Supernatural Bitterness & Unpopular Opinions: You All Suck

[SueB]

I support that rant.  This: 

 

Maybe a wife, 2.5 kids, and mortgage on a house in the suburbs isn't in the cards for either of them -- *that's fine.*

in particular.  Who are we to say that their lives are not worthy if they don't have that?  

[Cobalt Stargazer]

My UO(s) with regard to Supernatural is that imo Sam and Dean have an overall great relationship. I don't understand where the idea that either Sam or Dean dislike or disrespect each other, or that the writers/TPTB dislike or disrespect either character, even comes from. Also, I think that it's perfectly fine that their closest relationship as adults is with each other. Maybe a wife, 2.5 kids, and mortgage on a house in the suburbs isn't in the cards for either of them -- *that's fine.* It frustrates me when people are like, "[sam or Dean] has to go build his own life!" They each *have* built their lives, these are the lives they've built. And nothing's wrong with those lives, I don't think. Some fans act like they're these pitiable spinsters or suffering from eternal arrested development for their family/living situation and it's really off-putting to me. /rant

 

With all sorts of respect, I never said any such thing about Sam and Dean being pathetic spinster anything. I never said their lives were terrible. I don't think the relationship is entirely healthy, but as they say, all happy families are alike, but every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. I don't think that Sam is some albatross around Dean's neck, and I don't think Dean is dragging Sam into a world he doesn't want to be a part of. Perhaps I should have qualified that. My only point is that I think Dean can be jerkish and Sam can be petulant. That doesn't mean they don't want to live in one another's back pockets (not like that), just that sometimes the relationship doesn't strike me as completely good for them.

[rue721]

With all sorts of respect, I never said any such thing about Sam and Dean being pathetic spinster anything. I never said their lives were terrible.

 

Yeah, I know. That rant wasn't directed at you personally (or any person in particular), it's just my UO/bitterness with regard to SPN.

[SueB]

 

just that sometimes the relationship doesn't strike me as completely good for them.

 

Well that's fair  But, I'm kinda hoping this last year has given them both perspective.  For Dean, for example, I don't think it's in him to let Sam die.  OTOH, I think he would definitely reconsider not telling him what was going on. Further, if Sam was truly dead dead. Like atomized...can't be brought back by Cas dead... would Dean let him go?  I think he might. I think he would think long and hard about what Sam would want.  In the hospital with the decision regarding Gadreel,, it came as a shock to him that Sam wanted to die and never be brought back.  I'd say that Dean almost felt betrayed at that moment. Like Sam promised he wanted to survive it, accepted stopping the trials, and this "don't let me come back" thing just did not equate.  After the last 18 months, I think he'd have to think about what Sammy would want.  

 

Now that's a different question than "do everything in his power to prevent Sam from dying".  He's always going to fight to his last breath to STOP Sam from getting killed, but if it's a fait au complete (like it really was in 9.1), he may at least pause if not completely let Sam go rather than do something to potentially lose Sam's love.  Sam's sense of betrayal and the "we're not brothers" bit really was hard on Dean.  I don't know if he wants to go back there again.

 

Conversely, I think Sam now GETS what it's like to be Dean at least to some extent.  He understands now, more than he did before, the sense of responsibility for literally being his brother's keeper.  He always felt like Dean sacrificed for him, but I don't think he understood what having that responsibility felt like.  I honestly don't think he could ever get it 100% because he's not been parentified.  Regardless, I think he appreciates Dean's mindset more.

 

Bottom line:  the personal journey of these two has, I think, changed their relationship.  I think Sam is simply glad to have Dean alive and with him. I think Dean sees Sam's need for agency as essential to Sam's personality.  Hopefully this means they will show the respect for each other that is required to smooth out some of those less-than-healthy behaviors.  

[catrox14]

I HATED 9.1 because it was a contrived bunch of crap.

 

In the church in 8.23 Sam made a clear decision to stop the trials so he could live even though he was really messed up he was still making that choice of his own free will. 

 

Similarly, if we accept that he was making a choice of his own free will to go with Death in 9.1 then why was his choice to say yes to Gadreel less valid? The only thing the trick did was put Dean's face on the deal but it was still Sam making a choice to say yes to living vs dying. 

 

IMO if Sam really wanted to die and really was ready to die he still would have said yes to Death regardless of the ploy by Dean and Gadreel. 

 

I'm super bitter about that contrivance to make Dean the worst brother in the history of the universe. 

Edited February 8, 2015 by catrox14

[Iguana]

I always figured that Sam would have forgiven Dean relatively quickly if it was just about the initial consent to the possession. It was the weeks (months?) of lying to him about Gadreel still possessing and controlling him that really triggered Sam's feeling of betrayal and anger. And I totally get that. How Sam acted as a result of that anger and betrayal, though, is a whole other issue.

[DittyDotDot]

I never thought Dean was the worst brother in the history of the universe, but I could also understand Sam's point of view and why he might be angry--didn't care much for how he expressed his anger. I agree it was contrived, but I never felt like both boys didn't have valid points of view or reasonable reasons, though.

 

ETA: Or what Iguana said while I was mulling over and over and over how to articulate this.

Edited February 8, 2015 by DittyDotDot

[catrox14]

 I'm referring to the episode itself and the pretzel "logic" that was even bad for the "logic" of SPN to get Dean into the place where the audience is against him for making the decision he made.

 

To me it was just like the stupidity of Sam never looking for Dean or Kevin in order to have a rift between the boys in s8.  Although I think it was more likely for Dean to take desperate and highly questionable action to save Sam's life than for Sam not to look for Dean.

 

The coma was protecting him and trying to help Sam heal and he had one oxygen thing in his nose. So if they removed the oxygen away from Sam would he have just dropped dead? /rolls eyes.  Yes I know they said his brain was oxygen deprived but then they also had the doctor say the machines could keep him alive and I was like....um what machines? The ventilator that wasn't attached to Sam?

 

And Sam's coma-scape IMO was there just to shoehorn Death and Bobby especially because the show just couldn't let go of Jim Beaver. And neither Death nor Bobby ended up having any real impact on Sam's decision anyway.

 

Sam still made the ultimate decision to live both times of his own free will.Anyway, just imagine if they had just never had Bobby in the episode but had it just been about Dean in Sam's head trying to convince Sam to live. Dean would have been at his bedside reminiscing about the good things Sam did to save the planet and that he gave his life already at least once to save the planet, that they "still had work to do", that they weren't done trying.

 

Then in Sam's head Death could have still been in the episode but there to do his job without fawning over Sam. Sam could still have all the guilt over the Apocalypse and Sam still could be worried in his coma-mind that by not closing the gates of Hell he was potentially doing more harm than good. Visually we see Sam moving towards making the deal with Death and then in the hospital Sam's vitals start going south, Dean is becoming more and more desperate, and then Gadreel shows up and Dean accepts Gadreel's help because Dean is desperate and alone.

