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

[catrox14]

1 minute ago, gonzosgirrl said:

I still think if John were any part of her heaven, it would've come up at some point. When mentioning being with her 'babies', or Sam giving her John's journal, or literally any other time during the season, it would have been a kindness to tell her sons that their father was happy in heaven, even if she didn't know it wasn't necessarily his heaven.

I agree with this take. I just don't see them omitting Mary from John's Heaven unless he wasn't there.

I do understand telling a story in the negative space of things. Like not discussing John makes the audience ask "Where is John". 

Maybe it's not being answered purposefully for a future answer. But right now, I think the answer is that he is not in her Heaven and likely not in Heaven at all. 

[Katy M]

23 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

it would have been a kindness to tell her sons that their father was happy in heaven, even if she didn't know it wasn't necessarily his heaven.

She would be able to tell the difference between real and memories I would think.  So, even if she was having memories of John, and I'm sure she was, then saying he was there as a memory wouldn't be any comfort.

 

14 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

Like I said, I think of Heaven like a holodeck that's loaded with all one person's memories. You can load whatever memory you want or relived the same memory over and over and over again depending on your mood.

See, I don't think we've seen any evidence that is the case.  Sam specifically said he couldn't control it when Dean got mad that he wasn't in any of his memories.  Maybe as you're there longer you can control it, or maybe you can't.  I think you just have all your happy memories and Heaven puts them on random play.

[catrox14]

9 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

Sam's Heaven did have Dean, literally. They were reliving their memories together. I'm guessing they both have many memories that doesn't include the other and both have many memories that do and if they'd stayed any longer we might have seen more memories of them together. Remember, Dean's memory of his Mary didn't include Sam either.

I guess I've had a complete misunderstanding of Heaven then.

I was always of the understanding that Sam and Dean were on the Axis Mundi looking at each others' Heavens, meaning their happiest memories with Sam's being Thanksgiving with a non Winchester family, running away for two weeks with a dog, and leaving for college, which fits with Sam's overall life struggle of leaving the family. So I can see why his Heaven didn't have Dean or John. And no Mary because no memories of Mary. Alternately, Dean's Heavens were 4th of July with Sam, and Mary giving him pie and arguing with John on the phone. I thought Dean's Heaven didn't have Sam because Sam wasn't born yet? Or was it just a 4 year old Dean having Mommy all to himself. If Dean's Heaven includes Mary arguing with John on the phone that kind of says a lot about Dean's little 4 year old self and what he wanted most. 

Huh. I guess I've had it all wrong all this time.

[companionenvy]

I think John is in heaven -- or, at least, that he was intended to be in Heaven at the end of season 2. Hence the image of him ascending upwards after breaking out of hell. Also, John was (or was, at least, believed to be) a candidate for the righteous man who shed blood in hell. To me, that would mean he was only in hell because of the deal.

For all his faults, John was righteous -- which is different from saying he was good. But he had a ticket to heaven, pre deal with Azazel. 

I agree that real John wasn't in Mary's heaven. I don't see that as evidence that she didn't love him; Cupid's intervention or not, I do think they wound up caring deeply for one another. But SPN heaven's MO is being pleasant but empty. To me, that doesn't give much room for mess, complicated relationships, no matter how loving they may have been.

On that basis, I don't know that Sam and Dean would necessarily wind up in heaven together. Maybe it would depend on where they were in their relationship at a given moment. Because Chuck knows that's a complicated relationship. OTOH,, maybe the brodependency, would override everything else in their case.

[gonzosgirrl]

14 minutes ago, Katy M said:

She would be able to tell the difference between real and memories I would think.  So, even if she was having memories of John, and I'm sure she was, then saying he was there as a memory wouldn't be any comfort.

But it wasn't 'memory' for her. She was in Heaven with her babies, so if John were there with her, it would have been just as real to her. I absolutely recall feeling she was only talking about Dean and Sam,  and as I went to look up what she actually said, I'm wondering if I/we have this wrong anyway.

Quote

Dean: Mom, it's okay. All right? You're home now.

MARY PAUSES AND LOOKS SADDENED.

Mary: No.

DEAN LOOKS CONFUSED AND HURT BY HER WORDS

Mary: I'm not. I miss John. I miss my boys.

SAM WALKS IN AND JOINS DEAN AND MARY

Sam: We're right here, mom.

Mary: I know. In my head. But I'm still mourning them as I knew them. My baby Sam. My little boy Dean. Just feels like yesterday, we were together in heaven, and now...I'm her, and John is gone, and they're gone. And every moment I spend with you reminds me every moment I lost with them.

So is 'them' meant to refer to all three of them?

[MysteryGuest]

I don't see Sam and Dean as "soulmates", so I really think that SPN's Heaven is whatever they need it to be in the moment.  The reality of SPN's Heaven is that you're pretty much on lock down, unless like Ash and Bobby, you find a way to beat the system.  It's not that I don't want Sam and Dean to be in heaven together, but if they have to go there, I'd like their heaven to be more than just a recycling of their tragic lives.  Yes, they've had fun at times, and they love each other, but seriously, I hope heaven allows for a little bit of what could have been as well as what was, at least for their sakes.

5 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

So is 'them' meant to refer to all three of them?

Yes, I think some version of John was in Mary's heaven.

[catrox14]

8 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

So is 'them' meant to refer to all three of them?

 

8 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Mary: I know. In my head. But I'm still mourning them as I knew them. My baby Sam. My little boy Dean. Just feels like yesterday, we were together in heaven, and now...I'm here, and John is gone, and they're gone. And every moment I spend with you reminds me every moment I lost with them.

I didn't take this to mean they were all in Heaven together. I think Mary was of the mind that John was alive when she was resurrected. Then she found out that John was dead in the real world. 

To me based on how Samantha did the line readings she was saying that she is mourning her children, who she was just with in Heaven. Then she gets yanked out of Heaven to Earth and finds out that John is dead in this world, (gone)and her babies are gone because they are grown men now.

That's how I've always interpreted that scene.

