SuperNormal: Public Appearances, Tweets, Media And Other Social Media Of The SPN Cast

[catrox14]

FWIW, my comment wasn't  a criticism.  It was a OMG! Dean would totally sing this in his car and it would be beautiful and Jensen is singing it and...it's perfect. 

 

A little thought bubble popped into my mind this morning watching another version of this from the beginning when Rob is introducing a singer named "J-Dawg" . Now I'm sure that's just Rob having fun with 'surprising' the crowd with Jensen coming on to sing BUT what if some of Jensen's singing is because Jensen, Richard and Rob are also making a  little indie film on the side during the cons about this character played by Jensen who is trying to become a singer.  I don't even know why I thought that but I did. I feel like that is something they might do.

 

Anyhoo here is a better version of Jensen singing at VanCon.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kszHhHBjJm8be.com/watch?v=kszHhHBjJm8

Edited August 30, 2015 by catrox14

[7kstar]

New nickname...JDawg.  lol

 

It's so cool to the see the confidence he now has.  It would also be cool if he released some music but that may not happen until after SPN, unless some of his friends get him to do it.  Austin does have a big night life and music scene so I imagine he is happy living there when he can.  I enjoyed Austin but alas couldn't find a job so I had to move away.

[SueB]

So last weekend he got asked a couple of music questions and one of them was from my daughter in the M&G. She asked if the nerves ever go away when he's singing? (she's sung at a few public venues -Narional Anthem so she's intrigued by his ability to sing). His response was essentially never. He gets nervous singing for friends in little gatherings. The Inly time he's not nervous is when he's singing with someone like Jason Manns and playing backup. Then he can come in a drop out and it's okay. Regarding the album, his answer was still 'no' but I think he said also, at least not yet. He's a perfectionist, I suspect, when it really matters. And he's not going to do something unless he's going to do it right per his standards. Which are pretty exacting I expect.

BTW Catrox, I never thought you were criticizing. I think anyone (man or woman) who can pull off A Simple Man lifestyle is to be admired. Jensen OR Dean. Also....IA, let's put Knox in a temporal loop of grotesque deaths.

When he said JDAWG....All I could think of was DDAWG nickname Sonny used.

[7kstar]

I tell my students that actors/singers learn to see the nerves as energy.  He is comparing himself to someone and has a high standard.

 

I say this as I was always compared to my mom.  She sings really well.  But so do I, but growing up I was told how I didn't sing as well.  Away from my mom, I improved I took voice lessons but those words didn't go away.  I'm also a perfectionist.  Which sucks by the way.

 

So I can get why Jensen feels and reacts the way he does.  He got more compliments on his acting.  He knows he can act and is comfortable with the film version.  But I bet Stage would still be scary as he hasn't had to do that in a long time.

 

I really wish us creative types were supported more as it is such a rough road.  But I always cheer when I see someone getting closer to having the confidence they can do what they want.

[Demented Daisy]

Nerves go away?  HA!  15 + years of musical theatre here, plus copious amounts of karaoke.  Every week, I started the karaoke by singing the dj's standing request -- "Pictures of You" by The Cure -- and got nervous every single time.

 

It's easier, though, when you can open up and really let loose, though.  Billy Idol's "Rebel Yell" and "Uprising" by Muse were much easier to sing, for me, because I could open my throat and belt it out.  The quieter, more intimate, thoughtful songs require more control.  Much tougher.

 

And, of course, singing in a group is infinitely easier.  :-)

[7kstar]

Nerves go away?  HA!  15 + years of musical theatre here, plus copious amounts of karaoke.  Every week, I started the karaoke by singing the dj's standing request -- "Pictures of You" by The Cure -- and got nervous every single time.

 

Nerves never go away.  See it as something positive.  Your alert you've got energy to use.  My worst performances were always the ones that I felt calm and didn't have the butterflies.  I see that nervous energy as a good sign. Instead of thinking oh my God...Focus on "Yep I'm alive and ready."  Trust it will work out even when you think crap..."I forgot the first line." :) 

 

If I stop performing and then start again, it is really rough at the beginning.  I'm out of practice and the voices in my head are NOT nice.  Down right mean and scary.  Health issues create other problems as well.  But sometimes I try again.  Last year I did a performance for my advance Theatre Class.  I knelt on my knee.  When it was over I thought crap how am I going to get up.  I didn't have my cane.  One of the kids asked about it.  I had to say, yep it wasn't a good idea.  lol.