 

To me the shoehorning of Bobby was the biggest problem with Sam's coma-scape.  Bobby telling Sam he had done enough? BULLSHIT. Bobby would never have told Sam he had done enough.  Remember how he berated Dean when Dean wanted to say yes to Michael? Ghost!Bobby was the one that said, when it's time to go..go. Because Bobby was already dead. And coma!Bobby wasn't looking for reasons to die, he was looking for a reason to stay alive so he could tell Sam and Dean what they needed to know about the Leviathan...oh and he had a bullet in his brain. /rolls eyes again.

 

So my bitterness isn't over Sam's anger, it's the entire stupid way they did it.  Sigh....

 

ETA: And don't even start me on the treacly music cues that sounded like they were out of some stupid Hallmark movie. Like seriously, how did they not use "Dean's Family" music?  ugh.

Edited February 8, 2015 by catrox14

[7kstar]

I HATED 9.1 because it was a contrived bunch of crap.  snip

 

IMO if Sam really wanted to die and really was ready to die he still would have said yes to Death regardless of the ploy by Dean and Gadreel. 

 

I'm super bitter about that contrivance to make Dean the worst brother in the history of the universe. 

I think the 'Worst Brother in the World'  doing 'More harm than good' is the part the really backfired on the writers.  Instead of people getting angry at Dean, the "Worst Dialogue in the WORLD" united Dean and Sam fans against the writers. 

 

I'm fully a Dean girl and yet I love Sam as the BROTHER's is what is so unique and important for life.  Who isn't searching for someone that gets you and loves you with warts and all.  Sam had every right to be furious about being tricked to say yes, the dying speech was stupid IMO. 

 

They could have written some really challenging material, having Sam saying things like "I get why you did it, but I can't trust and deal with my being saved equals another person has to die.  I know you understand this when I saved your life by a faith healer.  Sometimes I feel like the only reason you want me alive is because you can't handle being alone.   You're fine if you are dying and leaving me all alone but when the shoe is on the other foot you refuse to let me go.  I'm so angry and confused and right now I can't stand to look at you but I still love you."

 

Instead we get the worst dialogue ever in Purge and start up the Sam Fans against the Dean Fans and I am So sick to death of that.

[rue721]

Similarly, if we accept that he was making a choice of his own free will to go with Death in 9.1 then why was his choice to say yes to Gadreel less valid? The only thing the trick did was put Dean's face on the deal but it was still Sam making a choice to say yes to living vs dying. 

 

IMO if Sam really wanted to die and really was ready to die he still would have said yes to Death regardless of the ploy by Dean and Gadreel.

 

This is where my confusion/aggravation stems from. Sam decides not to finish the Trials so that he can stay alive but then changes his mind and decides to die -- all *within ~1 day*? Wut. How was Dean even supposed to get that? Because who the fuck would get that? Oh, person who told me literally hours ago that he'd rather keep the gates of Hell open than die, OBVS you now are totally ready to die even though I have a way to save you, I'll just let you go. *Nobody* would think that imo.

 

Then, in Sam's head, all Dean tells Sam is that he has a way to save him but that he needs Sam to say yes -- and Sam says yes! So I'm not even sure where the betrayal came from about Dean not respecting Sam's decision to die? Because it's not like Sam even seemed to care what Dean had up his sleeve, he was willing to live at whatever cost, apparently. Just like he apparently was when Dean was trying to persuade him to stop the Trials and live, and Sam said yes to that, too.

 

Dean *did* lie for a while after that, but then there was that whole brouhaha about him trying to tell Sam what's going on and literally not being able to. It's not like he was just going to let the lie go on indefinitely and Sam found out by accident or something.

 

It's not that I have a problem with Sam being pissed off afterward. In Sam's shoes, I'd have *so much* trouble trusting Dean after that. I completely get why Sam would feel violated. By Dean, Gadreel, Crowley, whoever. I also do think that Dean wants Sam alive for his own reasons (loves him, needs him, etc). I don't understand why it's supposed to be ~normal~ or ~healthy~ to be OK with seeing your entire family wiped out before their time and being left totally alone in the world, but...*shrug.*

 

I also don't have a big problem with the storyline in terms of vilifying Dean, because I thought his actions were really pretty understandable, even though I didn't necessarily agree with them, and because I thought his choices were believable for him as a character. Imo Dean actually crossed a similar line in a much more uncomfortable/off-putting way when he was trying to hunt with Soulless Sam and wasn't sure about whether or how to bring Sam's actual soul back. Though I thought that was also not so unreasonable I couldn't get it or feel compassion for Dean over it. YMMV.

 

What I hate about the setup for the S9 possession storyline is that I literally can't understand wtf Sam was thinking about the dying/!dying thing. And that whole debacle was coming off of S8, which had about 3 consecutive seconds the whole season during which Sam:  1. made sense 2. seemed like himself, so it's not like I could use some wonderful foundation of characterization of Sam in order to fill in the blanks on what was going on with him at that point.

 

 And Sam's coma-scape IMO was there just to shoehorn Death and Bobby especially because the show just couldn't let go of Jim Beaver. And neither Death nor Bobby ended up having any real impact on Sam's decision anyway.

 

Yes, *completely agree.* That coma-scape was atrocious. Neither Dean nor Bobby seemed like themselves *at all,* and not in a way that was easily fanwanked as "Sam's idea of those characters" or anything. They were ridiculous. Why was Death even there? And remember that scene of Dean beating Sam? Siiiiiiiigh.

 

I actually liked a lot of the stuff with Dean in 9.1. I always love Gadreel -- he's a really interesting character, imo -- and I'm never going to complain about seeing Tahmoh Penikett, either. But that coma-scape ruined the episode for me.

Edited February 8, 2015 by rue721

[catrox14]

Oh wow. I forgot about the scene with Dean beating Sam.  Egads.  Man if they weren't setting up Dean to be the worst then I dunno what they were thinking. So, was that supposed to tell me that Sam was so afraid of Dean that he trusted Dean? Was he just abused by Dean for so long he couldn't make a choice of his own? Did he say to yes Dean out of fear? WTF

Edited February 8, 2015 by catrox14

[rue721]

So, was that supposed to tell me that Sam was so afraid of Dean that he trusted Dean? Was he just abused by Dean for so long he couldn't make a choice of his own? Did he say to yes Dean out of fear? WTF

 

LOL yeah, obviously the man that Sam trusted so implicitly that when Dean came to him with no explanations for how he was going to save him, just that he could, Sam immediately said yes, is *also* the man that Sam was just imagining beating the snot out of him.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

 I'm referring to the episode itself and the pretzel "logic" that was even bad for the "logic" of SPN to get Dean into the place where the audience is against him for making the decision he made.