[Wayward Son]

I’ve always assumed the Winchester’s are meant to be seen as soul mates. When he’s explaining about how heaven operates he describes “Winchester land” as opposed to “Sam land” “Dean land” and “Ashland”. Then there’s the fact the camera focused on the brothers after the mention of soulmates sharing heaven. 

 

However, I’m far from a Wincest fan. So I assume soulmates in the SPN verse are not exclusively romantic, but simply two people who are extremely close and just click  whether it’s as a romantic couple, family or friendship based bond. Obviously in the Winchester’s it’s familial.

 

And personally I don’t think anyone can watch this show and argue that for good or for bad Sam and Dean aren’t closer to each other than they are to everyone else.

[gonzosgirrl]

10 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

 

I didn't take this to mean they were all in Heaven together. I think Mary was of the mind that John was alive when she was resurrected. Then she found out that John was dead in the real world. 

To me based on how Samantha did the line readings she was saying that she is mourning her children, who she was just with in Heaven. Then she gets yanked out of Heaven to Earth and finds out that John is dead in this world, (gone)and her babies are gone because they are grown men now.

That's how I've always interpreted that scene.

That's precisely how I felt when I watched it, but reading it just now I had a different feeling.  I think you're right - it's Samantha's delivery and her whole vibe that made me see it the way I did.

[catrox14]

9 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

However, I’m far from a Wincest fan. So I assume soulmates in the SPN verse are not exclusively romantic, but simply two people who are extremely close and just click  whether it’s as a romantic couple, family or friendship based bond. Obviously in the Winchester’s it’s familial.

I guess for me, family implies soulmates. But I do think the Wincest crowd loves that idea that's for sure!

But then I don't believe in soul mates so for me it's all like "Sure, Jan" LOLOL

Just now, gonzosgirrl said:

That's precisely how I felt when I watched it, but reading it just now I had a different feeling.  I think you're right - it's Samantha's delivery and her whole vibe that made me see it the way I did.

Which I think was the intention of that scene. I think Mary thought John was alive because he wasn't in Heaven with her.

[catrox14]

Here is the scene for FWIW.

 

17 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

And personally I don’t think anyone can watch this show and argue that for good or for bad Sam and Dean aren’t closer to each other than they are to everyone else.

I think they are closer to each other but I don't think it makes them soulmates.

Edited November 20, 2017 by catrox14

[DittyDotDot]

31 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

But it wasn't 'memory' for her. She was in Heaven with her babies, so if John were there with her, it would have been just as real to her. I absolutely recall feeling she was only talking about Dean and Sam,  and as I went to look up what she actually said, I'm wondering if I/we have this wrong anyway.

So is 'them' meant to refer to all three of them?

I thought I remembered her saying she missed John too. And, yeah, my feeling always was there was a memorex version of John, just like there were memorex version of Sam and Dean. In fact, it makes no sense to me she could have one without the other if they're just memories anyway. 

6 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

But then I don't believe in soul mates so for me it's all like "Sure, Jan" LOLOL

I don't think it's meant to be the traditional idea of soulmates, but maybe more something they grant only to a very few simply because they aren't happy in their own afterlife with only their memories but need someone else. Like, maybe they figured Sam and Dean just wouldn't follow the rules if they didn't let them share an afterlife and would be causing problems so it was just easier to placate them by granting them joint Heavens? 

And, maybe the only reason the Novaks were granted "soulmate" status was because Jimmy agreed to be Castiel's vessel and that gave him a special request for his family to join him in his afterlife? 

So, maybe soulmates aren't necessarily people who are destined to be together and/or true loves, but just what Heaven calls these special cases who are granted the privilege of sharing?

1 hour ago, Katy M said:

See, I don't think we've seen any evidence that is the case.  Sam specifically said he couldn't control it when Dean got mad that he wasn't in any of his memories.  Maybe as you're there longer you can control it, or maybe you can't.  I think you just have all your happy memories and Heaven puts them on random play.

I don't know, my impression based on Pamela commenting her Heaven was one long concert at he Meadowlands, was that you could control it, but there was probably a learning curve.

[Myrelle]

Quote

 

I love this. I never thought of the Dean/Benny/Cas correlation to Dean/Jack/Cas - interesting and thought-provoking observation!

I wish these writers were forced to watch all episodes of the show, from the beginning and each week as long as they are on staff. I mean the finished product, what 'we' see. SO much could be improved with continuity and canon-compliance. Even in just the few episodes with Jack, both fetus!Jack and teenage!Jack, they are sending mixed signals and outright contradictions in character and behavior. So frustrating! Like, Jack is powerful enough to awaken an angel in the Empty - something they declare has never happened in millenia, yet they don't even attempt to have him revive a newly-dead human. He raised Cas because he was so emotional after hearing Dean blame him for his death. His emotions were running at least as high with the guilt of killing this human - and they don't even try, because they need him to angst and run away. Do better, show.

 

Brought over from the tombstone episode thread.

ITA with this post-especially the last sentence.

They should all have watched the entire series, by this point, IMO. It's part of their job, again IMO. They can all hop onto their twitter accounts concerning anything show-related, afterwards.

I can't take anything they say or do seriously any longer(not writing-wise, anyway) since learning that it's not a requisite aspect/part of their job description.

Pfffffffftttttt to whomsoever it is BTS who does the hiring of the writers and thinks that it's A-Ok and okey dokey to just watch "some" of the episodes(of this show especially!) before they write one word for it.

I was pretty much stunned when one of them openly admitted to this lack.

Edited November 20, 2017 by Myrelle

[Res]

5 hours ago, Myrelle said:

Brought over from the tombstone episode thread.

ITA with this post-especially the last sentence.

They should all have watched the entire series, by this point, IMO. It's part of their job, again IMO. They can all hop onto their twitter accounts concerning anything show-related, afterwards.

I can't take anything they say or do seriously any longer(not writing-wise, anyway) since learning that it's not a requisite aspect/part of their job description.

Pfffffffftttttt to whomsoever it is BTS who does the hiring of the writers and thinks that it's A-Ok and okey dokey to just watch "some" of the episodes(of this show especially!) before they write one word for it.