 

Also when I train actors -  group work is always easier.  Why because you've got a partner to focus on.  Focus on your partner and the audience fades.  In solo's you've got to see the audience as your partner and YES that is much harder.

 

Why are we afraid...It's simple.  The negative self talk we tell ourselves and sometimes it's been told to us over and over.  I always love when I get, "Wow, you can really sing.  No I mean it, you should be doing it professionally."  But like Jensen I'm much more nervous about singing than acting.  ;)

 

Jensen has talked about how he now embraces the love.  I think he has realize that the fans aren't out to tear him down if he misses a note.  Thus he is improving and sharing more. 

Edited August 30, 2015 by 7kstar

[SueB]

I think your right.

[Demented Daisy]

I think that singing brings a level of vulnerability that acting does not.  You're in character when you're acting.  Deliver a line wrong and you'll get a chuckle or a brief moment of confusion.  Then you recover and move on to the next line.

 

But hit a note wrong and your confidence is shot.  You spend the rest of the song trying twice as hard to get every note pitch perfect and you get in your head.  It just gets worse.  And, if it's the wrong place and the wrong time, you have hundreds of people staring at you, cringing, whispering... and you know what they're thinking.  You know what they're saying.  It's brutal.

 

I've had to remind people more than once that professionals, singers who have been performing for decades, get notes wrong.  They forget lyrics, or sing them out of order.  We're all human, we all make mistakes.  Fans have a tendency to elevate and it's hard to live up to those expectations sometimes.  You want to be perfect every time, but statistically, it's impossible.  But, I promise, the audience will forgive much faster than you will.

 

You know what they say.  You gotta shake it off.  ;-)

[7kstar]

There is a difference between singing solo's and acting.  But music also has a acting part to it.  The lyrics, the emotions, the mood. 

 

I know I have to get out of my head and just feel it.   I don't think I can describe it.  I've heard plenty of professionals sing badly on live TV. 

 

There is a famous opera singer that got denied being part of the MET Opera, 8 times.  The 9th time is the one that they decided to take a risk with her.  Just imagine if she had quit.  We would never have heard of Beverly Sills.

 

Both have a form of fear and require a sense of letting go.  Going off pitch or off beat is one of the most intimidating parts of singing solos.  Singing with a choir no biggie, at least for me.  But we judge all artists from all the professions, and everyone of them is human, and makes mistakes.  I wish I had heard that when I was a youngster instead of the nonsense I got.  In some ways it's amazing that anyone can overcome the issues and go on stage.  I also deal daily with trying to get teenagers to go on stage.  They wouldn't believe that acting is easier...It boils down to how much do you love it.  Singing around the house is easier, but sometimes I do wish I could do it live again. ;)  Maybe someday...  :)

[AwesomO4000]

In solo's you've got to see the audience as your partner and YES that is much harder.

 

It must be different for lecturing / teaching before a crowd, because for me, I do better when I can see my audience and I am getting feedback and somewhat using them as my "partner." I am rarely nervous anymore when speaking in front of a crowd... and the odd thing is that it was never really a gradual thing. When I was a graduate student, I used to be petrified. I would have to memorize my talk word for word and I dreaded it so much, and when I as done I would be like a deer in headlights.

 

And then the oddest thing happened. After I graduated, I didn't speak publicly for a long while - probably 10 years or so, but then one day my boss asked me to speak to a garden group: just about 25 people or so, but considering I hadn't done it in a while, I probably should've been nervous. Weird thing was, I wasn't. Even when I had trouble getting the printouts ready and hadn't even really practiced or had notes, I was fine. I gave an informed talk and engaged the garden group, leaving enough time at the end to take them into the garden and show them some of the things that I had just talked about. Weird thing was it was almost easy. The only thing that I can think of was the context. This time, I was talking about a subject I knew well, and I wasn't being judged or graded or compared to other students. This was my job, and they were looking to me to teach them something.