 

But where's the "pretzel logic"? I'm a returned viewer, and as I understand it, Dean was charged by John to do whatever he could to keep Sam alive, no matter the cost - or the consequences. If that's true, then I suppose John is equally culpable in the Gadreel business, despite not even being present at the time. But even if it is true, Dean was the one who gave the okay for Sam to pick up a hitch-hiker without either his permission or his knowledge. At some point, shouldn't Dean be just as responsible for his choices as Sam?

[rue721]

Dean's decision to ask Sam to say yes to Gadreel, without giving Sam the details of that plan, made me aghast when I watched 9.1 on broadcast, but when I rewatched that episode, especially right after rewatching the finale for season 8, it lost a lot of its impact. Mostly, the whole coma-scape and the brouhaha about Sam wanting to die irritated me because I couldn't track what was going on in Sam's POV at all.

 

But if we're talking about obnoxious decisions on Dean's part in S9, my irritation with him was highest near the middle of the season, when Sam called him out and was pretty justifiably upset, and Dean proceeded to pout SO HARD. I mean, he nearly killed himself he was pouting so hard.

 

I guess Dean wanted some attention/TLC and figured he would get it if he was drunk and liable to die at any second? Idk, THAT is where I was like, "uh are you trying to pull a John now?" Because I felt like that was pretty close to how John was acting at the end of S1/beginning of S2. YMMV. So I found that frustrating and wanted to slap some sense into Dean at that point.

 

Of course, within the length of about an evening, Dean then had Crowley whispering in his ear and manipulating him (like the most stereotypical scumbag on earth. If Dean were a woman, he probably would be all "been there, done that" about Crowley's tricks -- too bad). Soon, he was doing all kinds of things for Crowley without even necessarily realizing these sacrifices were for Crowley, imo -- I guess he was trying to get Crowley to stick with him? Idk. But that's when he was getting the Mark, killing Abaddon, etc. And not screwing with Crowley at all. Was he even feeding him any human blood or anything? I don't think so? So anyway, my point is, it sort of got hard to wish ill on Dean after that, since he was just completely lost. Which I guess is what Sam was also feeling because at that point he relented. I felt terrible for Sam when Dean showed up at that trailer, all red-eyed and messed up, and with Crowley right beside him, and Sam yelled at him not to trust Crowley and to remember who his friends were, and Dean just ignored him. So frustrating.

 

I think Sam's got a much bigger task ahead of him w/r/t "saving" Dean right now, because I think that Dean's actually much more conflicted about being "saved" than Sam ever was, even when Sam ostensibly wanted to die. YMMV. I mean, even if Sam saves him from the Mark of Cain, what led Dean to getting it in the first place was that he just completely fell apart emotionally, in a way that didn't really have anything to do with the supernatural. How to fix *that* problem, I have no idea! Though at some point I feel like the show is going to *have* to go there, because it seems like it's been building up or it's the course that Dean's been on as a character since at least S4.

Edited February 8, 2015 by rue721

[catrox14]

But where's the "pretzel logic"? I'm a returned viewer, and as I understand it, Dean was charged by John to do whatever he could to keep Sam alive, no matter the cost - or the consequences. If that's true, then I suppose John is equally culpable in the Gadreel business, despite not even being present at the time. But even if it is true, Dean was the one who gave the okay for Sam to pick up a hitch-hiker without either his permission or his knowledge. At some point, shouldn't Dean be just as responsible for his choices as Sam?

 I never said, nor  implied that Dean is not being held responsible for his choices here like AT ALL.  Dean should have probably just let Sam die but he can't ( and the show would have been over LOL). It's the parent side, it's pathological.

 

My bitterness is about the convoluted and nonsensical writing that put Dean and Sam in those positions.

 

It has Sam going from saying that he should do the trials because he very much didn't want to die and did see light at the end of the tunnel, which is why Sam says Dean shouldn't do the trials because Dean didn't see the light and it was essentially a suicide mission.

 

Then as the trials are progressing Sam says he's being purified and was seeking forgiveness for who knows what.  BUT then when Dean shows up to stop him, Sam says who cares if he dies because Sam supposedly had let Dean down. BUT then Sam ultimately decides to stop the trials because Dean gives Sam his reasons why Sam should not die and Sam says okay I want to live. 

 

But then in 9.1 which picks up literally HOURS (maybe a few days at most)after Sam stops the trials, which the last Dean knew Sam did not want to and was not ready to die anymore.

 

So Dean is making a decision with the information he had, until the very last minute when he sees Sam with Death in Sam's coma-scape. But even at that IMO Dean was still struggling with what to do. He knew the method would be something Sam would not want but he also did not believe that Sam actually wanted to or should die. So he made the call for the intervention.

 

But my beef is with  in the case of 9.1, nothing made sense . That's what I mean by pretzel logic...twisty and turny and nonsensical based on what happened in the couple of the past couple of episodes of season 8 it could easily be fanwanked that Dean could not reconcile that with Sam's choices up to the moment.  Dean didn't see everything else in Sam's coma-scape other than hearing Sam say "It's too late. I"ve decided" which doesn't really sound like Sam WANTING to die vs accepting what he thinks is his fate.  And of course, Dean would never accept that fate for Sam if he could stop it.  And yes it is pathological.  I don't think that choice deserved him being turned into a demon though...

Edited February 8, 2015 by catrox14

[AwesomO4000]

Sam decides not to finish the Trials so that he can stay alive but then changes his mind and decides to die -- all *within ~1 day*?

 

Okay, here's what I fanwanked concerning that, and it is mainly based on the show's and characters' history - which I'm not sure if the season 9 writer's had this in mind or it's just me, but I digress. At the church, Dean convinced Sam that it was possible that if he stopped the trials, that they could still help, and that when it came to Sam's condition they would "figure it out, like they always did" so Sam said basically "okay, I'll live." However that quickly went to hell in a handbasket. They didn't have the time this time to "figure it out" before Sam was dying, Castiel was not available to even give a temporary fix until a more permanent solution could be found, and Sam knew from experience that trying to save him another way could lead to very bad things. And I think based on Sam's "deal" with Death this was why Sam was chosing to let it go this time. So from what I saw, it wasn't that Sam wanted to die per se, but that he would rather die than have something bad happen - again, because he was brought back - again. In fact Sam was basically saying that he would agree to die only if nothing bad could happen in the name of bringing him back in any way, shape, or form - and I would guess that this would mean any evil or nepharious means of bringing him back as well - i.e. bad guys, demons, or Lucifer bringing him back to life. To me this was saying that Sam didn't really want to die, but considering the circumstances, he didn't have many good options, so he was going to try to get the best deal / result out of the situation that he could.

 

That was my fanwank anyway.

[catrox14]

That is a reasonable fanwank for Sam's mindset.

 

The problem is that in 9.1 Dean was never made privy to any  of that.  So Dean was still operating from the place of Sam wanting to live without benefit of what Sam was thinking until the last minute. 