I was pretty much stunned when one of them openly admitted to this lack.

I strongly agree with this and finally concluded that Kim Manners was mainly responsible for the heart of the show we all love. RIP KIm. No one comes close to replacing your genius.

[FlickChick]

35 minutes ago, Res said:

I strongly agree with this and finally concluded that Kim Manners was mainly responsible for the heart of the show we all love. RIP KIm. No one comes close to replacing your genius.

I wish I could like this x1000! I often wonder what the show would be like today with his influence. Such a HUGE LOSS!

[nightwing877]

Yeah Kim Manners is greatly missed, and if he was still here the show may have been better with his influence and even the X-Files revival too if he lived to see that return.

I'm curious how many writers will shift over to the spin-off if it happens. Unless some writers spread between both. It depends on if SPN continues with 23 episodes for S14, or both SPN and WS are between 13-16 episodes each.

[AwesomO4000]

On 11/18/2017 at 1:16 PM, catrox14 said:

So IMO, mission accomplished that Dean looks far worse than Sam in s8. 

In your opinion, and I'm not saying that it isn't valid, but in my opinion... no. Because I think that Jack is going to be a cause of some problems - be they unintended or not - while Benny entirely wasn't and the narrative made sure to show us just how not a problem he was. Not only was Sam wrong about Benny, he broke up a potential family - and family is very important in this verse - and Benny then sacrificed himself to help save Sam. To me, it's not even close. Sam was made to look much worse in season 8, because it wasn't just Benny, there was not looking for Dean, abandoning Kevin, insisting Dean give up Benny, no apologies from Sam (until season 11)... on and on. For me, it was a deliberate bus runover for his character. At least in my opinion.

I still expect Dean to come out being right in this one in that I think Jack is going to cause problems.

[gonzosgirrl]

28 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

In your opinion, and I'm not saying that it isn't valid, but in my opinion... no. Because I think that Jack is going to be a cause of some problems - be they unintended or not - while Benny entirely wasn't and the narrative made sure to show us just how not a problem he was. Not only was Sam wrong about Benny, he broke up a potential family - and family is very important in this verse - and Benny then sacrificed himself to help save Sam. To me, it's not even close. Sam was made to look much worse in season 8, because it wasn't just Benny, there was not looking for Dean, abandoning Kevin, insisting Dean give up Benny, no apologies from Sam (until season 11)... on and on. For me, it was a deliberate bus runover for his character. At least in my opinion.

I still expect Dean to come out being right in this one in that I think Jack is going to cause problems.

The difference is, Sam was wrong about Benny, but Benny didn't go out and hurt/kill anyone because Sam hurt his feelings. Dean may well be 'right', but he's going to be blamed for Jack going 'bad' because he did cuddle the spawn from the jump. It's already been read into canon by Sam.

[Wayward Son]

8 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

The difference is, Sam was wrong about Benny, but Benny didn't go out and hurt/kill anyone because Sam hurt his feelings. Dean may well be 'right', but he's going to be blamed for Jack going 'bad' because he did cuddle the spawn from the jump. It's already been read into canon by Sam.

No, they did worse than Sam hurting Benny’s feeling. The only instance of Benny killing people, we were shown on screen, was the result of Sam setting Martin on Benny. So instead of Benny killing because Sam hurt his feelings Benny killed because Sam set up a scenario where Benny needed to kill in order to not only defend his own life, but the life of his great grand daughter. 

 

Id hardly call that an advantage to Sam when comparing the situations. 

[MysteryGuest]

I have to agree that unfortunately for Sam, he wins the worst character assassination trophy with season 8.  It was so bad for so many reasons...not looking for Dean, ditching Kevin, being an ass about Benny, and the whole Amelia debacle.  Whatever they were trying to prove by having Sam make those choices failed miserably.  I can barely watch season 8 for that reason, and I get annoyed with the writers all over again every time I try to.

As for this season, I don't think that Dean's going to be blamed if Jack suddenly turns evil, which I personally don't see happening.  I'm more inclined to think that a la Cas, Jack will do something that he thinks is helping, and it will have catastrophic consequences.  

[gonzosgirrl]

12 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

First, I was excited from the “Then” portion that the episode was going to pick up right where Advanced Thanatology left off with the boys seeing Cas.  But it didn’t.  Suddenly, there’s Dean hunting in a cemetery with some other officer of the law.  Now, especially since the last episode ended on Dean, and this one started with Dean, I was really disappointed at the delayed gratification of seeing both guy’s reaction to finding Cas.  If I were more a conspiracy theorist, I might think it’s because TPTB hate Sam, but I don’t really think that, at least not so far, so I’m going to chalk that up to a bad directing move.  The director of this ep probably didn’t even know that the last one ended with only Dean’s reaction to seeing Cas and how that might come across to some fans, especially with this episode starting with only Dean hunting and not showing Sam.  Mind you, I’m not making this Bitch vs. Jerk.  But I will say, if it had been the opposite – there would be a lot of angry Dean fans.  

 

The 'conspiracy theorist' label seems condescending. Most arguments I've seen regarding the idea that Dean has been treated badly since Dabb took over have been supported by examples (right here in this thread), not the wild hair rantings that 'conspiracy theorist' implies. And they are a lot more obvious than who shows up on camera first, especially since both reactions to Cas were shown, and with equal enthusiasm on both Dean and Sam's part. So the idea that 'if' it had been opposite is really a moot point except to make it a B v J thing.

