Supernatural Bitterness & Unpopular Opinions: You All Suck

[catrox14]

4 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

hey admitted this back then. The writers` room as a whole didn`t even think about it but Gamble, who was invested in Sam. spoke up. If not for that, noone would have even thought about any consent issues. The nepotism duo probably dreamed about having Ruby possess a dog for the actual deed.

That's kind of rich coming from Gamble who thought Meg!Sam was "hot" when he was attacking Jo in 'Born Under a Bad Sign". 

[catrox14]

45 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

Now, does it make it any better that Ruby possessed a dead body or a live one? I'd say yes and no. At least there wasn't a poor girl trapped in there, but that girl probably did have friends and family who were traumatized by her coming back from the dead and then disappearing. 

Oh man. I never even thought about that.

[ahrtee]

52 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

Now, does it make it any better that Ruby possessed a dead body or a live one? I'd say yes and no. At least there wasn't a poor girl trapped in there, but that girl probably did have friends and family who were traumatized by her coming back from the dead and then disappearing. 

 

Well, if it makes you feel better, she didn't have any distraught family members at her bedside when they were about to pull the plug, which sort of implies she didn't have anyone too close.  Not that that actually* makes* it better....

[Wayward Son]

Not that it makes it any better, since there might still be a family out there who never knew what happened to a love one, but a sign at the foot of the bed read Jane Doe. I took that to mean that her identity was unknown to the hospital, and she was randomly found in her comatose state hence no grieving family at her bed side.

Edited August 30, 2017 by Wayward Son

[Katy M]

1 hour ago, DittyDotDot said:

Now, does it make it any better that Ruby possessed a dead body or a live one? I'd say yes and no. At least there wasn't a poor girl trapped in there, but that girl probably did have friends and family who were traumatized by her coming back from the dead and then disappearing. 

IIRC, she was listed as a Jane Doe.  So, no, she didn't have any family that would have known she came back.  We obviously know nothing of this girl's back story, but she had presumably been in a coma for at least a few days if not longer. If she was still listed as Jane Doe, then either nobody was looking for her, or they weren't going to find her because they were looking in the wrong places.

 

1 hour ago, DittyDotDot said:

Think of it like a hermit crab. They find a shell to carry around and protect them, but when they outgrow that shell, they find a new one. They don't get to dictate what happens to the previous shell anymore. 

Perfect analogy.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

That's kind of rich coming from Gamble who thought Meg!Sam was "hot" when he was attacking Jo in 'Born Under a Bad Sign". 

I think she just conflated physical personal preferences with the content of the scene there. It wasn`t supposed to read as hot or sexy. Not even in the dirty!bad!wrong kind of way.

[trxr4kids]

1 hour ago, DittyDotDot said:

Personally, I'd have preferred they just didn't go the route of Sam and Ruby having sex, but I don't think there's really any consent issues here. Think of it like a hermit crab. They find a shell to carry around and protect them, but when they outgrow that shell, they find a new one. They don't get to dictate what happens to the previous shell anymore. 

I admit to being sleep deprived and stressed but all I could think was Ruby gave Sam supernatural crabs, I'll show myself out.

[catrox14]

1 hour ago, Aeryn13 said:

I think she just conflated physical personal preferences with the content of the scene there. It wasn`t supposed to read as hot or sexy. Not even in the dirty!bad!wrong kind of way.

I don't think it read as hot or sexy but I think Sera thought it was sexy.  So for me, her stuff about consent and whatever is largely BS IMO.

[Wayward Son]

I'm not sure where else to put this, but I'm honestly really disappointed by the reactions of certain segments of the fandom this week. Sure everyone has their favourites, but at times like this people should be banding together and not belittling the good work that has been done because it involves people they don't like. Worse still, they shouldn't be making false accusations against those just trying to help. I'm just so, so disappointed! So much for the so called SPN family. 

 

* I don't know if this is the right place for this, or if there really is a right place for expressing disappointment with general fandom, so for anyone interested in discussing further I'd prefer to do so via pm. I just needed to vent. 

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I don't think it read as hot or sexy but I think Sera thought it was sexy. 

I agree, I just think she found it sexy because of Sam. Like say, someone, might find the scene of Demon!Dean fondling the stripper hot because Dean IS hot and just ignores the context of the scene. Personally, neither the Meg!Sam & Jo nor the scene with demon!Dean was in any way hot or sexy to me - sure, I always find Dean the person sexy-looking but that doesn`t always translate into my reading of a particular scene.

In general, though, I can understand the principle of the thing. In another show there was a scene  where a guy threatens to break a girl`s arm - the context of the scene is he wants to protect her life and she is stubbornly trying to put herself in danger so he threatens physical harm - and I thought that scene was hot as hell. Others thought it was horribly controlling and abusive. Those things can vary.     

Quote

I'm not sure where else to put this, but I'm honestly really disappointed by the reactions of certain segments of the fandom this week. Sure everyone has their favourites, but at times like this people should be banding together and not belittling the good work that has been done because it involves people they don't like. 

It`s unfortunate but not surprisIng IMO because it`s not even the first time this particular thing happened. Personally, I also believe the SPN family per se is largely a myth, the fandom is way too divided for that to be the case. 

Edited August 30, 2017 by Aeryn13

[catrox14]

2 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

Personally, neither the Meg!Sam & Jo nor the scene with demon!Dean was in any way hot or sexy to me - sure, I always find Dean the person sexy-looking but that doesn`t always translate into my reading of a particular scene

Ack that demon!Dean scene with the stripper was horrifying. I can't imagine anyone thinking that was hot in the least little bit. EW. I thought that showed Dean was clearly not Dean.

[shang yiet]

I remember theTWOP thread swooning and fanning themselves after Born under a Bad Sign. Many thought Meg!Sam was hot. Livejournal was combusting too. So no, it was not just Sera Gamble.

[catrox14]

24 minutes ago, shang yiet said:

I remember theTWOP thread swooning and fanning themselves after Born under a Bad Sign. Many thought Meg!Sam was hot. Livejournal was combusting too. So no, it was not just Sera Gamble.

ACK! Ewwwwww. LOL

[MysteryGuest]

3 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

I'm not sure where else to put this, but I'm honestly really disappointed by the reactions of certain segments of the fandom this week. Sure everyone has their favourites, but at times like this people should be banding together and not belittling the good work that has been done because it involves people they don't like. Worse still, they shouldn't be making false accusations against those just trying to help. I'm just so, so disappointed! So much for the so called SPN family. 

 

* I don't know if this is the right place for this, or if there really is a right place for expressing disappointment with general fandom, so for anyone interested in discussing further I'd prefer to do so via pm. I just needed to vent. 

I used to let this sort of stuff get under my skin, but I've convinced myself now that while these people have really big mouths, and spend seemingly all of their time being abusive on social media, I honestly do think they're a small minority of fans.  I will never really understand how anyone gets a thrill from trolling someone they don't even know, but obviously, it must work for some people.  I know that Gen's been getting some rather unpleasant feedback on her NowandGen Instagram lately.  She seems to take it in stride, for the most part. Sadly, there's no shortage of assholes in the world.  

[AwesomO4000]

12 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

Although it does raise a different question. If the girl is dead then Ruby technically possessed a corpse. Are there any other known instances of this occurring?