[AwesomO4000]

Good point.

 

Though for me, I'm more in line with Iguana's thinking. I didn't really blame Dean for his decision to save Sam, because as you said, he didn't have much time. And Sam likely would've forgiven him for that. However the lying afterwards - that's what I wasn't so happy with Dean for. Yes, if Sam "rejected" Gadreel, then he might die, but after a certain not very long time, I thought that that should be Sam's decision to make. And by the time Sam was talking about feeling wrong and maybe he was messed up again, I was starting to feel really bad for Sam, because I remembered what he went through in the second half of season 6 and in season 7. And for me, Dean should not have been keeping the secret beyond that point - it was a little unfeeling, in my opinion.

 

But of course then bad writing in "The Purge"  - I was okay with what happened in "Road Trip" - had to screw that all up and make Sam look like a jerk to compensate, so then I didn't feel so bad for him for a while. Not that I felt any better about Dean's lying or that Dean didn't get why Sam was angry about the lying. Now I was just annoyed with both of them - thanks a lot writers.

[mertensia]

Yeah the writers need to stop with the idiocy ball already. Also, frankly, to think a bit more. Sam's "Dean, Kevin, too bad so sad I'm livin' it up with a dog and an alcoholic vet! Go me" bit went down well with virtually no one. One simple sentence about Sam's reaching a breaking point and just not being able to cope and most reasonable people would have understood.

[AwesomO4000]

I so agree, mertensia...

 

But where would the drama be in that? ::sarcasm:: and ::bitter::

[DittyDotDot]

That is a reasonable fanwank for Sam's mindset.

 

The problem is that in 9.1 Dean was never made privy to any  of that.  So Dean was still operating from the place of Sam wanting to live without benefit of what Sam was thinking until the last minute. 

 

Again, I don't have any real issue with Dean saving Sam and I wasn't annoyed with him here, but point of clarification...Dean saw the moment Sam said he'd go with Death if no one else got hurt. Gadreel showed that moment to Dean who in return said, "What are you doing Sam?" I think it was pretty clear Dean knew what Sam was doing. But again, I don't think this is where Dean went wrong nor was I ever really against Dean or thought he was a horrible brother. I thought he was foolish and rather OOC throughout most of S9, but I also felt the same way about Sam back in S4. ::shrugs::

[catrox14]

Again, I don't have any real issue with Dean saving Sam and I wasn't annoyed with him here, but point of clarification...Dean saw the moment Sam said he'd go with Death if no one else got hurt. Gadreel showed that moment to Dean who in return said, "What are you doing Sam?" I think it was pretty clear Dean knew what Sam was doing. But again, I don't think this is where Dean went wrong nor was I ever really against Dean or thought he was a horrible brother. I thought he was foolish and rather OOC throughout most of S9, but I also felt the same way about Sam back in S4. ::shrugs::

I did mention in one of my posts that Dean saw the moment Sam decided he would go with Death. The only thing Dean saw Sam saying "nobody else would get hurt because of me" and if I die I stay dead". That doesn't change IMO that Dean still can't rely on that being what Sam really truly wanted because that was Sam's messed up coma-scape and not the last Sam spoke about. Just bad bad writing.

[DittyDotDot]

I'm not disagreeing with you the writing sucked in that episode, I was just pointing out that there might've been a flaw in your proof there. Personally, I loathe the episode because it's just so ham-fisted and hardly anyone feels like who they should be. But, that's largely how I've felt about the show since S8, so...

[Demented Daisy]

Re: Sam's agency

 

Every time they say that Dean dragged Sam away from college instead of Sam saying it was his choice, they're taking away Sam's agency, IMO.

 

Just finished re-watching Scarecrow.  Not only did Sam leave, but Dean praised him for doing so.  At the end of the episode, Dean tells Sam to go, but Sam chooses to stay.  In the very next episode, Faith, Dean tells Sam to go, but Sam stays.  Again.  Sam chooses, over and over again, to stay. 

 

But, dammit!  Dean made Sam leave college.  Dean forces Sam to stay with him.  Dean dragged him away from his normal life.  They're so intent on making Dean feel guilty for things that aren't his fault that they're taking away Sam's responsibility for his own choices.

[AwesomO4000]

Was Dean being sincere? I'll have to watch again, but I thought that he was being sarcastic about taking Sam away from all this. But it might just be me seeing sarcasm where it isn't - hmm you can take the girl out of New England. However, sadly I have been away too long from that area now... my necessary sarcasm survival skills are way too rusty now for proper social interaction in my home state.

 

And it is weird how Dean keeps blaming himself, especially since Sam already told Dean at some point at least that even back then he didn't feel like he entirely belonged there, * and that he didn't want normal anymore - multiple times... but yet they dragged that back up at the beginning of season 8 again... so there ya go.

 

* And likely finding out his best friend had become a demon and manipulated him likely didn't help Sam have many lasting fuzzy feelings for the place either.

[supposebly]

 

And it is weird how Dean keeps blaming himself, especially since Sam already told Dean at some point at least that even back then he didn't feel like he entirely belonged there, * and that he didn't want normal anymore - multiple times... but yet they dragged that back up at the beginning of season 8 again... so there ya go.

This is where the recent simplification and caricature-like quality of the show and the characters comes from in my opinion. They take some broad issues that were actually addressed rather subtly and were developed quite nicely over time and now it's reduced to: dragged from college, eats a lot, ogles a lot, and has a long speech about some emotional something at the end of the episode. While Sam looks puzzled.

 

And I roll my eyes and start to become embarrassed for the actors.

[rue721]

Was Dean being sincere? I'll have to watch again, but I thought that he was being sarcastic about taking Sam away from all this.

 

Yeah, I think it was just a joke because college seemed fun, what with all the hot girls around, the ridiculous buffet in the cafeteria, etc. It's a land of plenty :P

 

If Dean liked the cafeteria so much, just wait until he goes to Great American Buffet.

 

This is where the recent simplification and caricature-like quality of the show and the characters comes from in my opinion. They take some broad issues that were actually addressed rather subtly and were developed quite nicely over time and now it's reduced to: dragged from college, eats a lot, ogles a lot, and has a long speech about some emotional something at the end of the episode. While Sam looks puzzled.

 

And I roll my eyes and start to become embarrassed for the actors.

 

Completely agree.

 

Though I'd still rather see a caricature of the show from the days when it was genuinely well crafted, over random thrown-together trash like The Hunter Games. At least this episode had a comprehensible structure, even if the dialogue, sense of humor, and characterization were off.

 

You know what would be good? If Edlund could give Charmelo and Snyder's scripts a polish. For the last couple years, Charmelo and Snyder have been really weak with the dialogue, tone, and characterization in all their scripts imo, and those are Edlund's strengths. Too bad.

