoyed Sam as well. In seasons 4 & 8 I hated him so much but in actuality it was because the writers made him an asshole.

Edited by DeeDee79
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

48 minutes ago, Demented Daisy said:

Do you really want to know?  If you really want to know, I'll tell you why I prefer Dean over Castiel over Sam.  If it was rhetorical, I'll go back to packing.  :-)

Yeah, I do.  It was completely genuine.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
41 minutes ago, SueB said:

I thought he TOTALLY supported Dean w/ the grenade launcher. In fact, I thought he gave the most adorable little smile while looking at Dean's glee.  

I loved that scene! ?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
36 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I think Sam and Dean are both made out to be asshats for different reasons and often no clear reason. I think Sam is often the victim of his errors in judgment and Dean is made out to be an asshat for how he behaves and IMO in some way who he is as a person moreso than for the decisions he makes, minus selling his soul for Sam and letting an angel possess Sam without Sam's consent. Hmmm. I need to noodle on this a bit more.

Hee, I think you sort of answered your own question there... Because I wish it was just Sam just being the victim of his errors in judgement, but then there was the whole season 4, "Dean is weak" thing which was pretty much a hubris/judgemental/some other word that means stuck up that I can't think of right now behavior issue and there was season 8 and 9 where again, it was more than Sam not looking for Dean that was the problem, but the whole attitude and Benny hate, and Purge judgement, etc which again was a behavior issue.

And I agree that Dean gets these also - though different - but as you said, Dean gets choice issues sometimes also. He just tends to not get slapped down as hard on his judgement issues as Sam does - in general anyway.

So both things happen to both brothers a lot of the time.

As I've said one of the reasons that I liked season 6 and 7 so much was that there was - in my opinion - a minimum of this going on for Sam and Dean and that am and Dean were allowed to just be brothers with external forces to fight against rather than fighting each other. That didn't necessarily work out so well for Castiel, but at least I enjoyed his redemption and that it brought him closer to Sam, so I'll take what I can get.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
36 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

Eh, despite my posts on here, if anything I have a slight preference for Dean, who I certainly think is the more interesting character. I'm more reacting to a "the writers are mean to Dean" mentality that I find totally incomprehensible, as well as a tendency to vilify Sam well beyond what I think his actions warrant. 

I'll also admit that I see a clear pattern of Sam being ultimately shown to be wrong -- sometimes to disastrous consequences -- when potentially similar poor decisions by Dean either turn out to be the right call or don't wind up leading to a negative result. But I don't really think that it is because the writers hate Sam. I think it is because they often put plot before character, and because the large writing staff and multiple show-runners haven't always paid enough attention to what beats are becoming overplayed. In general, I think they like both characters, and depict them both as Big Damn Heroes. 

Okay.  Well said, but I think you were responding to a quote that I quoted?  ; )  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, DittyDotDot said:

For me, the fact that Sam fans think Dean is the favored and the Dean fans think Sam is the favored actually tells me there is no one favored character by TPTB and the show is actually quite balanced. 

Exactly.  

Apologies to all if my invisible snark with a side order of hyperbole font got lost in html translation. ;)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, AwesomO4000 said:

And Sam having to apologize to Dean for "choosing Ruby" in my opinion would have been like Sam having to admit that he should have just accepted everyone else's plans for his life. Sam "chose" Ruby and it was the wrong choice, but it was his choice, and Sam admitted it was the wrong choice - and that he would "take it all back if he could." So, I think that was Sam's admission there. He admitted he made the wrong choice, but I don't think Sam should have had to apologize to Dean for daring to make his own choice in the first place. Dean had already chosen for Sam when he made the deal. I think it was okay for Sam to choose something else even if it ended up being wrong in the end. That's just my opinion on that one.

Sam should have apologized for choosing her when Dean offered to go hunt Lilith if Sam would just step away. And he should apologize for sneaking around and lying. He should apologize for choosing his addiction/Ruby over all of his loved ones/friends who were telling him it was bad. 