12 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

The season 8 parallels are pretty strong this season, and they continued for me in the episode as well with Dean saying that he didn’t even know Cas could be brought back.  Again, this isn’t Bitch vs. Jerk.  I actually think Dabb is doing a really good job with it.  Dabb has shown the real ramifications of losing someone (Dean losing Cas and Mary versus Sam losing Dean) and not knowing where they went (The Empty verus Purgatory) and thinking it wasn’t even possible to get them back with showing Dean’s descent into depression and hopelessness.  That’s what we should have seen at the beginning of S8 with Sam.  But since I can’t go back and change the past, I’m glad Dabb hasn’t given Dean the Carver treatment Sam got.  I know there are some people who will never even consider the possibility that maybe Sam had a breakdown or bout of depression after Dean exploded in a mess of black goo and disappeared, and that wasn’t Dabb’s fault, but I think with showing what Dean has been going through this season so far, Dabb, in his own way, is trying to make up for it.  Because if we can watch Dean and say, ‘yeah, all that makes sense as to why Dean would feel this way’ then imo, we should be able to think about Sam’s reactions at the beginning of S8 a little more sympathetically also -  especially since Sam was all alone back then and Dean at least has had his brother through this.  Possibly veering into BvJ territory for a split-second: it does make the treatment Sam got from Carver look that much worse by comparison.  But like I said, I’m glad Dabb hasn’t done that to Dean and overall, it’s almost as if he’s trying to make up for what Carver did.  

 

This whole idea of softening what Sam did by making Dean do virtually the same thing is maybe the worst in a long list of things I hate about Dabb's showrunning. It's beyond anvilicious and lazy. Dabb isn't giving Dean the treatment Sam got, he's doing worse. Sam abandoned Kevin to begin the season, but Dean not only wants to kill this woobie child, he has to be mean and heartless while doing it. Dabb had Sam put the words right there in canon - if Spawn goes bad, it's because of you. Dabb had a therapist tell Dean he is doing grief wrong. Carver gave Sam golden-tinted memories and girlfriend, and a mature way of handling grief, not to mention a convenient 'agreement' not to look for each other. Just because a portion of the fandom rejected that nonsense, it's still what was written into canon. Just like Dean being an asshole to a 'kid' is now. And Sam got the trials arc to make up for it. Just because he failed in the end, he was still the 'hero' of the season - if that's punishment, then please, please punish Dean the same way this season.

And for the record, if they *had* shown Sam to have experienced the same kind of grief and despair, and then expressed any remorse for being a dick* like Dean has after only 4 episodes, then yeah, I would've felt less gobsmacked by his actions. But he didn't, and throwing Dean under the bus now doesn't make up for it, it just gets Dean run over by a bus.

*He not only didn't apologize, he doubled down on it, threatening to walk away from Dean if he didn't get over it

It's also worth mentioning that Sam didn't look for a way to save Dean, ever, and never would have if Dean didn't find his own way back a year later. We're still counting Mary's disappearance in days, and Dean is already softening in his belief that she's dead/gone.

Edited November 23, 2017 by gonzosgirrl

[MysteryGuest]

I just don't see where the show has relentlessly shown Dean to be an asshole this season in regard to Jack.  Yes, he initially thought of him as a monster, and his first instinct was to put him down for the safety of everyone.  Obviously, that didn't happen, and within a very short time, Dean has come around to believing that maybe there is hope for Jack to be good.  I'm sure he's still wary, but that's Dean.  He's been kind to him, and even complimentary.  And even when he was being "mean" to him, it was more in a big brother/little brother kind of way.  He certainly wasn't abusive.  Telling him to sleep on the couch and read a book isn't exactly cruel and unusual punishment.  Neither is warning this unknown entity that if he does go dark side, he will do what he can to stop him.  

I'm just not seeing how Dean's depression and early attitude toward Jack are some albatross that he'll be forced to wear for the rest of the season.  If there's one thing that I think this group of mediocre writers has managed to do well this year is to show two legitimate perspectives, and to not make either brother be "wrong".  It doesn't mean they won't argue and say stupid things to each other, but I've been pleasantly surprised that it didn't turn out the way I thought it would with the brothers constantly at odds.  

They might be trying to show some parallels to season 8, but as far as I'm concerned, season 8 is an aberration that should be stricken from the SPN lore.  

[DittyDotDot]

11 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

They might be trying to show some parallels to season 8, but as far as I'm concerned, season 8 is an aberration that should be stricken from the SPN lore.  

I don't think they are purposely paralleling S8 in order to even out the playing field here, but I do think they learned their lesson from their mistakes in S8 and have done a very good job of showing and giving both Dean and Sam valid points of view instead of just skipping it like they did in S8.

And, personally, I don't see the whole Dean's a dick to Jack thing either. I think Dean had a very valid point of view, as did Sam. ::shrugs::

Edited November 23, 2017 by DittyDotDot

[gonzosgirrl]

19 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

I just don't see where the show has relentlessly shown Dean to be an asshole this season in regard to Jack.  Yes, he initially thought of him as a monster, and his first instinct was to put him down for the safety of everyone.  Obviously, that didn't happen, and within a very short time, Dean has come around to believing that maybe there is hope for Jack to be good.  I'm sure he's still wary, but that's Dean.  He's been kind to him, and even complimentary.  And even when he was being "mean" to him, it was more in a big brother/little brother kind of way.  He certainly wasn't abusive.  Telling him to sleep on the couch and read a book isn't exactly cruel and unusual punishment.  Neither is warning this unknown entity that if he does go dark side, he will do what he can to stop him.  

I'm just not seeing how Dean's depression and early attitude toward Jack are some albatross that he'll be forced to wear for the rest of the season.  If there's one thing that I think this group of mediocre writers has managed to do well this year is to show two legitimate perspectives, and to not make either brother be "wrong".  It doesn't mean they won't argue and say stupid things to each other, but I've been pleasantly surprised that it didn't turn out the way I thought it would with the brothers constantly at odds.  

They might be trying to show some parallels to season 8, but as far as I'm concerned, season 8 is an aberration that should be stricken from the SPN lore.  

Logic and reasonable, objective thinking support what you say to be true. I believe it, 100%. But out there in the social media world, and in the words put into characters' mouths (and rolled eyes/heavy sighs) by the writers, the general concensus is Dean was a dick to a child.

 

ETA: I''ll go on record here and say, if there is no reference made to S8 and Sam not looking for Dean, by the end of this season, I'll eat my hat. They already had Sam's pointed 'you want to move on, from Mom,' line and look of dismay. I'm 100% sure that won't be the end of it.