 

Anyway, I know it's sort of damning with faint praise, but for all its faults, this is probably my favorite episode written by Charmelo and Snyder since S6. It missed the mark but I didn't think it was fundamentally a steaming turd of bullshit (like The Hunter Games was writing-wise imo). What I don't actually get about these low expectations, though, is that I liked their S6 episodes. *shrug.*

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Just finished re-watching Scarecrow.  Not only did Sam leave, but Dean praised him for doing so.  At the end of the episode, Dean tells Sam to go, but Sam chooses to stay.  In the very next episode, Faith, Dean tells Sam to go, but Sam stays.  Again.  Sam chooses, over and over again, to stay. 

 

Actually, you missed a spot. I also watched Scarecrow yesterday morning, and near the beginning of the episode Dean and Sam had an argument because Sam wanted to follow up on John's phone call instead of going on to the town where the couples were disappearing. Dean said that doing what their father wanted them to do was "being a good son" and called Sam a selfish bastard because he wasn't following orders. Now, considering that John is the one who ostensibly saddled Dean with Sam in the first place, and he always does what his father tells him, why was he bitching him out for wanting to go look for the father who was the entire reason they started the road trip in the first place? And why does Dean get to decide what orders negate the previous ones?

[mertensia]

John had told them not to look for him. Dean's going to obey that though he undoubtably didn't want to. Then Sam gets all "well I'm going to anyhow!" Which I can jnderstand- John's habit of not explaining must have been a miserable thing to deal with continuously- but he didn't really think things through well. How likely was it he was going to find John?

[Demented Daisy]

 

Actually, you missed a spot. I also watched Scarecrow yesterday morning, and near the beginning of the episode Dean and Sam had an argument because Sam wanted to follow up on John's phone call instead of going on to the town where the couples were disappearing. Dean said that doing what their father wanted them to do was "being a good son" and called Sam a selfish bastard because he wasn't following orders. Now, considering that John is the one who ostensibly saddled Dean with Sam in the first place, and he always does what his father tells him, why was he bitching him out for wanting to go look for the father who was the entire reason they started the road trip in the first place? And why does Dean get to decide what orders negate the previous ones?

 

What Dean did in the beginning of the episode is immaterial, IMO, because he changed his mind by the end.  Sam left, even though Dean didn't want him to, and when they talked on the phone, Dean told him it was the right thing to do.  Sam changed his mind, as well, so that entire argument is immaterial.  Don't we all say things in the heat of the moment that we don't necessarily mean?

 

Now, we can tit-for-tat all day about this (Sam said this, Dean said that), but IMO, by the end of the episode, both had changed their minds.  Both grew to see the other's point of view.  Which is what I was getting at in my original post.  Dean has never forced Sam to stay.  Sam has made that decision time and again.  But whenever TPTB want some drama (or, apparently, a joke), they bring up that tired old lie.

[Aeryn13]

I think the mature solution in Scarecrow would have been the split up, just amicably. And then stay in contact. Why should Dean not investigate the disappearances, lifes could have been (and were) at stake. Meanwhile Sam still could have gone off to follow his lead if that`s what he wanted to do. But just as Dean didn`t have to follow John, he didn`t have to follow Sam either. I mean, why should Sam get to decide where they both go? If he didn`t like Dean`s choice, he was always free to leave as shown here. Dean should have done what HE felt was right which was IMO doing the hunt.

 

So in essence, ironically they did the right thing but handled it in a poor way. 

[DittyDotDot]

I think the mature solution in Scarecrow would have been the split up, just amicably. And then stay in contact. Why should Dean not investigate the disappearances, lifes could have been (and were) at stake. Meanwhile Sam still could have gone off to follow his lead if that`s what he wanted to do. But just as Dean didn`t have to follow John, he didn`t have to follow Sam either. I mean, why should Sam get to decide where they both go? If he didn`t like Dean`s choice, he was always free to leave as shown here. Dean should have done what HE felt was right which was IMO doing the hunt.

 

So in essence, ironically they did the right thing but handled it in a poor way. 

 

Wait, I'm confused. In Scarecrow, Dean DID do what he wanted and did the hunt and Sam DID do as he wanted and went after John, then they came back together at the end of the episode by choice. Are we talking about two different episodes?

[Aeryn13]

 

Wait, I'm confused. In Scarecrow, Dean DID do what he wanted and did the hunt and Sam DID do as he wanted and went after John, then they came back together at the end of the episode by choice. Are we talking about two different episodes?

 

No, no, the same episode. What I meant was they should have done what they did but without having a big dramatic fight about it on the road. They get co-ordinates as well as a lead on John, essentially two jobs, they are two people, each of them wants to do one of the jobs so the logical solution is split up. But do it in a "okay, you do this, I do that, we check in every three hours or so and if one of us needs help, they`ll call immedately".

 

They would still have done what they did in the episode but handled it more maturely.

[DittyDotDot]

Ahh, Gotcha. I thought you were saying something different. Working off little-to-no sleep, should've given it another once over.

 

I guess the dramatic moment doesn't bother me too much because they had been cooped in that car together for months and the tensions had been building. This episode followed Asylum where Dean was picking at Sam about his visions and Sam was forced to puke out some hard truths. So, the argument seems organic to me in this case. However, I'm never opposed to Sam and Dean acting maturely, so I get what you're saying.

Edited February 12, 2015 by DittyDotDot

[Aeryn13]

 

This episode followed Asylum where Dean was picking at Sam about his visions and Sam was forced to puke out some hard truths.

 

I didn`t see what Sam said in Asylum as hard "truths". Just because he thinks Dean is a pathetic drone didn`t actually make it true for me. It was just the first scene where Sam, under a supernatural influence, let loose with the disdain. And the first of those scenes that made me go "whatever, Smuggerson". Same as under the Siren spell and recently, sans influence, in the Purge. Maybe the writers are trying to use Sam as their mouthpiece in those scenes but it just makes me loathe the character and loathe them on top of it. 

[DittyDotDot]

Aeryn13, on 12 Feb 2015 - 3:50 PM, said:

I didn`t see what Sam said in Asylum as hard "truths". Just because he thinks Dean is a pathetic drone didn`t actually make it true for me. It was just the first scene where Sam, under a supernatural influence, let loose with the disdain. And the first of those scenes that made me go "whatever, Smuggerson". Same as under the Siren spell and recently, sans influence, in the Purge. Maybe the writers are trying to use Sam as their mouthpiece in those scenes but it just makes me loathe the character and loathe them on top of it. 

 

I meant they were things that Sam thought somewhat true, but being pushed to the extreme due to the influence. These are things that I believe would've been hard for Sam to say if he wasn't under said influence. I didn't mean to imply they were actually true nor did I think they were actually true.

 

Personally, I've never felt like Sam or Dean were mouthpieces for the writers, but characters acting as characters do. So, to me, it's not the writers using Sam to tell us how awful Dean is, but allowing the character to act as the character would in the given situation.