 

Odd thing was, that didn't really change, even when I would later speak in front of much larger audiences. To keep things slightly on the intimate level then, I generally find people in the audience in different sections whom I see "connecting" with me. They will be nodding along or smiling at something I said. I'll find one or two in each section and I'll make eye contact with them at various times while I am talking throughout the hour or so that I am speaking. So I guess they are very much my "partners" and their positive energy helps me stay engaged and focused. In general, I look forward to speaking, especially if it's about one of my favorite topics (I talk about quite a few different things, some more dear to my heart than others.) Heh - my major professor from grad school would be shocked if he knew that I'm now known for my speaking, considering how bad I used to be at it.

 

On the rare occasions when I am nervous, however, it's usually when I must do another kind of talk called a webinar. With this kind of talk I do not see my audience at all and they do not see me. They are looking at my PowerPoint presentation while I talk to them. If I'm lucky, I'll get a texted question which shows up on my computer screen in a box in the corner. If I'm not lucky, it will be me talking for an hour with no feedback. It's almost creepy for me, because I have no energy to work from, no "partners" in the audience. It's just me, in a room, alone, seemingly talking to myself for an hour and worrying whether the people in the various audiences (in different parts of the state usually) are even listening to what I'm saying or whether they're texting on their phones and bored to death. Without feedback, my mind is free to worry. Why aren't they texting any questions? Are they even listening? Did they smile at my funny story/joke/etc.? Weirdly, it's similar when I leave a message on a message machine - I hate doing that. It's so weird for me, and again like I am talking to myself, except I know that I'm being recorded and that makes me nervous. I won't do radio interviews for the same reason - I can't see my audience... and what if I mess up live on the air, and don't know I messed up, because there's no feedback?

 

So for me, with a live audience involved, apparently I'm all about wanting to see them and working off of their signals. What can I say: I like the audience rapport and like to feel comfortable with them and establish that ease so that they can feel comfortable with asking me a question if needed during the talk.* The other type of time I get just a little bit nervous is when I have to give a very short talk - like 8 to 10 minutes. Because I'm used to filling an hour's time or more (and even with an hour I sometimes have to hurry along if the audience has been question-y), getting everything said in a short period of time is somewhat daunting for me.

 

That said: singing? I'd likely be really, really nervous and need some liquid courage to do it, especially since I know my voice isn't exactly the best, or even good... despite what my hubby might say (he's biased - heh). If I was a good singer, I might not mind though. I'd probably still use the connect-with-certain-audience-members trick though. I tend to like that feedback.

 

* Though not all speakers prefer that. Some would rather the audience members wait until the end. I don't mind being interrupted by a raised hand, because often I speak about a lot of things in an hour's time, so I wouldn't want them to forget their question.

Edited August 31, 2015 by AwesomO4000

[7kstar]

I speak all the time in front of groups without any pre planning.  Speaking is easy for me.  Because I'm talking about what I know.  I quickly put it in place and go.

 

Singing is different because I did get some abuse and it took me a long time to heal.

 

I have helped others talk in front of people and usually after awhile, they are like it's not that bad.  I think the problem is we do these things when we are young and someone says the wrong thing and we make it the truth.  It's just a moment and sometimes you nail it and other times you don't.

 

Jensen's got the thick skin for acting, he is working on it for singing.  I mean look at Taylor Swift.  She gets all kinds of kudos or cut downs depending on which side your on.

 

There isn't a pill or quick fix for stage fright...It takes time and you have to do it to get better.  If you start around age 4, by the time your 20 your a pro.  If you start at 20 you still need time to get over it.  Some have it easier than others, especially if you have support and like getting in front of others. 

 

I should shut up, but as you can see this is one topic I know a lot about,   So I can talk about it a lot.  :)

[catrox14]

A little snippet from VanCon. J2 talking about Christmas traditions. The best thing is Jensen's dead on impersonation of his little girl. It's a the very end

 

 

in Tumblr form.  Oh gods.  Look at his hand...he's wiggling it just like a toddler would trying to keep their balance. GUH. /dead of cute

https://33.media.tumblr.com/e6a87d471021d4e411798b2078a7c151/tumblr_ntxp5oJxXU1rstq9ro1_250.gif

 

[SueB]

Full panel is up:

 

The author has put an annoying watermark in the center of the screen.