In addition to the other examples already given, I think a few of the parking lot demons in "Jus In Bello" were also well and truly dead.

11 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

Exactly.  They should have left the whole thing out because it was always skeevy. 

What happens if the demon kills the possessed person? There is no longer a soul there. but the body is technically alive . Does that make it okay for the demon to do what they want with the body? 

Actually I think the soul is stuck there until the body is dead dead - like human Meg was stuck inside her body with demon Meg. So even if the demon kills the meatsuit, the soul can't leave unless the demon leaves for a little while.

As for Ruby, we also know for sure that the meatsuit was Dead, because when she possessed the maid "for a hot minute" in either "I Know What..." or the next episode, she left the body on the floor. It didn't get up and walk away like a soulless person would. So yup Ruby's meatsuit was truly and sincerely dead.

6 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

In general, though, I can understand the principle of the thing. In another show there was a scene  where a guy threatens to break a girl`s arm - the context of the scene is he wants to protect her life and she is stubbornly trying to put herself in danger so he threatens physical harm - and I thought that scene was hot as hell. Others thought it was horribly controlling and abusive. Those things can vary. 

I must admit to finding the very wrong Meg / tied up Sam scene in "Shadow" fairly hot. The way Sam asks "You wanna have fun? Go ahead then. I'm a little tied up right now." It's because I not only see chemistry between Jared and Nicky, but because I know that Sam is actually more in control than he looks, since he's distracting Meg to get himself free. I found that part sexy. Smart, resourceful Sam for the win.

Meg!Sam and Jo on the other hand, nope, doesn't do it for me... but like you, I can see where it might for someone else.

Same with exercising soulless Sam. On the one hand the visuals are nice, but the actions and attitude scream "sociopath" to me, and if I were that prostitute - who herself, I think was playing her own game *** - I would've been running out the door, entirely creeped out. In my opinion, she was not the most intuitive prostitute, because her "danger" radar should have been pinging. Not that I'm saying that Soulless Sam was a serial killer, but I don't think he would've thought twice should say a demon have come through the door and he could somehow have used her as bait.

*** I think she'd been paid already and the extra money was her tip, so she was being ingratiating - barking up the wrong tree too, because Soulless Sam could've cared less. I actually found my interpretation of the dynamics of that scene fascinating: a player trying hard to play her game - I didn't buy her "my day off" crap for a moment - but doomed to failure, because her "prey" was more dangerous than she knew.

And yeah, I'm probably reading more into than was there - but it makes the scene much more interesting for me anyway. : )

Edited August 31, 2017 by AwesomO4000

[SueB]

Chiming in with some info:

- Ruby was a corpse --when she was possessing the maid 'for a hot minute', she said 'coma girl is slowly rotting in the floor' when Sam asked.

- Since Sunday, 'SPNFamily' have been scrolling thru social media and providing the names/addresses of Hurricane Harvey victims in urgent need of evacuation to the Coast Guard. We've got over 2000 'saves' so far.   It's gonna get worse, BTW, the chemical plant in Arkheim has already had 2 explosions with more coming.  And east of Houston, the are releasing 3 dams soon.   Expect major crisis soon.   

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I must admit to finding the very wrong Meg / tied up Sam scene in "Shadow" fairly hot. The way Sam asks "You wanna have fun? Go ahead then. I'm a little tied up right now." It's because I not only see chemistry between Jared and Nicky, but because I know that Sam is actually more in control than he looks, since he's distracting Meg to get himself free. I found that part sexy. Smart, resourceful Sam for the win.

I thought Dean and Abaddon was hot, even though she threatend him with possession and he looked genuinely worried. 

In general, there are some scenes of sexualized violence or at least villains using sexual undertones when they are physically threatening and Dean usually responds to those with quips and bravado since this is the only weapon he has in those cases. Those are usually pretty good scenes IMO. I might not always find them sexy but I usually like them. 

Quote

 I think she'd been paid already and the extra money was her tip, so she was being ingratiating - barking up the wrong tree too, because Soulless Sam could've cared less. 

I think the scene had more or less the same background as something like Charlie doing cos-play and every single person there being madly into her. Thompson admitted she was - a genderbent - self insert for him and Gamble admitted to feeling like Sam "belonged to her". Or at least Jared himself said that. Hence, Thompspn wrote Charlie/himself as someone who would be the center of everyone`s romantic attention in a fantasy scenario and Gamble wrote the guy who was so good even prostitutes forgot about pay. It`s generally a trope I forgive more easily on twelve year old fanfic writers but professional writers on TV shows do it all the time, too. 

[AwesomO4000]

3 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

I think the scene had more or less the same background as something like Charlie doing cos-play and every single person there being madly into her. Thompson admitted she was - a genderbent - self insert for him and Gamble admitted to feeling like Sam "belonged to her". Or at least Jared himself said that. Hence, Thompspn wrote Charlie/himself as someone who would be the center of everyone`s romantic attention in a fantasy scenario and Gamble wrote the guy who was so good even prostitutes forgot about pay. It`s generally a trope I forgive more easily on twelve year old fanfic writers but professional writers on TV shows do it all the time, too. 

Oh, this is likely true. And as I said above, I admit that I'm likely putting more into the scene than is there. But I think one of the reasons is that to me - and this is based on the vibe I got - it didn't look like Jared was playing that scene as "sexy" but more as disturbing. Much like his smile in "Caged Heat" - which though theoretically was a smile, was creepy as all get out to me the way Jared did it - I felt the same way about that scene. The way Jared was playing Sam there, I was disturbed, rather than finding it sexy, and this was before we knew he was soulless. I remember thinking "yeesh there's something really wrong with Sam there. That's just wrong." To me his attitude was sort of like "Well, now that you've interrupted my exercises, are you done staring at me? Because I'm more than ready for you to get the hell out of here." With an added undertone of "if you don't hurry it up, I might make you sorry." And the almost annoyed throwing away of her number just added to that for me. Just eeugh.

And in light of the interesting piece someone posted recently in one of these threads about how much control directors have over how a scene looks, I'm wondering why I got this impression if that wasn't supposed to be what that scene was saying... that is if I'm not just seeing things that aren't there. (But it was such a strong impression I got.)

Oh I guess I need some bitterness, huh. I guess my bitterness is - especially in the early episodes, I wonder how much differently Dean and Sam would have come across if Jensen and Jared had more control over how their characters come / came across. Because sometimes I wonder how they feel about some of the crappy things the writers - and now maybe directors - do to their characters.

I don't think I could be an actress, because it would drive me bonkers to have little control over how the character I was portraying was going to come across onscreen. I'd want to own my own performance.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

Oh I guess I need some bitterness, huh. I guess my bitterness is - especially in the early episodes, I wonder how much differently Dean and Sam would have come across if Jensen and Jared had more control over how their characters come / came across. 

I think they wouldn`t have felt as confident about exerting control back then, both in terms of knowing the characters inside and out and also in their position within the production hierarchy. I mean, they sure know they wouldn`t have been fired for speaking out but despite not getting producer credits per se, they are in a more comparable position to producers now. 