Edited February 12, 2015 by DittyDotDot

[amensisterfriend]

I love Scarecrow for the reasons you guys touched upon and more, but my bitter UO stemming from that discussion is that I honestly think the writers had a better grip on who Sam was and wasn't back in the very first season than at any time since. He just seemed a better, more consistently defined mix of strengths and flaws in S1 than any subsequent season IMO. 

 

And a very UO re Dean: I keep seeing people worried about Dean showing any signs of regression to his early season form, but I LOVED the Dean of S1. (And S2 and s3 as well, but mostly s1!) He was so vibrant, amusing, and just plain alive. They hinted at his self-esteem issues without bogging down him---and us---with the unrelenting, soggy angst about how poor Dean just doesn't get how very worthy a man he is. He was a little too inclined to indulge his "Id" and rougher around the edges, but all that made him more unique and lovable to me. Once Dean became less joyful and exuberant, the entire show did as well IMO. I realize it would have been ridiculous not to have his character change over 10 seasons, but I seem to be in the minority in thinking that most of those changes weren't for the better., 

Edited February 13, 2015 by amensisterfriend

[Mulva]

But where's the "pretzel logic"? I'm a returned viewer, and as I understand it, Dean was charged by John to do whatever he could to keep Sam alive, no matter the cost - or the consequences. If that's true, then I suppose John is equally culpable in the Gadreel business, despite not even being present at the time. But even if it is true, Dean was the one who gave the okay for Sam to pick up a hitch-hiker without either his permission or his knowledge. At some point, shouldn't Dean be just as responsible for his choices as Sam?

Actually, you missed a spot. I also watched Scarecrow yesterday morning, and near the beginning of the episode Dean and Sam had an argument because Sam wanted to follow up on John's phone call instead of going on to the town where the couples were disappearing. Dean said that doing what their father wanted them to do was "being a good son" and called Sam a selfish bastard because he wasn't following orders. Now, considering that John is the one who ostensibly saddled Dean with Sam in the first place, and he always does what his father tells him, why was he bitching him out for wanting to go look for the father who was the entire reason they started the road trip in the first place? And why does Dean get to decide what orders negate the previous ones?

Because Dean is always right, and he has a natural right to make all the decisions, and Sam is supposed to follow Dean's wishes blindly, and he's a bad person if he has any ideas or wants of his own.

[shang yiet]

Dean said that doing what their father wanted them to do was "being a good son" and called Sam a selfish bastard because he wasn't following orders

 

Here we see Dean letting loose with his disdain and he didn't even need a supernatural influence!

[rue721]

I honestly think the writers had a better grip on who Sam was and wasn't back in the very first season than at any time since. He just seemed a better, more consistently defined mix of strengths and flaws in S1 than any subsequent season IMO.

 

Yeah, maybe true. I think that it's strange how slippery Sam's characterization is, though. Even in S1, it seemed like we were supposed to fill in a lot of blanks about him on our own. I don't think it occurred to the writers or TPTB that that would be difficult. Then it got more confusing, imo, because at around S4, I think "filling in the blanks" for Sam's characterization started feeling straight up like playing MadLibs.

 

I think that it's not that the writers don't have a grasp on Sam as a character, but more that I think they think his character is self-explanatory? They seem like they're always trying to "spice him up" by having him keep drawn-out secrets that are hidden even from the audience. It's relatively rare for the show to explore his POV when he's not somehow out of his mind (crazy/high/etc), too. I think that's because they figure we already "get" him when he's just his normal self, so they assume going into his POV during those "normal" times would feel redundant or boring. What's funny is that I doubt that anyone aside from the show's TPTB see the character that way, but what can ya do.

 

Once Dean became less joyful and exuberant, the entire show did as well IMO. I realize it would have been ridiculous not to have his character change over 10 seasons, but I seem to be in the minority in thinking that most of those changes weren't for the better., 

 

IA that when Dean lost his lightness, the show lost a lot of its lightness, and that's too bad. The changes have not been for the better, imo. But I don't think that's an UO? It seems like even within the show, the characters themselves don't see those changes as having been for the better!

 

That was so long ago now, though, and when the show tries to recapture any of that lightness now, it always seems to flub it. So I guess what I would enjoy is if, instead of trying to lighten up Dean as a character at this point, they just lightened up the tone of the show overall (and let Dean be as dramatic as they want to write him). I mean "lighten up" as in, use a lighter touch generally, not take itself so seriously.

 

I guess it might be an UO (?) but I actually think that Dean works pretty well when he's toned down, because Jensen Ackles's bread and butter is making smaller moments interesting (I actually think, the less dialogue the better, when it comes to him), and that Sam works well when he's sillier or in sillier circumstances, because Jared Padalecki's bread and butter is selling this deadpan/dryness that gives OTT moments weight without undermining their ridiculouslness/hilarity.

 

If Sam had at least one slapstick gag per episode and Dean had at least one silent dramatic sequence per episode, I would be a pretty happy viewer every Tuesday night :).

[catrox14]

To me, Dean had lost his light snarky side and his douche facade , but not his sense of humor. And for me that is organic character growth. I mean I would never find it interesting to have a character go through what Dean has and then expect to him to be the same as he was in s1. He's 36. He can't be the same. He's died and gone to hell and been a demon and it should change him.. He's been a surrogate father to Sam and Ben and he's watchedh Sam die a couple of times. He has to be different.

That's why his characterization in halt and catch fire annoys me so much.

Edited February 13, 2015 by catrox14

[supposebly]

From the Media thread. A discussion on "meaningful" deaths on TV.

 

DittyDotDot:

 

I'm not talking about having a meaningful and poignant death for a character because I like them and what not. Nor am I suggesting they make a big show of each and every death. I'm just saying if they actually want to subvert the audiences expectations, they need to find a way to use those deaths in unexpected ways.

 

I think "unexpected" is in the eyes of the beholder. I was shocked at Demon Dean or even Dean getting killed but not at all at Dean going to hell. However, I find important how they get there and what the repercussions are that makes a TV death meaningful.

 

Dean's demon death wasn't meaningful for me in the aftermath since it barely did anything to the characters that they hadn't done in some way before. And better. the lead-up however was done well, I think.

 

Also, I still don't understand why he didn't kill Crowley when he was a demon. The only time I found him even remotely scary was when he handled Cole.

 

Right now, I just have this feeling of, been there, done that, bored now. Dean's way of dealing with the mark feels like pretty much anything he's done before in how he approached things. Denial, a little flailing, research, acceptance, and "going down swinging". And then the season is over. And something else "shocking" happens because we have another season.

 

At this point, I almost want the show to end with Dean killing Sam and Crowley and then becoming the king of hell. They really wimped out in making Dean the baddest demon there ever was.

 

I'm kidding! Mostly. Just, I need something to shake up this dreary repetitiveness I'm feeling.