 

/rant on:

I GET exactly how hard it is to do this.  I've done it.  And I really appreciate that someone risks their con experience to get an excellent video. Takes the time to edit, etc.. and upload.  It's a major effort and a pain in the ass. And it's the only way for many fans (especially international or those unwilling to knock off liquor stores to pay for tickets) can see it.  It's a highly appreciated SPN public service.  I also understand how irritating it is when people steal your work.  But putting the watermark over their faces or in such a way that it's constantly IN OUR FACE (for photos and video) just irritates the hell out of me.  No one is making money off of your work.  Someone is stealing credit, yes, but .... unless it's the same person over and over again... what the hell does it really matter?  I don't want the watermark gone so I can use the pictures, I just find it incredibly irritating.  So... I listened to it in the background, popped in when I wanted to but found I enjoyed the live periscope version more.  And for photo's? I ts individual's names on Tumblr just so I don't have to see it and zoom past it on Twitter.  Maybe it's me, but I don't see the point of doing this nice thing and providing pictures and then ruining them with huge watermarks.  Something discrete in the corner... no worries.  But it's like LOOK AT ME - I DID THIS - GIVE ME PRAISE!  Bleech.

/rant off

Edited September 2, 2015 by SueB

[7kstar]

Put it in the bottom not over the faces.  I feel the same way @Sue B.  So I wind up searching for someone else and you know what I can find them.  Sometimes better quality or seats.  Sometimes not, but I appreciate the ones that don't ruin the experience by the watermark over the people you want to see.

 

I wish they would understand that I would want to watch theirs more if it didn't have the mark.  There is plenty of ways to sign it which still makes the experience fun for those that can't be there.  But I can't rant to the person, since I haven't ever gone and I doubt I will be able to do so.  :(

[Commando Cody]

It's the mark of disdain. 

[Commando Cody]

I don't get it either. When people do that, I search for another video.  I think it would be harder to crop a name out of a video, so I don't know why they put their copyright smack in the middle.  I put my copyright on photographs in the lower right corner. It doesn't help if they crop the photo. I've seen that happen a lot. 

 

One of the photos I posted on Twitter of Jared, ended up on Tumblr. I would not have known this, except someone tweeted about it with my Twitter name. After I thanked him for letting me know, he deleted the tweet.  At least the stuff on Tumblr gets linked back to the original tweeter.  Chad Lindberg re-tweeted one of my photos. I thought that was cool. 

[7kstar]

The one your talking about always does this.  She is even being praised so she will not stop.  I do find it irritating but sometimes she is the only one.  So I will listen while doing something else.  

 

I get they don't want there stuff stolen, but it's not original works either.  If it was original...I wouldn't give it a time of day.  The Mark of Disdain is so fitting!   :)

[DittyDotDot]

I guess I figure they ponied up the money and went to the convention and took the images and/or video, so they can do whatever they want with their own work. They aren't required to upload them for others to see, nor am I required to watch them. I just go find a different one that I can appreciate better.

[rue721]

This watermark thing reminds me of that comedy sketch where the auctioneer is selling priceless paintings -- and whenever he sells one, his assistant paints SOLD! across the front of it in bright white paint.

[Omegamom]

This is just cute! Their expressions! And someone replied that Clif looks like a garden gnome...;-)

RT @JensenAckles: Ummm...is he still in the back seat? This is getting awkward. @jarpad @bodyguard4JandJ #AlwaysWatching http://twitter.com/JensenAckles/status/639582879899451392/photo/1

[DittyDotDot]

That's priceless!

[7kstar]

IA with the comment how is Jensen taller than Jared.  It's too much.  :)

 

I think there is a story there....

[Omegamom]

It looks like Jared is leaning over from the other side to get into the picture.

[SueB]

He really is good at those hashtags and random tweets.

[catrox14]

He's not the King of Social Media per Zap2It for nothing.  #PepperoniDreaming NEVER FORGET

Also, did anyone else hear Rockwell's "It always feels like somebody's watching me"  when they read that tweet? Just me?

[Omegamom]

Well, NOW I'm hearing it! Thanks for the earworm, catrox14!

[catrox14]

So Arrow's trailer is supposed to drop tomorrow. Maybe SPN's will too!

[Demented Daisy]

Someone shaved recently....

 

https://twitter.com/dicksp8jr/status/639848999458095104

[catrox14]

Welp, no trailer, no teaser, nothing so far.  Thanks CW :(. What the hell.