Edited November 23, 2017 by gonzosgirrl

[ahrtee]

4 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

I don't think they are purposely paralleling S8 in order to even out the playing field here, but I do think they learned their lesson from their mistakes in S8 and have done a very good job of showing and giving both Dean and Sam valid points of view instead of just skipping it like they did in S8.

And, personally, I don't see the whole Dean's a dick to Jack thing either. I think Dean had a very valid point of view, as did Sam. ::shrugs::

I think the issue here is not whether you (or any other fans) think that Dean isn't being a dick/that both Sam and Dean have valid points of view.  You can tell by reading any random post in this topic that people see things differently, and most likely you're never going to get them to agree on anything (except season 8, I think, though for different reasons...) :)

But the point here is that the narrative *says* (not just shows, which is open to interpretation) that Dean is behaving dickishly.  Sam and the therapist call him out on it, and Dean himself apologizes for behaving "like a dick."  So whatever the fans choose to see or choose to believe, I think we have to accept that that's what the writers see and what they intended.  (ETA: As @gonzosgirrl just said while I was typing....)

[Aeryn13]

Quote

 If there's one thing that I think this group of mediocre writers has managed to do well this year is to show two legitimate perspectives, and to not make either brother be "wrong".

While I think they - mercifully - made the "Dean is a dick" portion of the Season short and it petered out at the end of episode 4, I completely disagree that they portrayed two legitimate viewpoints. Or even attempted to do so. 

Dean being wary of Jack was clearly shown to be wrong and mean. It was a stance supported by nothing onscreen. Jack is like a baby who just wants nougat and love. It seemed completely unjustified to say even one mean word to him. The therapist in the crappy ep 4 was clearly a writer`s mouthpiece and if she knew what Jack was or not, she showed how he SHOULD be treated. With more doubling down on Kelly the sainted mother.  

As for Mary and Cas, since the audience knew they were alive, again, Dean`s viewpoint was completely invalidated from the start. 

In no way, shape or form did I see the writers giving any of his thoughts and opinions and feelings any legitimacy. Sam was supposed to be right 100 %, that was crystal clear to me through episodes 1-4.  

Even I couldn`t take Jack as any viable threat seriously. Not like he was portrayed. So, Lucifer`s spawn or not had no meaning there. Being wary of him or even side-eyeing him seemed downright crazy and unsupportable. 

So if that was the writer`s attempt at presenting a legitimate viewpoint on both sides? I can`t even fathom that.

Quote

Logic and reasonable, objective thinking support what you say to be true. I believe it, 100%. But out there in the social media world, and in the words put into characters' mouths (and rolled eyes/heavy sighs) by the writers, the general concensus is Dean was a dick to a child.

I think it is kinda like the difference between a story in book form and as a movie or TV show.

On paper, Jack being what he is would justify Dean`s POV and actions. And if it was just on paper, it might be viable. But TV/movie is a different medium. And in that medium, it was no longer viable. They aged Jack up physically but for all intents and purposes left him like a baby. And if he had been physically left a baby as well, you can bet that even Dean`s reaction would have been softened. Why? Because people in general are primed to expect that towards a baby.

And everything about the portrayal of Jack`s character primed the audience for exactly the reactions they had: Dean is so mean to him. poor baby Jack, wrap him in a blanket, stop it, Dean, Jack is good. 

I can`t blame anyone for those reactions because IMO those are the completely normal reactions towards those scenes. It`s like showing someone kicking a puppy and expecting people not to go "stop that, that poor little thing". They adressed every "care for the woobie" instinct people have with the character. Dean was never gonna get even a shoe in with that fight with the way HE was portrayed. The very idea is ludicrous to me. That`s not how people in general will react. 

Edited November 23, 2017 by Aeryn13

[Pondlass1]

Writers are protective of Sam for the most part and Jared is pretty good at those tolerant sighs and eyerolls. 

In this scenario think they should equal it out a bit and emphasize that Sam is only being 'nice' to Jack because he might be useful in terms of opening the rift. If mommy dearest wasn't stuck in the AU Sam would be just as wary of Jack. Sam uses people.

Jack is sweetness and light (and cute according to online fans) at the moment.  He will turn.  He'll be bad for a while, but will have an epiphany and kill Dad.  I think TPTB will keep him around.  He's proven popular and he can come in handy.  He and Dean will be best buds too.

Dean will always be the Stubborn Dick most episodes.  But writers do seem to make him 'right' most of the time... thing is, folk just don't take notice.

[MysteryGuest]

15 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Logic and reasonable, objective thinking support what you say to be true. I believe it, 100%. But out there in the social media world, and in the words put into characters' mouths (and rolled eyes/heavy sighs) by the writers, the general concensus is Dean was a dick to a child.

I'll refrain from getting on my social media soapbox, but I still say it comes down to perspective.  I think the biggest faction of fans who are annoyed with Dean for being so mean are the ones who were instantly enamored with Jack.  So it wasn't so much about Dean, it was all about this shiny new toy who's been shown as either frightened as a kitten, or smiling with childish wonder.  Where the writing has failed, IMO, it's in not giving Jack's character more depth.  If he truly wonders why he doesn't feel anything, like he told the psychiatrist, then we should be seeing more evidence of that.  Instead what we see is just this sweet young man who only wants to please everyone.  It's as if the writers themselves forgot that Jack is the son of Lucifer.  

Since I can't think of any reason for even creating the character of Jack other than to add to the drama of the "will he or won't he be evil" bit, they definitely need to give us more of the "could he be evil" side.  To show him only as good and then suddenly flipping him to bad is going to look stupid.  Any bad things he's done so far have been done innocently in an effort to please, but they need to show more of Jack's internal struggle, if he actually has one.  Are they trying to show him as this naive entity that could be led astray by anyone due to his innocence, or as someone who might have darker tendencies but can learn to fight them rather than surrendering to them.  I think I'd be more interested in seeing the latter.