[DittyDotDot]

I think "unexpected" is in the eyes of the beholder. I was shocked at Demon Dean or even Dean getting killed but not at all at Dean going to hell. However, I find important how they get there and what the repercussions are that makes a TV death meaningful.

 

I agree that unexpected is in the eye of the beholder. I probably should clarify...I was surprised they made Dean a demon, but I wasn't actually shocked by the time he opened his black eyes. When they sent Dean to Hell, I wasn't surprised he died, but was shocked to see Dean in Hell. But, what it led to was actually the unexpected part for me, whereas, what Demon Dean led to has been almost entirely expected by me.

 

Maybe I too need to be shocked out of this feeling of been there, done that.

[Aeryn13]

 

 

Dean said that doing what their father wanted them to do was "being a good son" and called Sam a selfish bastard because he wasn't following orders

Here we see Dean letting loose with his disdain and he didn't even need a supernatural influence!

 

 

 

And in their Scarecrow fight Sam pretty much repeated what he said under the influence in Asylum, same as he pretty much repeated what he said under the influence in Sex and Violence. He phrased it slightly less bad but that`s why I always believed those feelings were quite real. He just didn`t verbalize them even to himself.

 

But mostly it`s just scenes like with the luddite/overeating crap in the last episode. Maybe it is supposed to come across as fond mocking from Sam or even taking the piss but not being completely serious but in 97 % those scenes miss the mark completely for me. And I even get that Dean comes across as annoying in them, especially when they Flanderize certain traits of his but Sam is even more nails on chalkboard for me there. Dean mocks as well but he doesn`t use "that face/that voice" that just makes me wanna punch a wall when TV characters do it.

[Slovenly Muse]

Ok, so I finally got around to watching 10.13 "Halt and Catch Fire" a week late, and while the discussion has all wound down because I'm so late to the party, I just can't move on without ranting about how shitty it was. Yes, the MotW case was fairly typical for this show in terms of, well, what I expect from it. But although it's been said for years now that SPN has a big problem with women, I somehow never expect it when it happens so egregiously. Like, it takes me by surprise that they haven't figured out how to fix it yet! I mean, have the writers of this episode actually met a human woman before? Dean gawking at the college girls was super gross, like, SUPER gross. And it happened more than once! And the college girls, the roommates. Is that how these writers think women actually talk to each other? Between the laughable dialogue, the ghastly decor (seriously, that sparkly pink "sisters to the moon and back" poster looked like something your grandma bought on sale at Hallmark thinking the kids would like it, which they promptly burned), and the widow's obsession with "Lifetime movies," I'm wondering if there's a stereotype they left unturned! And thinking of the widow, what the hell? She loses her husband, he starts haunting her computer, then getting creepily obsessed with revenge... so, she must have known who the kids were that caused the accident, if hearing about the deaths at the college made her suspicious (and if her husband's ghost knew who they were and talked about getting revenge on them), but she never turned them in? Or confronted them about what they had done, even when she saw them leaving flowers outside her house all the time? Or, like, made any effort whatsoever to end the haunting and stop him from killing? Because she loved him too much to ever have to be without his scary homicidal ghost living in her wifi? And then when her husband's last remaining killer shows up at her door to confess, she greets her with a bouncy, friendly smile? I CAN'T WITH THIS! It's been 10 seasons! Start writing women like human people!

 

Gaaah! Thanks, bitterness thread. I needed that.

[AwesomO4000]

Brought over from the Dean thread:
 

Me: I guess what I'm saying was that it was a big misunderstanding - made worse for "teh drama" (boy melodrama moment doesn't even apply here for me as this went way beyond that in my opinion), and I wanted to smack the writer(s) in the head for doing this - to Sam's character especially... again.... especially since the end game ended up just being "oh, well, Dean was right after all..." again. In other words, it wasn't really necessary except for "teh drama." My opinion only there.

 

This is what I don't get.  I don't care who was right and who was wrong.  I don't care about tit-for-tat.  I don't care about tallying up wins and losses.  I don't care who gets the emotional moments or relationships or Big Hero Moments.

 

I care about Sam and Dean and their relationship.  Give me a good story of the good guys fighting the good fight.  Together.  I don't give a damn about anything else.

 

I actually agree. That is what I want also.

 

I chose my words incorrectly. The reason I said that Dean was "right" and this is what happened... again is because that's what Sam and Dean's fight was mainly about: Dean being right that Sam would do the same thing and Sam disagreeing. The first time Sam and Dean had this kind of fundamental disagreement fight in season 4, at least it made sense. But this time, based on what happened at the end of the season, both Sam and Dean ended up agreeing with Dean's point of view (and there were no real consequences / ramifications on the main plot even like there were in season 4 - the conflict was just there) ... so why did we have to spend a whole half a season where Sam and Dean were basically fighting with each other - rather than together against the bad guys - when they both came to the same conclusion anyway? It might have been different if there had been some sort of character development involved, but there wasn't really much of that either as far as I could see.

 

So, to me, it all seemed to be Sam and Dean spending a whole half a season fighting over and saying and doing crappy things to each other  (mostly Sam to Dean) about something they actually ended up agreeing on in the end. This might happen in real life, but it's not what I want to see in my television shows, especially if it ends up making characters that I enjoy behave in awful ways in order to do it. At least if you're going to ruin a character for me for a while, I want it to be for an actual reason.

 

As you said earlier:

 

I never hated Sam until that moment.  To me, it was the most arrogant, self-serving, petty, ungrateful, and deliberately hurtful thing he could have said to Dean.  I have since forgiven "Sam" because, IMO, TPTB realized they made a huge mistake with that speech.  But at the time, I was utterly disgusted.  I still hate that episode and the majority of S9 for that reason.

 

To me, after doing that, that the end game was to just have Sam do exactly what Dean said he would all along is frankly, in my opinion, shitty. It wasn't that I cared that Sam was wrong... so, okay Sam would save Dean, no problem, if that's where they wanted to go. I'm entirely fine with that - it was that first they trashed Sam's character for seemingly no apparent reason except to make him look like an "arrogant, self-serving, petty, ungrateful, deliberately hurtful" dick to Dean. If in the end, TPTB figured out they made a big mistake... well then fix it: have Sam apologize and admit he was wrong; don't have him wait until the last minute and say "I lied" which either makes him look like the hugest hypocrite in the world or a complete, unsympathetic, self-absorbed idiot for not realizing it until the last, freaking minute... sorry that bugs the crap out of me.