[DittyDotDot]

Not to rain on the pity party, but I don't think it's unusual to not have a trailer yet. Seems like it's about this time every year we're all asking why there isn't one yet. I think it'll be another week yet.

 

Stupid show. ;)

[catrox14]

Last season we got the teaser from Comic Con and I think the year before (?). Part of it this is that comic con in 2014 was two weeks later than this year so they had already had enough to give a teaser.  And there was a lot more buzz because of it being the 10th season etc. I didn't feel as starved for info as I do this season.

 

And to be fair, I don't know how other seasons went because I only started watching live with s9.  So that's just my perception and what I'm experiencing. I'm a thirsty gal. 

Edited September 5, 2015 by catrox14

[DittyDotDot]

Oh, no, you're right in that the show usually does drop more information, but an official trailer...I don't think so. I could be wrong, but I seem to recall posting something similar right around Labor Day last year too. What I recall that was shown at Comic Con was some skulking around the bunker from Soul Survivor, but not really much of a trailer, IMO.

[catrox14]

Yeah the Comic Con thing was a teaser , but it certainly sated me whilst making me want more. Also, little did I know, I was watching the demise of demon!Dean LOL....:(

 

 

 

But the silence right now....other than Jensen's tweets of Baby...is not enough. I'm greedy. 

[catrox14]

Jensen Ackles is mentioned as a breakout talent in this article on the state of TV from Forbes. Good company and better late than never, I suppose!

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/merrillbarr/2015/09/10/american-horror-story-hotel-trailer/

 

Anthologies could be the place new talent is discovered. Anthologies could be television’s testing ground to find the next Claire Danes, Kerry Washington, Charles Dutton or Peter Dinklage. Sure, we occasionally get a break-out performance through traditional fields that results in the likes of a Dylan O’Brien, Tatiana Maslany, Gina Rodriguez or Jensen Ackles, but those come few and far between. The new state of television anthology is giving the industry a chance to fix its dwindling talent pool “problem” in a way that allows it to still save face by not turning to the likes of the dirty internet.. 

 

Edited September 11, 2015 by catrox14

[bethy]

I love that Jensen got a shout out among younger stars in "hipper" shows. That rocks.

[7kstar]

The fact that Jensen is getting a shout out in 11 years and Jared's name isn't there is interesting.  I think Jensen can do something if he wants after Supernatural.  I think many are willing to help him out once he is done.

 

The real question will be what will Jensen want to do?  :)

 

 

[catrox14]

Well, here's an article from TV Guide on the 10th anniversary tomorrow had two of their writers reflect on the pilot.

 

http://www.tvguide.com/news/supernatural-pilot-10th-anniversary/

 

 

Like okay, I don't expect every article to love the show. Criticism etc,  fair game although a bit odd for an "anniversary" article but whatever. But THIS BELOW...holy moly this right here is like...um WAT? How in the fucking hell do you ever get this out of the story at all? That's some fucked head!canon that ..WUT.  

 

Joyce: I can't say I feel the same way, but I totally understand why you and a lot of people did. When the episode ended, I was rolling my eyes that they had to fridge Jess to make Sam join Dean in demon-hunting, though you knew it was coming from a mile away. In my personal Supernatural canon, Dean killed her to have baby bro all to himself.

 

I mean. I just...I'm speechless.  Like frankly, I barely got through the rest of the article because I was flabbergasted that someone actually believes that. I mean how is that even allowed to stand in a "review".  This isn't reader commentary after all. Or fan fiction.

 

Happy reading ?

Edited September 13, 2015 by catrox14

[Commando Cody]

I don't know what that was or who those people are, but it was terrible.  I couldn't finish reading it.  

[trxr4kids]

Is this the new tvguide tumblr edition? Seriously I'm blown away.

[catrox14]

Tumblr isn't THAT bad. I mean they at least get show canon fairly correct.  It's like she just wanted to bash the show but needed someone else to support her even though the other writer watched the pilot only ONCE.

 

That's just some shit there.

[Omegamom]

If that's the sum total of their tenth anniversary coverage, then, yeah, it's some shit. But if it were accompanied by a *real* anniversary article, it would be kind of a cool experiment--show someone new the pilot, see what they thought.