[catrox14]

I was watching Nightshifter and Sam totally took over the group of hostages. Told them what and what not to do. Sam never wasn't a leader. Nothing he ever did with the BMOL wasn't leadership. He lead the way when they killed the Alpha Vamp. Sure it was happenstance but he still took charge of that whole thing. Those are two examples of Sam CLEARLY being a leader which just reminds me that the whole "leadership" speech in 12.22 with Sam saying it was easier to follow  rings even more false and is kind of a load of crap built on some weird revisionist history.

That's my unpopular opinion for today.

Edited September 4, 2017 by catrox14

[Bessie]

5 hours ago, catrox14 said:

Those are two examples of Sam CLEARLY being a leader which just reminds me that the whole "leadership" speech in 12.22 with Sam saying it was easier to follow  rings even more false and is kind of a load of crap built on some weird revisionist history.

Agreed. I've always viewed sam as something of a free spirit. Sometimes he leads, sometimes he follows and sometimes he does his own thing. He doesn't easily fit into one category. 

[Pondlass1]

1 hour ago, Bessie said:

I've always viewed sam as something of a free spirit. Sometimes he leads, sometimes he follows and sometimes he does his own thing. He doesn't easily fit into one category. 

This is the  main reason I continue to watch Supernatural.  The Winchester brothers don't fit any standard lead good/bad category (like most network heroes).    They're mostly screwed up to hell, but they'll still save the day.  

Still, no one could save the directionless mess that was season 12. Fingers crossed our Winchesters return for season 13... I'd forgive the anvils and parallels if we could have our Winchesters back - - you know...the ones that are canny and nimble and can win a fight.  Like back in the day.

[CluelessDrifter]

In reference to the discussion going on about the amulet or 'Samulet' in another thread, I guess my unpopular opinion is that Sam didn't fish the amulet out of the bin or keep it all those years.  There are logistical problems.  I guess the keepsake box is supposed to side step them.  Dean could have kept the box while Sam was in the cage, the way some have suggested, or it could be argued that Sam left the box at Bobby's, but the problem for both scenarios is that once Sam was soulless, he wouldn't have taken it, because he wouldn't have cared enough about anything in the box to take it.  Playing devil's advocate, all that means is that he would have had to get the box after he got his soul back.  Those aren't the biggest issue I have with it though.  

It's the times Sam could have given it back if it had ever been intended that he picked it up after Dean threw it away.  He and Dean were in a good place before he agreed to be Lucifer's vessel, so he could have done it then.  I could have probably lived with Sam seeing the amulet around Dean's neck rather than the never-before-seen green army man as a way to break Lucifer's control over him.  Then there was when he was trying to get through to Dean in Brother's Keeper.  There are more instances, but those are the biggest examples I can think of right now.  There are times when Sam could have looked at it if he had it, like when Dean was in Purgatory or when he was trying to find Demon!Dean.  I also think that it borders on making Sam look bad for not having given it back, which is why I think it was left up to the viewer to decide if he had it or Chuck did and why I think Chuck had it.  I think the writers realized the holes and left it open for interpretation for that reason.   (As an aside, I've seen it argued that Sam didn't give it back, because he was worried Dean would reject it, but there were plenty of times they were in a good place when he could have.  It's also an argument that paints Dean as an ogre.  I've seen it argued that he didn't give it back, because basically, 'finders keepers,' as in Dean threw it away, Sam picked it up and just kept it, but again there were plenty of times Sam could have looked at it if it was just keepsake for him.  I think the easiest solution is most likely.  After Dean threw it away, that was meant to be it.  The writers and show runners didn't plan to bring it back until it was suddenly reintroduced in Season 11, and that's why it doesn't make sense from a story perspective, IMO) 

[gonzosgirrl]

48 minutes ago, CluelessDrifter said:

In reference to the discussion going on about the amulet or 'Samulet' in another thread, I guess my unpopular opinion is that Sam didn't fish the amulet out of the bin or keep it all those years.  There are logistical problems.  I guess the keepsake box is supposed to side step them.  Dean could have kept the box while Sam was in the cage, the way some have suggested, or it could be argued that Sam left the box at Bobby's, but the problem for both scenarios is that once Sam was soulless, he wouldn't have taken it, because he wouldn't have cared enough about anything in the box to take it.  Playing devil's advocate, all that means is that he would have had to get the box after he got his soul back.  Those aren't the biggest issue I have with it though.  

It's the times Sam could have given it back if it had ever been intended that he picked it up after Dean threw it away.  He and Dean were in a good place before he agreed to be Lucifer's vessel, so he could have done it then.  I could have probably lived with Sam seeing the amulet around Dean's neck rather than the never-before-seen green army man as a way to break Lucifer's control over him.  Then there was when he was trying to get through to Dean in Brother's Keeper.  There are more instances, but those are the biggest examples I can think of right now.  There are times when Sam could have looked at it if he had it, like when Dean was in Purgatory or when he was trying to find Demon!Dean.  I also think that it borders on making Sam look bad for not having given it back, which is why I think it was left up to the viewer to decide if he had it or Chuck did and why I think Chuck had it.  I think the writers realized the holes and left it open for interpretation for that reason.   (As an aside, I've seen it argued that Sam didn't give it back, because he was worried Dean would reject it, but there were plenty of times they were in a good place when he could have.  It's also an argument that paints Dean as an ogre.  I've seen it argued that he didn't give it back, because basically, 'finders keepers,' as in Dean threw it away, Sam picked it up and just kept it, but again there were plenty of times Sam could have looked at it if it was just keepsake for him.  I think the easiest solution is most likely.  After Dean threw it away, that was meant to be it.  The writers and show runners didn't plan to bring it back until it was suddenly reintroduced in Season 11, and that's why it doesn't make sense from a story perspective, IMO) 

He didn't give it back or even show any hint of still having it when Dean hung the wooden version on the mirror in the 200th. Not a hint. And with the way this show loves its anvils, we should/would have seen the real thing in the box when he was putting the fake one in (if the box had existed then). Which only enforces my belief that they pulled the is it/isn't it wank out of their butts when they showed a possible bit of the cord in this amazing box of Sam's in 11x11, and then wussed out on spelling it out in Don't Call Me Shurley. Robbie's explanation that Sam started carrying around again when he thought God was speaking to him doesn't hold water - since it's reappearance in his pocket didn't happen until long after he was roundly disabused of that notion.

[AwesomO4000]

2 hours ago, CluelessDrifter said:

I also think that it borders on making Sam look bad for not having given it back, which is why I think it was left up to the viewer to decide if he had it or Chuck did and why I think Chuck had it.

Why would it make Sam look bad? He didn't think Dean wanted it anymore, but maybe he himself, didn't want to see it lost forever to a garbage heap, so he picked it up. But letting Dean know he took it might make it look like he didn't respect Dean's decision to get rid of it, so Sam kept it a secret. So he (Sam) got to keep it while not disrespecting Dean's wish to not have it / see it anymore. That makes sense to me, anyway. Looking at it that way might be sensitive of Sam, because Sam giving the amulet back to Dean might look like Sam saying "well, you threw it away, and you looked like you meant it, but I decided that you really didn't mean it, so picked it up for you because I knew instead you'd want it back later when you came to your senses." And since Dean did mean it - and Sam knew Dean meant it - Sam keeping it for himself without pressuring Dean to take it back or letting Dean know he didn't let Dean's decision to dump it stand, to me, doesn't make Sam look bad at all. To me, it would have been the most right thing to do.