 

I guess what I'm saying is I don't necessarily care that Sam is wrong most of the time it's that he gets completely trashed character-wise - almost always in defense of his wrongness... and then he's proven wrong on top of that. It happened in season 4 (with the horrid "Sex and Violence" being the biggest insult), it happened in season 8 (with too many examples to even list), and then it happened again in season 9. In many cases, too - except arguably season 8 - Sam should legitimately have a point, but the writers - in my opinion - either make sure that he doesn't or that his "point" is made to sound shitty, petty, etc. For me, I have a hard time believing that they make this "mistake" over and over again with Sam's character, so in general, I come to expect it now. In fact, I'm pretty sure that over on TWoP, I expressed my hope that Sam would at least stick to his principals on not bringing Dean back if Dean didn't want it, but that most likely that Dean would be right, and Sam would be made to just look like a hypocritical jerk for defending his beliefs so vehemently. And yeah, that's exactly what happened in the end.

 

So that's my bitterness. I keep hoping that Sam will one day be allowed to help Dean, save him, do something really positive rather than be the "arrogant, petty, hurtful" brother who can't get it right, and sometimes he gets close enough to give me hope - season 3, and 5-7 - and then the rug gets yanked out from under me again - season 4, 8, and 9. So I'm really worried since I have hope for this season that it's all going to go to crap again.

[Demented Daisy]

Reminder:  this is the Bitterness/Unpopular Opinions thread.  Standard disclaimers.

 

If Dean does something good/right, it doesn't mean that Sam is automatically bad/wrong.  Life (and this show) is so much more complex than that.  Was Sam right that Dean should not have done what he did?  Absolutely.  Dean fucked up.  Bad.  And he has been pretty unapologetic about it.  Also bad.  I don't remember the show ever trying to argue that he did the "right thing" by tricking Sam into allowing the possession.  It did have a few upsides (saving Sam, Charlie, and Castiel's lives), but it also had one major downside -- Kevin.  Sam has every right to his anger.  He has the right to say to Dean whatever he wants.

 

Was it wrong for Sam to say he wouldn't do the same?  No, I don't think so.  Not in that very specific instance.  If the show was trying to say that he wouldn't try to save Dean's life at all, well, that's another matter entirely.  I think that's what Sam meant by "I lied".  I don't think he meant that he lied about not saving Dean through unnatural, supernatural means.  I think he was hurt and he lied about not trying to save Dean at all.  I don't think that means that Sam was "wrong".  It doesn't mean that Dean did the right thing and Sam would have done the same in that situation.  I don't think that's what Sam was saying at all.

 

Was it wrong for Dean to say, "What happened with you being okay with this?"  Yep.  Stupid.  I wouldn't call it "crowing" as some others have, but was it a ridiculous thing for Dean to say in that moment?  Yep.  They could have worded it about a thousand ways better -- that wouldn't have made either of them look like jerks.

 

At the end of the day, this is a show about two brothers who have been through way, way too much in their short lives.  Despite everything supernatural that has happened to them, they're still human, with human faults.  When the writers make Dean do/say something stupid, I don't roll my eyes and say, "Well, at least Sam has done X, Y, and Z."  

 

I'm not telling anyone how to watch/enjoy the show.  For me, not keeping track of who said/did what increases my enjoyment of the show.  Dean acts like a jerk, Sam acts like a jerk.  Dean says/does something stupid, Sam says/does something stupid.  Dean saves the world, Sam saves the world.  The show goes on.

 

And mileage varies.

Edited February 23, 2015 by Demented Daisy

[AwesomO4000]

I understand your points, Demented Daisy. I also get that I'm likely over-reacting.

 

Sometimes the show makes it tough though. I probably would've found Sam's "I lied" much easier to swallow if not a few moments later Sam wasn't trying to summon Crowley - with Crowley postulating that Sam likely wanted to make a deal no less * - and then left it vague as to exactly what Sam planned to have Crowley do concerning Dean - since more than likely, it would have to have been some sort of supernatural means to save him, and being Crowley, likely evil/dark.

 

* Now I don't think Sam would've done that, but the chances that anything Crowley would have done concerning saving Dean were not going to be supernatural - and because it was Crowley, more than likely dark or evil in nature - were likely pretty slim. And since there was no Sam follow up with Sam discussing with anyone what he would have done or not - like say a conversation with Castiel with Sam maybe saying it was probably lucky Crowley didn't come, because he might have done something foolish, for example - then it looks like potentially Sam would have done something similar to what Dean had, and therefore the "I lied" does have the potential to take on that kind of meaning.

 

So I understand that interpretations vary. I just wish sometimes the show didn't make it so hard to know exactly what it is they are trying to say by leaving so much up to interpretation. I like your interpretation much better - i.e. that Sam didn't mean that he lied about doing something supernatural and not what Dean would have wanted, but instead meant saving Dean in general - but what he said to Dean and that Crowley scene makes it tricky for me.

[Demented Daisy]

Well, my personal canon was that he was summoning Crowley for vengeance, not necessarily to bring Dean back from the dead by some nefarious means.  

 

Damn it, Crowley. You got him into this mess. You will get him out... or so help me, God.

 

 

Absolutely this is up to interpretation.  Art is subjective that way.  I think he was thinking that Crowley would bring Dean back, or Sam would kill him.  Not that Sam would sell his soul or force a demon in Dean or anything like that.  Then, if Crowley refused and Sam killed him, then he would go on to angels or magic or whatever.  I mean, he could have summoned an angel like Dean did, but he didn't.  IMO, he still knew it was wrong.  He was more interested in punishing the person responsible.

 

But, yeah, interpretation.

 

ETA  Also, this was the immediate aftermath.  He was definitely distraught -- most likely because he didn't think it would happen.  Did he think Dean would die against Metatron?  Was he prepared for that eventuality?  No idea.  He was reacting, IMO, not thinking properly.

Edited February 23, 2015 by Demented Daisy

[trxr4kids]

I'm bitter that I started watching this show because I thought it was about two brothers on never ending roadtrip, saving people, hunting things( things like urban myths and various legends) while driving an impossibly well maintained classic car, listening to classic rock and bantering, squabbling good naturedly. Fast forward to now and it's two brothers, sorta, most of the time, who live in a lair, except when they don't, caught in the middle of the most epically boring battle (or really long strategy session) between heaven and hell while hating themselves or each other, you know sometimes, except when they don't. I may have ranted about that before so forgive me if I'm being repetitive, like we do the show.

 

Onto my list of stuff I never wanna see or even hear mentioned on this show again because of how freaking weird/disturbing they are about it:

1) Sex: Did you know that if you enjoy sex you're a) a lecherous pervert b) a teenager in a mans body c) soulless d) a demon  Take our quiz and find out which one.

2) Homosexuality: Isn't that so gay, let's all point and laugh, except when it's so terrifying that you have to knock over tables getting away from it so you don't catch the gay cooties.

3) Prostitution: I always thought this was a very complex societal, economic, psychological issue but thanks to Supernatural I now realize it's all the result of that Evil Empire the Post Office, it totally explains why nobody ever gets flyers telling them they can get free service if they're soulless.

4) Dogs: WTF show? Seriously WTEverlovingF?

Edited February 25, 2015 by trxr4kids