[catrox14]

54 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

I just don't see where the show has relentlessly shown Dean to be an asshole this season in regard to Jack.  Yes, he initially thought of him as a monster, and his first instinct was to put him down for the safety of everyone.  Obviously, that didn't happen, and within a very short time, Dean has come around to believing that maybe there is hope for Jack to be good.  I'm sure he's still wary, but that's Dean.  He's been kind to him, and even complimentary.  And even when he was being "mean" to him, it was more in a big brother/little brother kind of way.  He certainly wasn't abusive.  Telling him to sleep on the couch and read a book isn't exactly cruel and unusual punishment.  Neither is warning this unknown entity that if he does go dark side, he will do what he can to stop him.  

I'm just not seeing how Dean's depression and early attitude toward Jack are some albatross that he'll be forced to wear for the rest of the season.  If there's one thing that I think this group of mediocre writers has managed to do well this year is to show two legitimate perspectives, and to not make either brother be "wrong".  It doesn't mean they won't argue and say stupid things to each other, but I've been pleasantly surprised that it didn't turn out the way I thought it would with the brothers constantly at odds.  

They might be trying to show some parallels to season 8, but as far as I'm concerned, season 8 is an aberration that should be stricken from the SPN lore.  

Sam is clearly being shown to be the kind, loving, understanding, sympathetic and supportive person to Jack, the innocent nephilim child(if powerful and in a man's body.

Canonically, the narrative structure has shown both explicitly and implicitly that Dean fired his gun at the child before it did anything intentionally wrong. He promised to kill said child, has called him things like 'freak' and "the anti-Christ" and told him to sit and stay as if he were a dog, and being generally an asshole to Jack.

That throughline is supported when most of the characters around Dean, who are either trusted as in Sam, with the "He's messed up because of you" whilst at the same time begging Dean to help him save Jack and believe in Jack like Dean did with Sam re the demon blood (which LOLCANON no, did not happen but okay). That riot act from Sam  to Dean is being framed as a good thing and that Sam is correct and Dean is in the wrong and cruel to boot.  Sam compared Dean's treatment of Jack to John which was intenfed to be considered BAD and cruel.  The Shifterpist was presented as an objective, mental health professional who observed that Jack is "terrified" of Dean along with upsetting Sam so much that he had to leave the room.

It's all pretty terrible for Dean because Jack is considered by the narrative to be a child. That's the difference between s8 and now. Sam wasn't framed as mentally, emotionally, and potentially physically being cruel to a child. 

Edited November 23, 2017 by catrox14

[MysteryGuest]

3 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Sam is clearly being shown to be the kind, loving, understanding, sympathetic and supportive person to Jack, the innocent nephilim child(if powerful and in a man's body.

Canonically, the narrative structure has both shown both explicitly and implicitly that Dean fired his gun at the child before it did anything intentionally wrong, he promised to kill said child, has called him things like 'freak' and "the anti-Christ", told him to sit and stay as if he were a dog, and being generally an asshole to Jack.

I honestly don't see this.  I think Sam was absolutely using Jack, even if he does relate to him on some level because of his past.  The original scene with the pencil did not paint Sam in a good light, I didn't think.  When Dean called him out on his using of Jack, I do think he thought about it and realized it was at least partly true.  And last week he was actually the one who looked the most afraid of Jack.  Maybe I've just gotten to the point where I watch the show with my internal editing switched on.  It automatically compensates for awkward phrasing, inexplicable facial expressions, etc.  Or maybe it's just that I'm so damn happy to not have to deal with the Lucifer love fest of last season, that anything is a vast improvement over that.  Because for the most part, I'm really enjoying this season, and I never expected that I would.

[DeeDee79]

10 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

Because for the most part, I'm really enjoying this season, and I never expected that I would.

I second this statement in large part because the BMOL completely ruined last season for me almost as much as all of the Lucifer love.

[DittyDotDot]

1 hour ago, ahrtee said:

But the point here is that the narrative *says* (not just shows, which is open to interpretation) that Dean is behaving dickishly.

I understand you believe the narrative says that, but I don't think that's at all what the narrative states, in fact, I believe the narrative is stating the opposite.

[ahrtee]

12 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

I understand you believe the narrative says that, but I don't think that's at all what the narrative states, in fact, I believe the narrative is stating the opposite.

DEAN; Problem?
MIA: You just upset your brother so much, he had to leave the room. And Jack? Look at him. He’s terrified of you. 
DEAN: Nah. No, we’re simpatico. Right, kid?
JACK: (flatly) We’re simpatico.
MIA: Convincing. You’re angry, Dean. 
DEAN: And?
MIA: And if you don’t want to do anything about it, that’s your business. But you’re aiming it at everyone in your life. 

In my experience, that's pretty strong criticism coming from a therapist, who generally aren't supposed to take sides. It also seems aimed at making him feel guilty, instead of turning it to something designed to make him think instead: something like "why do you think you're so angry?" or "what do you hope to accomplish by saying things like that?"  Or even, to paraphrase you, "I understand that you believe that, but Sam seems to think otherwise.  Do you think you two can tell each other why you feel that way?"   

She was saying that his behavior was wrong (not necessarily what he was thinking); and, in that last statement, she was blaming him for upsetting the others.  

Then, back at the bunker there was this:

[DEAN hands SAM a bottle of beer.]
DEAN: Listen, man, back at, uh, Mia’s, I was out of line. I’m sorry for being a… a dick lately. 
SAM: Thanks. 
DEAN:  And maybe you’re right, about the kid. I mean, he tries. I’ll give him that. And he tapped his powers, saved our ass, so that’s a win.

I honestly don't see that that needs any interpretation if you take the text as canon.  Dean got called out for upsetting others, he apologized for being a dick, and he acknowledged that Sam "might" be right about Jack, at least in part, which is going against everything he'd said so far.  And Sam thanked him instead of contradicting him or even offering him some leeway because of the circumstances, as they've done many times in the past. 

There was nothing else *written* to show that Sam or anyone doesn't think that Dean was being a dick.  If you want to interpret it in some other way based on body language, expressions or tone of voice, that's fair; but it's not canon.  
 