2 hours ago, CluelessDrifter said:

After Dean threw it away, that was meant to be it.  The writers and show runners didn't plan to bring it back until it was suddenly reintroduced in Season 11, and that's why it doesn't make sense from a story perspective, IMO) 

I don't know. Considering a fan version showed up in season 10 - along with Chuck -  it might have already been being considered in season 10.

1 hour ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Robbie's explanation that Sam started carrying around again when he thought God was speaking to him doesn't hold water - since it's reappearance in his pocket didn't happen until long after he was roundly disabused of that notion.

But we are talking about Sam here. In most cases, if you look up optimistic (to an almost absurd extent) in the dictionary, there would be a picture of Sam. I doubt that a little thing like it actually being Lucifer who had been talking to him would make Sam think / believe that God wouldn't eventually show up. Sam's more stubborn than that. Besides, if he'd put the amulet in an inside, secure pocket, he might've forgotten that it was even there once Lucifer came to light. Either explanation works just fine for me.

[companionenvy]

4 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Why would it make Sam look bad? He didn't think Dean wanted it anymore, but maybe he himself, didn't want to see it lost forever to a garbage heap, so he picked it up. But letting Dean know he took it might make it look like he didn't respect Dean's decision to get rid of it, so Sam kept it a secret. So he (Sam) got to keep it while not disrespecting Dean's wish to not have it / see it anymore. That makes sense to me, anyway. Looking at it that way might be sensitive of Sam, because Sam giving the amulet back to Dean might look like Sam saying "well, you threw it away, and you looked like you meant it, but I decided that you really didn't mean it, so picked it up for you because I knew instead you'd want it back later when you came to your senses." And since Dean did mean it - and Sam knew Dean meant it - Sam keeping it for himself without pressuring Dean to take it back or letting Dean know he didn't let Dean's decision to dump it stand, to me, doesn't make Sam look bad at all. To me, it would have been the most right thing to do.

I might agree with you except for the scene where Dean says "I should never have thrown it away." That would have been the moment to reveal that he had kept it, if he had done so.

I hadn't seen the writer's comments on this, and am disappointed, because I just assumed the amulet showed up miraculously via Chuck in S11, which I like a lot better than thinking Sam had had it all along. Even without the Fan Fiction scene, given Sam's state of mind and the state of their relationship when Dean threw it out, I don't think he would have fished it out.

[AwesomO4000]

1 hour ago, companionenvy said:

I might agree with you except for the scene where Dean says "I should never have thrown it away."

I honestly don't remember Dean ever having said that. I even said above (or in the other thread) that if Dean had said something like that then I would agree that that would have been Sam's cue that Dean wanted it back. But as far as I remember, Dean never mentioned it again until Marie, and that was to say that he didn't need it. I remember Marie telling Dean that he shouldn't have thrown it away, and Dean replied that he didn't need the amulet to remind him of how he felt about Sam. Sam wasn't there to witness the exchange, but if he had been, he would have likely felt even more strongly that he should keep it to himself if he had heard that.

2 hours ago, companionenvy said:

Even without the Fan Fiction scene, given Sam's state of mind and the state of their relationship when Dean threw it out, I don't think he would have fished it out.

But Sam was good with their relationship at that point in season 5. It was Dean who was having the problem. Sam wanted the relationship to work and still thought that they could beat the apocalypse together. Sam was telling Castiel and Dean just that right before Dean threw the amulet away. And as I said above, if Sam didn't give it up before, I don't think he would give it up then either, especially since now he knew what the amulet did, and it had meaning for him personally. And if Sam thought that Dean was going to give up on him, I would think he would want it as a keepsake if nothing else (Just like he wanted it for that purpose after Dean's death).  Just my opinion on that one.

[catrox14]

2 hours ago, companionenvy said:

I might agree with you except for the scene where Dean says "I should never have thrown it away." That would have been the moment to reveal that he had kept it, if he had done so.

I think it was Marie who told Dean he should have never thrown it away. Dean said "I don't need it to know how I feel about my brother".  But he took it from Marie, and hung it up on the mirror and looked fondly at Sam. IMO, if Sam had kept the real one all along, that was the time for him to say he had it, when Dean was cool with having the fake one.

If Sam retrieved the amulet from the trash can because he had hope it would work one day, it seems to me he would have tried to use the amulet to help free Dean of the Mark in s9 and s10. Even if he forgot he had it, when he opened the keep sake box  to put the letter from Bobby in it, I would think he would have been like, "Wait, maybe this can help!", especially since he knew it was a curse from God. Like why not pull it out of that box and pray over it, or give it to Cas or Rowena. Something. Anything.

[companionenvy]

11 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I honestly don't remember Dean ever having said that. I even said above (or in the other thread) that if Dean had said something like that then I would agree that that would have been Sam's cue that Dean wanted it back. But as far as I remember, Dean never mentioned it again until Marie, and that was to say that he didn't need it. I remember Marie telling Dean that he shouldn't have thrown it away, and Dean replied that he didn't need the amulet to remind him of how he felt about Sam. Sam wasn't there to witness the exchange, but if he had been, he would have likely felt even more strongly that he should keep it to himself if he had heard tha

Thanks - I was misremembering. Sam did, however, see Dean put up the fake amulet in the impala, which again would likely, I think, have prompted him to admit that he still had the amulet. 

 

16 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

But Sam was good with their relationship at that point in season 5. It was Dean who was having the problem. Sam wanted the relationship to work and still thought that they could beat the apocalypse together. Sam was telling Castiel and Dean just that right before Dean threw the amulet away. And as I said above, if Sam didn't give it up before, I don't think he would give it up then either, especially since now he knew what the amulet did, and it had meaning for him personally. And if Sam thought that Dean was going to give up on him, I would think he would want it as a keepsake if nothing else (Just like he wanted it for that purpose after Dean's death).  Just my opinion on that one.

Sam's good with their relationship in that he doesn't have any problem with Dean, but despite his attempts to be optimistic - and what may have been a sincere belief that they could beat the apocalypse -- I don't believe he was fully secure in Dean's feelings about him. Not after Dean's reactions to his memories in Dark Side of the Moon.  We're also only two episodes away from "My Blood Valentine," in which Dean had seen Sam totally hopped up on demon's blood and had to lock him in the panic room. Dean was understanding, but I have to believe that would have activated Sam's anxiety and self-loathing. And, of course, it really hasn't been all that long since Dean had told Sam that they needed time apart. He came back, but the wounds from the apocalypse are still fresh. I don't think Sam doubts that Dean loves him and would still die to protect him, but when Dean throws the amulet out, it has to confirm his worries about whether their relationship has been permanently damaged by what he's done. Given that the amulet is valuable because of what it means for the brother's relationship, I can't see Sam wanting to keep it once Dean had tossed it; Sam wanting to keep the amulet after Dean died is very different than Sam wanting to keep it when Dean voluntarily got rid of it as a passive-aggressive gesture of anger at Sam. 