When I watched the pilot, hubby was out of town, it was midnight, and dark, and my house was making noises. I didn't make it through, because I decided I couldn't watch the skeeriness on my lonesome. ;-) So I'd say the pilot worked okay ten years later for me!

But I was hooked enough to watch it again the next day, the whole thing. And then the next and the next and the next. A true Netflix binge started. That was March, I think, and it provided me with a very welcome distraction through some dark shit at home.

[catrox14]

 

If that's the sum total of their tenth anniversary coverage, then, yeah, it's some shit. But if it were accompanied by a *real* anniversary article, it would be kind of a cool experiment--show someone new the pilot, see what they thought.

 

Oh I think it's a cool idea if it had done what you said.

 

I found it amusing that they are calling it a problem for the show that started out about 2 white probably straight brothers going through small towns and saving people hunting things whilst having family angst is still about that but that's bad because they are both still white and straight(Dean? eh who knows). Then they complained that two minor female characters that were only there for exposition on the monster failed the Bechdel test because they were talking to the two main male leads about the monster.  IN A PILOT EPISODE written over 10 years ago that didn't really have a Bechdel test as a measure of it's diversity. 

 

That's when I was like...okay what is the point of this whole thing. 

Edited September 14, 2015 by catrox14

[Commando Cody]

I thought it was odd that it stated that they did this article in "honor" of its ten year anniversary.  Then they go on to talk about their issues with the pilot.  

 

 I liked most of the recurring characters who were on Supernatural. It was the women I couldn't stand. I couldn't wait for most of them to get killed off or sent away.  I hope the taxi driver, who drove Claire away, was a monster and evaporated her. I liked Ellen and I would watch a spin off with Sheriffs Jody and Donna. 

[rue721]

It's one thing to look back on an episode that aired in 2005 and see such a heteronormative, macho, white-washed show.

 

LOL how old are these reviewers? Because 2005 was really not THAT long ago imho. I mean, 10 years is a long time in a lot of ways, but we weren't living in Ye Olden Days or something.

 

I think the show *can* seem somewhat dated, but I think that's mostly in the same ways that it was somewhat dated even when it started airing. Mostly, I think the pacing is really slow and the number of storylines going on is really limited compared to contemporary shows. But that's stuff that I actually kind of like about it, YMMV.

 

There is a 0% chance that what's dated about the show is that it's centered on two straight white guys, though. Or that women get fridged. I'm watching The Walking Dead for the first time right now and if these reviewers are looking for some whitewashed macho heteronormativity, TWD has it in spades. Aaaaaaaaand now I'm imagining SPN but with Merle and Daryl Dixon in place of Sam and Dean and it's cracking me up. I would actually love that show.

[catrox14]

Fuck Merle, keep that racist m'fer off my SPN lol. Unless he's a Walker that Sam and Dean kill.

I'd be cool with Rick, Michonne, Daryl to hunt with Dean and Sam. Lordy. The hot

[rue721]

Taking this to the SPN v. Other Shows thread. :)

[DittyDotDot]

I find it funny how this show keeps getting labeled misogynistic. Sexist, I could perhaps, maybe, see, but nothing about this show says to me it hates women. But then again, I'm not of the opinion that a show needs to have a token female character just to say it's got one, either. That's the kind of thinking I actually find insulting. 

 

As far as the show feeling dated, I think it was purposefully meant to feel dated. That's was actually it's charm and what drew me to it in the first place. I think the attempt to move away from that thinking is actually what's made the show sort of unappealing to me. 

 

Anyway, I don't disagree with all their sentiments--the show has become rather repetitive--I just didn't feel it was actually a review of the show itself as much as a discussion you'd see on most message boards. ::shrugs::

[MYFAKETVBOYFRIEND]

And to say the show was too dark?! Its a horror show! These "journalists" *cough* should get new jobs.

[mertensia]

I'm often mystified by the misogyny accusations as well.

[DittyDotDot]

Gawd, this show used to be so beautifully lit. What's people's obsession with everything being bright all the time anyway? I've been hearing that sentiment over and over again a lot lately, not only with horror shows. Shouldn't the lighting fit the mood of the show? 

 

Sorry, photographer's rant there. ::walks away muttering about those damn kids standing on her lawn again.::