[DittyDotDot]

4 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

I honestly don't see that that needs any interpretation if you take the text as canon.  Dean got called out for upsetting others, he apologized for being a dick, and he acknowledged that Sam "might" be right about Jack, at least in part, which is going against everything he'd said so far.  And Sam thanked him instead of contradicting him or even offering him some leeway because of the circumstances, as they've done many times in the past. 

Again, I understand that's your perspective. Mine is that I don't consider the overall narrative to be spoken through a couple characters' own POV. The overall narrative has clearly shown and told me that while Dean may have not been wary and untrusting of Jack, he clearly gave him a chance. Which I don't consider dickish, myself.

[Aeryn13]

I think when the writers want to get certain messages across, they do so through mouthpiece characters giving speeches and making those points, IMO rightfully assuming that next to this scenes that show maybe something else or something more will pale and be forgotten.

Though overall, in that case, I will even say that the therapist reacted to the situation. I mean, she was shit at her job and a real professional would probably groan at the blame-game and immediate taking sides, but Dean was the confrontational one there, Sam woobie-stormed out and Jack sat there with tear-filled manga eyes. It was the antithesis of subtle. 

I felt bad for Jack and Dean is by far my favourite character so he still retained my sympathy also. My annoyances lied more with Sam and his incessant "we have to be on the same page" pushing. But if Dean wasn`t a character I liked or remotely cared for, I would 100 % agree with the "dick" moniker. What amounts to kicking baby animals is dickish.

It was just annoying in the first place that the show laid it on so thick. Making Jack sympathetic and making Dean wary - neither had to go so far in one direction that it literally looked like the baby-animal-kicking. 

And I have a bad history with this show and it trying to say Dean is a dick at various points. Compared to him acting like a dick every now and then. Which every character ever does. Even the goodiest of two-shoes.  

[gonzosgirrl]

33 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

DEAN; Problem?
MIA: You just upset your brother so much, he had to leave the room. And Jack? Look at him. He’s terrified of you. 
DEAN: Nah. No, we’re simpatico. Right, kid?
JACK: (flatly) We’re simpatico.
MIA: Convincing. You’re angry, Dean. 
DEAN: And?
MIA: And if you don’t want to do anything about it, that’s your business. But you’re aiming it at everyone in your life. 

In my experience, that's pretty strong criticism coming from a therapist, who generally aren't supposed to take sides. It also seems aimed at making him feel guilty, instead of turning it to something designed to make him think instead: something like "why do you think you're so angry?" or "what do you hope to accomplish by saying things like that?"  Or even, to paraphrase you, "I understand that you believe that, but Sam seems to think otherwise.  Do you think you two can tell each other why you feel that way?"   

She was saying that his behavior was wrong (not necessarily what he was thinking); and, in that last statement, she was blaming him for upsetting the others.  

Then, back at the bunker there was this:

[DEAN hands SAM a bottle of beer.]
DEAN: Listen, man, back at, uh, Mia’s, I was out of line. I’m sorry for being a… a dick lately. 
SAM: Thanks. 
DEAN:  And maybe you’re right, about the kid. I mean, he tries. I’ll give him that. And he tapped his powers, saved our ass, so that’s a win.

I honestly don't see that that needs any interpretation if you take the text as canon.  Dean got called out for upsetting others, he apologized for being a dick, and he acknowledged that Sam "might" be right about Jack, at least in part, which is going against everything he'd said so far.  And Sam thanked him instead of contradicting him or even offering him some leeway because of the circumstances, as they've done many times in the past. 

There was nothing else *written* to show that Sam or anyone doesn't think that Dean was being a dick.  If you want to interpret it in some other way based on body language, expressions or tone of voice, that's fair; but it's not canon.  
 

As much as I hate this post, I also wish I could like it a hundred times, because it's nothing but the truth. The bolded statement most of all demonstrates what we, the audience, were supposed to take away from all of it, since Sam is the de facto protagonist of the show. His tacit acceptance of Dean's apology says it all.

[companionenvy]

3 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

since Sam is the de facto protagonist of the show.

The last two episodes (among others) don't support this, IMO.

[MysteryGuest]

Dean was being kind of a dick in the doctor's office.  He had a major chip on his shoulder, which even if that's how he truly felt, he should have worked harder to disguise considering why they were there to begin with.  They were working a case, not signing up for family counseling.  So to me, Dean was apologizing for that, specifically, and then because he is who he is, he offered to at least consider that Jack might not be evil.  I personally like that Dean is introspective enough to actually look at his behavior and apologize for it, and to actually pay attention to Jack's behavior instead of just seeing what he wanted to see.  I don't see that as a bad thing.  There have been times when having him apologize has upset me (last season, to be specific), but this particular scene didn't bother me at all.  

[gonzosgirrl]

4 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

The last two episodes (among others) don't support this, IMO.

But it's always been the show's stance, no? And whether he is or not, he has been our witness to Dean's grief and how he's handled it in these first episodes, and he accepted an apology for it. The Shifterpist was just icing on the nasty cake.

More than anything else, I hate Dabb & Company for making me have to write posts ostensibly trying to convince people Dean is being shown to be a dick. He's the ultimate troll.

[ahrtee]

28 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

Again, I understand that's your perspective. Mine is that I don't consider the overall narrative to be spoken through a couple characters' own POV. The overall narrative has clearly shown and told me that while Dean may have not been wary and untrusting of Jack, he clearly gave him a chance. Which I don't consider dickish, myself.

Maybe the problem here is the definition of narrative. I'm using it here (because there have been way too many fights about what is considered canon on this site) as strictly *what is written/spoken on the screen,* not what may or may not be implied through the direction, facial expressions/gestures, or viewer's preference.  That would be open to personal interpretation.  Spoken words are not, unless they're contradicted on screen to show that there's a difference of opinion among the characters.  And what was spoken here is that Dean has been behaving like a dick, and all the characters involved (in this case, Sam, Jack, the therapist and Dean himself) all agree.    This is not to say that it won't change in time (as others are afraid :) ) to make Sam apologize and Dean be right; but for now, this is canon.  

So I would say that your perspective is as valid as anyone else's (I actually agree with it myself!) but it's not canon.  The text as written (and quoted) is.  