[Katy M]

10 hours ago, CluelessDrifter said:

In reference to the discussion going on about the amulet or 'Samulet' in another thread, I guess my unpopular opinion is that Sam didn't fish the amulet out of the bin or keep it all those years.  There are logistical problems.  I guess the keepsake box is supposed to side step them.  Dean could have kept the box while Sam was in the cage, the way some have suggested, or it could be argued that Sam left the box at Bobby's, but the problem for both scenarios is that once Sam was soulless, he wouldn't have taken it, because he wouldn't have cared enough about anything in the box to take it.  Playing devil's advocate, all that means is that he would have had to get the box after he got his soul back.  Those aren't the biggest issue I have with it though.  

It's the times Sam could have given it back if it had ever been intended that he picked it up after Dean threw it away.  He and Dean were in a good place before he agreed to be Lucifer's vessel, so he could have done it then.  I could have probably lived with Sam seeing the amulet around Dean's neck rather than the never-before-seen green army man as a way to break Lucifer's control over him.  Then there was when he was trying to get through to Dean in Brother's Keeper.  There are more instances, but those are the biggest examples I can think of right now.  There are times when Sam could have looked at it if he had it, like when Dean was in Purgatory or when he was trying to find Demon!Dean.  I also think that it borders on making Sam look bad for not having given it back, which is why I think it was left up to the viewer to decide if he had it or Chuck did and why I think Chuck had it.  I think the writers realized the holes and left it open for interpretation for that reason.   (As an aside, I've seen it argued that Sam didn't give it back, because he was worried Dean would reject it, but there were plenty of times they were in a good place when he could have.  It's also an argument that paints Dean as an ogre.  I've seen it argued that he didn't give it back, because basically, 'finders keepers,' as in Dean threw it away, Sam picked it up and just kept it, but again there were plenty of times Sam could have looked at it if it was just keepsake for him.  I think the easiest solution is most likely.  After Dean threw it away, that was meant to be it.  The writers and show runners didn't plan to bring it back until it was suddenly reintroduced in Season 11, and that's why it doesn't make sense from a story perspective, IMO) 

Exactly.  I had thought that he fished it out when the episode first aired  But, if he didn't give it back in Swan Song, he didn't have it.   1. As far as he knew, there was NEVER going to be another chance.  2. If Dean was ever going to not reject him, the moment when he was going to sacrifice himself for the world would have been it.  3. On the off chance that he did have it, he would either have to have been wearing it and Lucifer probably would have just chucked it, or where would he have put it that Dean wouldn't have found it during his off-year.

[AwesomO4000]

27 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

Sam's good with their relationship in that he doesn't have any problem with Dean, but despite his attempts to be optimistic - and what may have been a sincere belief that they could beat the apocalypse -- I don't believe he was fully secure in Dean's feelings about him. Not after Dean's reactions to his memories in Dark Side of the Moon.  We're also only two episodes away from "My Blood Valentine," in which Dean had seen Sam totally hopped up on demon's blood and had to lock him in the panic room. Dean was understanding, but I have to believe that would have activated Sam's anxiety and self-loathing. And, of course, it really hasn't been all that long since Dean had told Sam that they needed time apart. He came back, but the wounds from the apocalypse are still fresh. I don't think Sam doubts that Dean loves him and would still die to protect him, but when Dean throws the amulet out, it has to confirm his worries about whether their relationship has been permanently damaged by what he's done. Given that the amulet is valuable because of what it means for the brother's relationship, I can't see Sam wanting to keep it once Dean had tossed it; Sam wanting to keep the amulet after Dean died is very different than Sam wanting to keep it when Dean voluntarily got rid of it as a passive-aggressive gesture of anger at Sam. 

I can see it both ways. I could see Sam wanting to hold on to it exactly because Dean was angry with him... as a last ditch effort to have something that represented their relationship... a last bit of hope. Whereas if he left it in the trash, that would be like Sam also giving up and thinking their relationship was unfixable and having no hope, and considering that Sam's confidence in Dean doing the right thing is strongly present only two episodes later, I don't think Sam was as pessimistic about their relationship as you do. Just my opinion on that. As I've said before, in general Sam is a hopeful creature.

And though the situations as you say are different, I think in both cases, the amulet represents the relationship, and I can't see Sam entirely giving up on it... which would be pretty much what his leaving it behind would be doing in that situation. And again as I said... mystic amulet. I could see Sam not wanting it to be trashed on that principal alone. But again I get that miles vary.

As for "My Bloody Valentine," I agree that Dean was shaken, but I think for Sam that was actually a confidence builder and not  source of self-loathing, because despite falling off the wagon - due to enhanced addiction due to Famine - Sam was still ultimately able to resist the temptation. He didn't give in and take Famine's offer to "drink as much as he wanted." Sam said "no." Despite a powerful horseman's influence, and he was able to kill him. In my opinion, if anything, that would have given Sam confidence in his ability to resist his addiction.

18 minutes ago, Katy M said:

On the off chance that he did have it, he would either have to have been wearing it and Lucifer probably would have just chucked it, or where would he have put it that Dean wouldn't have found it during his off-year.

My fanwank is that it was at Bobby's somewhere with his stuff and maybe someday in the distant future he figured Dean would find it. In my opinion, despite him going into the cage, the wounds were still too fresh to give it back then. Part of Sam's plan of going into the pit was to fix his mistakes, but he wasn't there yet, so still too soon... in my opinion anyway... and besides, it was Dean's choice to dump it, so I would think Sam would try to respect that even if he'd wanted  to save the amulet for his own reasons.

Not that it matters what I think. The dialogue was left vague enough that Chuck could have found the amulet somewhere, and Sam not had it at all. I just prefer to think that Sam did.

[ILoveReading]

This might be unpopular even in the unpopular thread, but I don't think Sam fished the amulet out of the trash because I really don't think  it meant that much to him in the first place.  I guess I just don't really see how its a symbol of the brothers bond.

It was never supposed to be meaningful.  That was all Jensen.  He picked it out at random from a box of props because he felt Dean would wear protective symbols.  Kripke admitted to writing the backstory because he got tired of so many people asking about it.

It wasn't something Sam loving picked out for Dean.  It was a gift for John originally.  A really strong case can be made that Sam only gave it to Dean out of spite.

We've never seen Sam acknowledge the amulet.  Not even in the episode where we learn its back story.  Not even a throw away line like "I can't believe you still have that thing."  If its a symbol we should  have seen Dean try to give it to Sam to remember him by or at least have  some kind acknowledgement.   If the writers can't even be bothered to show it meant something to Sam to in the ep that shows where it came from it makes me question how much it really meant to him.

Sam did hold onto it while Dean was in hell, but I always felt that was more about using it as a symbol of hope that Dean would come back.  Much like the reason Dean held on to Cas's trench coat.  I don't think Dean felt it was a symbol of their profound bond, just a way of thinking, "Cas will need this when he comes back."

Also during Fallen Idols, Sam specifically tells Dean their previously relationship never worked.  During that point in s5 their relationship was not good.  Sam lost faith that Dean lost faith in him.  Dean was rapidly losing faith in everyone, including himself.  There was no real trust between that brothers at that point.  Why would Sam want a remind of all that, and a relationship he himself said had to change?

Plus, there is no logical reason why Sam wouldn't mention it during 5.22.   As for as he knows he'll never see Dean again.  I wouldn't have liked it any better but the amulet falling out of Sam's pocket makes more sense that a plastic green army man that was never seen before or since. 