Ruby was so shoved in that season that it makes me wince. The interesting part, going back to Mystery Spot, is the way Sam reacts to Dean's death. He is ruthless, he has a flat affect and hunts to find what he wants to get his brother back. Yes it was the trickster at that time but Lilith holds the deal and that's what he wanted - Dean's soul. Once he figured out he couldn't change what Dean had done, why wasn't he hunting her down instead of getting lost in a bottle? The passage of time in Mystery Spot was three months. When Dean came back from hell Sam was flouncing around with his demonic floozy in a hotel. I just can't see Sam doing that so close to Dean being torn apart or Ruby being so compelling that he would be that involved instead of going into the mindset of 'save Dean'. That was the mindset of season three for him, up to him being willing to turn himself into a monster. What happened to that?

Yeah, Sam does talk about going after Lilith but he takes his sweet ass time with it. I could see Dean maybe defusing his need a little with his return but Sam immediately turns around and ditches him for Ruby when Dean goes to confront Castiel. Sam's not even upfront about it and during a lot of that season I kept wondering "Where did Sam go and who is this asshat?"

I suppose one could argue that the demon blood was influencing him but we don't even know how long he'd been using it. Plus the effects of it I could see making Sam more focused on killing Lilith even if it was only revenge at that point instead of frolicking with hell spawn. I wish they had gone with an idea of Ruby as a partner in crime instead of his lover and dealer in the end, I guess. 

Season's Four major crime against both characters was the need for secrecy which stripped Sam of viewer sympathy and left Dean to muddle along without a brother that had his back, making him painfully broken to the point of wondering how he was even sane.

Just my thoughts.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Airmid said:

I wish they had gone with an idea of Ruby as a partner in crime instead of his lover and dealer in the end, I guess. 

And this is largely the reason why I preferred Ruby 1.0 vs Ruby 2.0. He didn't trust her and barely liked her and Ruby in turn treated Sam and Dean as if they were the village idiots but it was more palatable than the version we got in season 4. Then again my bias could be showing because I preferred Katie's depiction over Genevieve's *shrugs*

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Airmid said:

Sam should have apologized for choosing her when Dean offered to go hunt Lilith if Sam would just step away. And he should apologize for sneaking around and lying. He should apologize for choosing his addiction/Ruby over all of his loved ones/friends who were telling him it was bad. 

Ruby was so shoved in that season that it makes me wince. The interesting part, going back to Mystery Spot, is the way Sam reacts to Dean's death. He is ruthless, he has a flat affect and hunts to find what he wants to get his brother back. Yes it was the trickster at that time but Lilith holds the deal and that's what he wanted - Dean's soul. Once he figured out he couldn't change what Dean had done, why wasn't he hunting her down instead of getting lost in a bottle? The passage of time in Mystery Spot was three months. When Dean came back from hell Sam was flouncing around with his demonic floozy in a hotel. I just can't see Sam doing that so close to Dean being torn apart or Ruby being so compelling that he would be that involved instead of going into the mindset of 'save Dean'. That was the mindset of season three for him, up to him being willing to turn himself into a monster. What happened to that?

Yeah, Sam does talk about going after Lilith but he takes his sweet ass time with it. I could see Dean maybe defusing his need a little with his return but Sam immediately turns around and ditches him for Ruby when Dean goes to confront Castiel. Sam's not even upfront about it and during a lot of that season I kept wondering "Where did Sam go and who is this asshat?"

I suppose one could argue that the demon blood was influencing him but we don't even know how long he'd been using it. Plus the effects of it I could see making Sam more focused on killing Lilith even if it was only revenge at that point instead of frolicking with hell spawn. I wish they had gone with an idea of Ruby as a partner in crime instead of his lover and dealer in the end, I guess. 

Season's Four major crime against both characters was the need for secrecy which stripped Sam of viewer sympathy and left Dean to muddle along without a brother that had his back, making him painfully broken to the point of wondering how he was even sane.

Just my thoughts.

This is why I wished they would have spent a little more time on Sam's point of view in season 4.  I will say though... I think Sam took his sweet time going after Lilith because he wanted to make sure he was strong enough to finish her.  He had to utilize his powers and learn how to use them.

  • 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