[MysteryGuest]

But the doctor was calling Dean out on his behavior in that moment, not of a lifetime, or even the past week.  She only saw what went on in that room, and Dean was acting like an ass.  He was even rude to the doctor in the beginning, making faces and comments about keeping a diary as a little girl.  He was being a dick.  And when he pushed it far enough that Sam blurted out what was actually bothering him, even Dean was surprised.  And in my opinion, that's what he was apologizing for, not for having a different opinion about Jack.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

He was even rude to the doctor in the beginning, making faces and comments about keeping a diary as a little girl. 

I can`t believe as a therapist she hasn`t encountered that kind of behaviour many times before and know how to deal with it without the prissy blame-game which should be a no-go.  

Quote

More than anything else, I hate Dabb & Company for making me have to write posts ostensibly trying to convince people Dean is being shown to be a dick. He's the ultimate troll.

Heh. Yes, that`s true. 

And he was the original troll. It was his (and Loflin`s) first outing that led to the huge "Dean is a dick" kerfluffle where Kripke had to publicially state that wasn`t the point of the episode (it was just badly written apparently so people were taking it away) and the writers actually respected the character. I think Dabb was genuine, even then. 

Edited November 23, 2017 by Aeryn13

[MysteryGuest]

5 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

I can`t believe as a therapist she hasn`t encountered that kind of behaviour many times before and know how to deal with it without the prissy blame-game which should be a no-go.  

I didn't think the actress was all that great in the role, but I know that doctors I've been to tend to call you on your shit.  Even when it's just you and them in the room, let alone in some sort of group environment.  

We can certainly argue these points till the cows come home, but I'm not sure we'd get anywhere.  We each see what we see.  I won't deny that the writers/show runners have made the characters do and say things that I've absolutely hated and found to be completely out of character.  But I just can't get behind the idea that it's because they favor one character over another.  I don't think that Sam always comes off looking right and just, so I can't agree that the writers are propping up his character at Dean's expense.  If that's truly what they're trying to do, they're failing miserably at it.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I didn't think the actress was all that great in the role, but I know that doctors I've been to tend to call you on your shit. 

In TV world, though, I`ve seen about a gazillion scenes like this and it`s usually - for extra drama - with the character who is grumpy and hates counceling/thinks it`s hogwash. And they make that clear by being extremely snarky and rude. In none of those scenes does the therapist go for the bait. Because they are meant to be seen as cool, smooth and too smart to fall for that. 

This scene on the other hand was so clearly written as another "this is a message from your friendly writers, speaking through whatever-her-name-was: Dean is a dick who is doing grief wrong, M`kay". Urgh.

Irony of it all is, I fully expected Missouri to be that character, going by her previous episode. But she was kinda sympathetic and non-bitchy with Dean. So I had braced myself for episode 3 and it turned out better than expected. Then I actually did expect better for episode 4 because I figured: grief councelling, there will be some catharsis for Dean. And what happens? They make up a new bitchy character (incidentally a black woman again) who is new Missouri. Nooooooooo. Then we get to Billie back who previously was also pretty haughty with Dean and now she is Death, she is downright sympathetic and even somewhat helpful without being sacharine at all.

So the characters I expected much worse from were nice and the one I didn`t see coming annoyed the crap out of me. Up is down and left is right. *shakes fist*

And I do actually agree that this Season (so far) is better than 12.B. I can`t say I find it good or really all that entertaining but it`s just better than a gigantic black hole of suck. Remains to be seen if it stays that way, 12.A wasn`t so bad either. However, episode 4, I really, truly hated. And the therapist scene was a big reason why.    

[catrox14]

This is possibly the greatest conspiracy theory yet and I am fully on board this theory.

[catrox14]

... And Kripke replies clearing up exactly...nothing.. well I guess he did.

Edited November 25, 2017 by catrox14

[Jeddah]

If the writers were obligated to use the awful “Native Americans curse white people by having bugs attack them” premise because of Kripke, then I do blame him for how bad that episode was. Even Kim Manners couldn’t totally save that one.

However, I’ve never thought that episode was a total loss. The writers put some nice details in there. There’s a lot revealed about each brother’s relationship with John. And  Dean got to use the steam shower!

In my opinion “Bugs” isn’t even the worst Season 1 episode. I’d give that title to “Route 666.”

[Aeryn13]

I thought Bugs was harmless, stupid but harmless. 

Quote

If the writers were obligated to use the awful “Native Americans curse white people by having bugs attack them” premise because of Kripke

I think you could work something from even that premise. Buffy IMO managed to pull off a pretty funny and well-written episode with a similar concept, granted, without the bugs but they had "funny syphilis" instead.  

Kripke was just always more the guy who was into "cool horror moments". Apart from a scene here or there in Bloody Mary, I just never thought the show could pull them off. It was always too goofy (and too network to get true horror in). 

[catrox14]

I think both Bugs and Route 666 get a bad rap but there are far worse episodes of SPN than those two. I mean they are almost charmingly bad at this point in the show's history. Some things in later seasons are SO MUCH WORSE LOL

B.It's  funny that Kripke talks about how Singer told him to not do it and he should have listened but Singer was totally fine with a stupid racist ghost truck LOL. (yes I know his wife wrote it)

Bugs was bad because the pacing made no sense and I do not do arachnids even if they look totally fake. It was poorly constructed and the whole live bees debacle makes it worse. Time is weird in the episode too. I did like that it juxtaposed how the brothers saw each other and both had misconceptions like most families.

Route 666 had a good idea but egads find some other way to a good ghost story around racism in the South, without using a stupid haunted truck.  I liked learning that Dean had a real love interest, told her the truth about his life and was dumped for it. I can see why he chose to avoid commitment after that and just went with casual relationships henceforth, in general.  And it was another nice tie in to the through line that the brothers really didn't know each other if they grew up together. Like most families. 

[Pondlass1]

Often in Supernatural (and other shows too) night and day lengths seem off.   Bugs had the shortest night ever, if I remember correctly.  And there's times when it's day - then it's night.