It meant that Sam didn't think enough of the amulet to mention it when Dean came back from purgatory, or when Dean hung the fake one, or Sam trying to use it to get through to Mark of Cain Dean, or any other number of brother moments.   Apparently Dean was so moved and touched by the gesture he didn't even acknowledge it.  So I really don't see what was so great about that scene.  

Since its been gone longer than Dean had it, I'm not sure its really represents their bond anymore, unless the bond is something that is tucked away, hidden, easily forgotten  and only known to Sam. 

Edited September 6, 2017 by ILoveReading

[DittyDotDot]

5 hours ago, companionenvy said:

I might agree with you except for the scene where Dean says "I should never have thrown it away." That would have been the moment to reveal that he had kept it, if he had done so.

Sam and Dean never talk about the amulet on-screen. Dean  hangs it on the mirror as they drive away, but there is no dialogue in that scene. Marie tells Dean he shouldn't have thrown it away when she gives the prop to Dean and Dean's response is,, "It never really worked. I don't need a symbol to remind me how I feel about my brother." For me, it makes sense that Sam would know this about Dean and not think it necessary to tell him he had the thing at that point.

This is the deal, I don't think the amulet really was that big of a deal as everyone is making it out to be. I believe Sam fished it out of the trash in S5 simply because it was something that had meant something to Dean and didn't want it left behind in the trash--maybe he thought he'd give it back to Dean someday; maybe he just wanted it to remind himself things weren't always bad between them? Ether way, he tosses it in his box but, a lot of shit happens and basically forgets about it except when he maybe opened the box from time to time over the years. But it's just trinket of his past he doesn't want to get rid of, not some huge symbol of his relationship with Dean. 

Remembering the thing was supposed to glow in God's presence, he digs the thing out when he thinks God is sending him visions. He doesn't tell Dean because Dean doesn't believe he's getting visions at all, least of all from God. By the time it's known Lucifer sent him those visions, they know Amara is God's sister and the likelihood God might show up is still pretty good, so he keeps carrying it around just in case the thing works as advertised. It's not big deal, though, probably doesn't think it actually will work, but it's not like they have anything else, so why not. Sam tends to keep stuff like this to himself anyway, so I don't find it odd or unbelievable at all.

Anyway, I think it's perfectly reasonable that Sam had the thing all along. I actually don't think there are any logic fails to this one, it just comes down to personal preferences, IMO. I just happen to prefer the idea that Sam had the thing all along to the idea that Chuck magically put it in his pocket. It's not about Sam having this grand romantic symbol of his relationship with Dean, but, for me, it reminds me Sam is just a regular person. Lots of us hang on to crap we think means something at one point in our lives, but years later we find it and can't remember why we kept it in the first place--and yet still don't toss it. 

All that being said, even though I've always thought Sam fished it out of the trash, I never wanted or needed to be told on the show that's what he did. I think they should leave well enough alone with stuff like this. It's like with the Colt, I've always been fascinated by it and wondered how it works, but I never wanted to show to actually tell me how or why it works. Or like whether Chuck was really God or not; I think it was better when they left it ambiguous. Not every mystery needs to be overtly solved on the show; it's good to leave somethings out there for the audience to wonder at. Basically, it generally takes away the magic and fun of it all when you explain the magicians tricks. 

5 hours ago, companionenvy said:

I hadn't seen the writer's comments on this, and am disappointed, because I just assumed the amulet showed up miraculously via Chuck in S11, which I like a lot better than thinking Sam had had it all along.

But that's the thing, just because the writer or any PTB says something is their head canon--which Robbie clearly states it's his belief, not that it's absolute truth--that doesn't mean you have to adopt it as your own head canon. I think there's room within the fabric of the show for both interpretations to work.

Edited September 6, 2017 by DittyDotDot

[auntvi]

4 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

So, I think it's perfectly reasonable that Sam had the thing all along. I actually don't think there are any logic fails to this one, it just comes down to personal preferences, IMO. I just happen to prefer the idea that Sam had the thing all along to the idea that Chuck magically put it in his pocket. It's not about Sam having this grand romantic symbol of his relationship with Dean, but, for me, it reminds me Sam is just a regular person. Lots of us hang on to crap we think means something at one point in our lives, but years later we find it and can't remember why we kept it in the first place--and yet still don't toss it. 

 

Yes. That's what I've been thinking this morning. If I saw a sibling throw something from our childhood away, I'd retrieve it and hold onto it just because it's ours. The intrinsic value and even the symbolic value don't matter so much - it just belongs to us.

[gonzosgirrl]

41 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

But that's the thing, just because the writer or any PTB says something is their head canon--which Robbie clearly states it's his belief, not that it's absolute truth--that doesn't mean you have to adopt it as your own head canon. I think there's room within the fabric of the show for both interpretations to work.

 

I think the difference here is, Robbie wrote it back into the story with this head canon in mind. The person controlling the story (of the moment anyway) wrote it believing Sam had it all along. That's not really the same thing as fanon or the viewer's interpretation of things, IMO. I just wish they had spelled it out for once instead of leaving it open for argument yet again. To me, that's fan service at its worst - doing it, but not having the stones to own it.

[DittyDotDot]

5 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

I think the difference here is, Robbie wrote it back into the story with this head canon in mind. The person controlling the story (of the moment anyway) wrote it believing Sam had it all along. That's not really the same thing as fanon or the viewer's interpretation of things, IMO. I just wish they had spelled it out for once instead of leaving it open for argument yet again. To me, that's fan service at its worst - doing it, but not having the stones to own it.

Why does it matter? I think writer's intentions can be interesting and can sometimes make me look at something differently, but ultimately, it's up to me what it means. That's the beauty of art. There is no wrong way to experience it.

[Katy M]

17 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

Why does it matter? I think writer's intentions can be interesting and can sometimes make me look at something differently, but ultimately, it's up to me what it means. That's the beauty of art. There is no wrong way to experience it.

I've said it a million times.  It doesn't matter what the writers, directors, or actors say offscreen.  If it doesn't happen onscreen, it doesn't count.  There was nothing that was aired that led me to believe that Sam had the amulet all along.  If they ever air something that says that he did, I might not necessarily consider it a retcon, but if and until that happens, I'm viewing the show under the lens that he did not.

[trxr4kids]

1 hour ago, DittyDotDot said:

Why does it matter? I think writer's intentions can be interesting and can sometimes make me look at something differently, but ultimately, it's up to me what it means. That's the beauty of art. There is no wrong way to experience it.

That's the best way to look at it since almost every time I read their comments I'm left thinking either they're talking about a different show entirely or I'm watching it wrong. ; )

49 minutes ago, Katy M said:

I've said it a million times.  It doesn't matter what the writers, directors, or actors say offscreen.  If it doesn't happen onscreen, it doesn't count.  There was nothing that was aired that led me to believe that Sam had the amulet all along.  If they ever air something that says that he did, I might not necessarily consider it a retcon, but if and until that happens, I'm viewing the show under the lens that he did not

I both agree and disagree with this ( shocking, I know, ) because although I think intent matters it doesn't necessarily ( or even likely ) change my opinion. Warning this is not bitch vs jerk just my opinion and I'm not trying to go there. Example A: everyone and their mother affiliated with the show says Sam is the empathetic, compassionate one but I don't often see him being more of either. Example B: everyone says Dean is bossy and controlling but I again don't see him being more of either.

[catrox14]

The amulet lost meaning for Dean because 1) he saw that his happy memories were all about family and he found out that Sam's were not. 2) He finds out that the amulet was supposed to actually do something as in track God, but it didn't and that God didn't care. Sam learned the same thing about the amulet at the same time.  Cas wanted to believe Joshua was lying but Sam told Cas that he didn't think he was which IMO meant. 

IMO, Sam, too, no longer thought the amulet had practical value in s5, so I don't see him retrieving it for that reason. For the sake of argument, let's say he did keep it for that reason, then why then didn't he think to use it in s10 when he needed all the help he could get to save Dean? Yet  in s11 he did think to put it in his pocket because he thought God was talking to him?

I think it's almost like Robbie wrote the ending of DCMS with the vision of Chuck showing himself to the boys and then put in the moment of 'TA DA it's the Samulet!" , so fans would be all, 'AWWWWWWW look!". IMO, Robbie didn't think through all the ramifications of the past WRT to putting the amulet in Sam's pocket

Robbie should have just said, Chuck retrieved the amulet himself, because he didn't want anyone else trying to find him with it. Then when he decided he wanted to be found he put in Sam's pocket. There is no trying to justify the whys and wherefores of how Sam came to have it. 

[Katy M]

36 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Robbie should have just said, Chuck retrieved the amulet himself, because he didn't want anyone else trying to find him with it. Then when he decided he wanted to be found he put in Sam's pocket. There is no trying to justify the whys and wherefores of how Sam came to have it. 

WEll, he obviously put it in Sam's pocket, regardless of where it was before, because he showed it to MEtatron while they were in Heaven (?) before it appeared in Sam's pocket. Which is why I don't really see why people think Sam had it all along in the first place.

[catrox14]

11 minutes ago, Katy M said:

WEll, he obviously put it in Sam's pocket, regardless of where it was before, because he showed it to MEtatron while they were in Heaven (?) before it appeared in Sam's pocket. Which is why I don't really see why people think Sam had it all along in the first place.

 

11 minutes ago, Katy M said:

WEll, he obviously put it in Sam's pocket, regardless of where it was before, because he showed it to MEtatron while they were in Heaven (?) before it appeared in Sam's pocket. Which is why I don't really see why people think Sam had it all along in the first place.

I remember a lot of fans thought Sam looked embarrassed  when the amulet lit up which made them think he had it all along. Now with Robbie's remarks it's just adding to the debate.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

4 hours ago, DittyDotDot said:

Anyway, I think it's perfectly reasonable that Sam had the thing all along. I actually don't think there are any logic fails to this one, it just comes down to personal preferences, IMO. I just happen to prefer the idea that Sam had the thing all along to the idea that Chuck magically put it in his pocket. It's not about Sam having this grand romantic symbol of his relationship with Dean, but, for me, it reminds me Sam is just a regular person. Lots of us hang on to crap we think means something at one point in our lives, but years later we find it and can't remember why we kept it in the first place--and yet still don't toss it. 

Sigh.  This is me as I try to clean out my closet and desk drawers....

[CluelessDrifter]

14 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Why would it make Sam look bad? He didn't think Dean wanted it anymore, but maybe he himself, didn't want to see it lost forever to a garbage heap, so he picked it up. But letting Dean know he took it might make it look like he didn't respect Dean's decision to get rid of it, so Sam kept it a secret. So he (Sam) got to keep it while not disrespecting Dean's wish to not have it / see it anymore. That makes sense to me, anyway. Looking at it that way might be sensitive of Sam, because Sam giving the amulet back to Dean might look like Sam saying "well, you threw it away, and you looked like you meant it, but I decided that you really didn't mean it, so picked it up for you because I knew instead you'd want it back later when you came to your senses." And since Dean did mean it - and Sam knew Dean meant it - Sam keeping it for himself without pressuring Dean to take it back or letting Dean know he didn't let Dean's decision to dump it stand, to me, doesn't make Sam look bad at all. To me, it would have been the most right thing to do.

 

This is the 'paints Dean as an ogre' argument that I really detest.  Not only does it make it seem like Dean would lash out at Sam for keeping the damn thing, because . . . because why?  Because he would think it means Sam doesn't respect his decisions?  Seriously?  If I throw something away and my brothers want it, they're welcome to it.  I'm not going to go through all the mental gymnastics I would have to go through to be mad that they picked it up and think it means they don't respect my wishes.  But it also paints Sam as a head ducking, mousy, keeps-his-opinions/wants/wishes-to himself kind of guy, and I just don't see Sam like that. 

14 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I don't know. Considering a fan version showed up in season 10 - along with Chuck -  it might have already been being considered in season 10.

Then why not use it instead of the pictures in Brother's Keeper?  That was in season 10 and an optimal time to bring it out if he's the one who had it.

[catrox14]

5 hours ago, DittyDotDot said:

Lots of us hang on to crap we think means something at one point in our lives, but years later we find it and can't remember why we kept it in the first place--and yet still don't toss it.

 I could buy that argument if this was something other than the amulet which had significance beyond sentimental value.

The day Dean threw it away was a pretty big day in the boys and Cas' life. The boys were murdered by Roy and Walt, went to Heaven, found out all kinds of distressing things, and then were resurrected with all the memories of Heaven and the knowledge that God was all "fuck this shit, I'm out".  Cas was so upset that the amulet didn't work that he called God a "son of a bitch" and gave up. To me, that's the kind of day that Sam isn't likely to forget, so why would he forget the thing that's tied to the three big  events of that day.

For me, it comes down to either the amulet is a big deal to Sam or it's not. IMO, if it was a big enough deal for him to retrieve it, then he wouldn't forget he has it,  especially since they don't have a houseful of crap and he has ONE keepsake box to remember.

Edited September 6, 2017 by catrox14

[AwesomO4000]

@DittyDotDot: I wish I could like your post multiple times. You've said what I've been trying ot say, but so much better.

3 hours ago, CluelessDrifter said:

This is the 'paints Dean as an ogre' argument that I really detest.  Not only does it make it seem like Dean would lash out at Sam for keeping the damn thing, because . . . because why?  Because he would think it means Sam doesn't respect his decisions?  Seriously?  If I throw something away and my brothers want it, they're welcome to it.  I'm not going to go through all the mental gymnastics I would have to go through to be mad that they picked it up and think it means they don't respect my wishes.  But it also paints Sam as a head ducking, mousy, keeps-his-opinions/wants/wishes-to himself kind of guy, and I just don't see Sam like that. 

I'm not seeing how this paints Dean as an ogre. Are you saying here that the only reason Sam would keep the amulet's existence to himself is because he'd be afraid of Dean's retribution and so is therefor being mousy about it? Why is this the only option? Could it instead be that maybe Sam actually respects his brother's opinion and choice and so therefor doesn't see the need to advertise the fact that he has it, since Dean doesn't care, so why even bring it up? That is if the explanation isn't as simple as the one DittyDotDot described - which to me is a very plausible explanation.

3 hours ago, catrox14 said:

The day Dean threw it away was a pretty big day in the boys and Cas' life. The boys were murdered by Roy and Walt, went to Heaven, found out all kinds of distressing things, and then were resurrected with all the memories of Heaven and the knowledge that God was all "fuck this shit, I'm out".  Cas was so upset that the amulet didn't work that he called God a "son of a bitch" and gave up. To me, that's the kind of day that Sam isn't likely to forget, so why would he forget the thing that's tied to the three big  events of that day.

Maybe not forget exactly so much as perhaps it's just no longer as important / traumatic in the grand scheme of things because of everything that has happened since, but still has some meaning. Since that day - and actually not that far after that day - Sam had a whole series of much maybe bigger days to follow, including going to hell to come back to find that he'd been walking around soulless doing God knows what, then getting those memories back along with 180 years of hell torment, Castiel becoming a wrathful God, Sam losing his mind, etc. etc. Sam even adopted a somewhat Zen attitude to deal with all of that shit. So maybe in the grand scheme of things, that particular day no longer seems quite as traumatic in comparison. To me, that's pretty understandable. To me, that actually makes much more sense than Dean's blowing up and throwing it away in the first place and declaring the night Sam went to college was the "worst night of his life." I remember thinking "really Dean, still with that," because yes, it might have been if not for the fact that you had about 30 years worth of nights in hell getting tortured and another 10 torturing souls yourself that you supposedly feel guilty about, so maybe some perspective here, because shouldn't some of those night actually be worse by like a whole bunch?

So I can entirely see Sam thinking that the amulet was important at the time, saving it because it had sentimental meaning to him and/or because of its mystical value, but then in the grand scheme of things later and with  other bonding moments to come, well, then it didn't seem quite as significant as it was in that moment, but still being something Sam wanted to hold on to. That makes total sense to me, but that doesn't mean it has to for others.

9 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

We've never seen Sam acknowledge the amulet.  Not even in the episode where we learn its back story.  Not even a throw away line like "I can't believe you still have that thing."  If its a symbol we should  have seen Dean try to give it to Sam to remember him by or at least have  some kind acknowledgement.   If the writers can't even be bothered to show it meant something to Sam to in the ep that shows where it came from it makes me question how much it really meant to him.

I think the fact that Sam was remembering exactly that memory and why he was remembering it - that he was going to be losing his brother soon - shows the importance of it. Sam knows why Dean still has the thing, so there's not reason for him to say he can't believe why Dean still has it. For me the meaning was clear - the camera (and we were doing Sam's POV at the time) focuses on it as Dean comes in. For me personally, I got the message and didn't need an anvil.

9 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

Sam did hold onto it while Dean was in hell, but I always felt that was more about using it as a symbol of hope that Dean would come back. 

Sam didn't only hold on to it. He wore it on his neck. For me, that takes it to another level, because it's very personal. Not that I'm saying Dean keeping Castiel's jacket wasn't also personal, but for me, wearing it takes it up a notch.

9 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

I wouldn't have liked it any better but the amulet falling out of Sam's pocket makes more sense that a plastic green army man that was never seen before or since. 

Actually we had seen army men before - they were part of Dean's memories that he talked about and used to relate to the kid in "Dead in the Water." And we saw the actual green army man again in "Baby."

9 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

It meant that Sam didn't think enough of the amulet to mention it when Dean came back from purgatory, or when Dean hung the fake one, or Sam trying to use it to get through to Mark of Cain Dean, or any other number of brother moments.  

Why would Sam even bring it up if he didn't think Dean had any attachment to it any more? However, he knows how Dean feels about Mom and their family, so the pictures - which he got from Dean's room - made a lot more sense in my opinion. Especially since just recently Mark of Cain Dean had told Sam he should be the one dead instead of Charlie... I'm thinking appealing to Dean using mom looked like a much better strategy.

9 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

Also during Fallen Idols, Sam specifically tells Dean their previously relationship never worked.  During that point in s5 their relationship was not good.  Sam lost faith that Dean lost faith in him.  Dean was rapidly losing faith in everyone, including himself.  There was no real trust between that brothers at that point.  Why would Sam want a remind of all that, and a relationship he himself said had to change?

By the time of "Dark Side of the  Moon" Sam was in  better place. Two episodes after this (PONR), Sam would believe that Dean would make the right decision and not say "yes" to Michael, so I disagree that for Sam, he thought the relationship was in a bad place or that he had lost faith in Dean. I would say more that he did trust in Dean at that point. As for the need for a relationship change, why would needing a change now (in "Fallen Idols") mean that it wasn't good when they were kids - which is when the amulet came from? Just because Sam thought that their recent relationship needed to change so they could work together better now, didn't negate the relationship from when they were kids. And that only makes sense to me. A relationship that works when you're children isn't necessarily going to work as well once you become adults. The relationship has to change as you do. That doesn't mean that relationship before automatically becomes crap. It just means that it was different and doesn't work any more for who you are now. To me that only makes sense.

9 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

Plus, there is no logical reason why Sam wouldn't mention it during 5.22.  

I personally disagree, because I think it was still too soon, myself.

9 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

I'm not sure its really represents their bond anymore,

I never said it did. It would have become more of a sentimental keepsake, but that to me is a far cry from it just being something that's seen as a useless piece of trash to be chucked out. It doesn't have to be either this huge representation of Sam and Dean's brotherly bond - just as Dean pointed out in "Fan Fiction" - or a useless piece of trash Sam should've chucked out. It can be something in between those two things and still be something Sam might've wanted to hold on to. My opinion only on that.

Edited September 6, 2017 by AwesomO4000

[CluelessDrifter]

17 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I'm not seeing how this paints Dean as an ogre. Are you saying here that the only reason Sam would keep the amulet's existence to himself is because he'd be afraid of Dean's retribution and so is therefor being mousy about it? Why is this the only option? Could it instead be that maybe Sam actually respects his brother's opinion and choice and so therefor doesn't see the need to advertise the fact that he has it, since Dean doesn't care, so why even bring it up? 

No, I'm saying that's how I see your argument for why Sam might have kept it to himself.  

[AwesomO4000]

7 minutes ago, CluelessDrifter said:

No, I'm saying that's how I see your argument for why Sam might have kept it to himself.  

It isn't what I meant and after rereading my explanation, I don't see where I said anything that implied that.

I said that Sam not telling Dean could be him respecting Dean's decision rather than making it look like Sam thought Dean really didn't mean to throw it away and Sam knew better. Nowhere in that was I saying that Sam was afraid to tell Dean he recovered it or that he thought Dean would get angry with him, so I wasn't sure where that came from, but it's not what I meant, so sorry I didn't make it clear enough.

[CluelessDrifter]

16 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

It isn't what I meant and after rereading my explanation, I don't see where I said anything that implied that.

I said that Sam not telling Dean could be him respecting Dean's decision rather than making it look like Sam thought Dean really didn't mean to throw it away and Sam knew better. Nowhere in that was I saying that Sam was afraid to tell Dean he recovered it or that he thought Dean would get angry with him, so I wasn't sure where that came from, but it's not what I meant, so sorry I didn't make it clear enough.

No worries.  I just think that sneaking around and keeping a secret about having an amulet because you don't want your brother to think you aren't respecting his wishes makes it seem as though said brother would be angered by it.  I see no other reason for secrecy.  Out of respect for said brother's wishes doesn't work for me, because if you think Sam kept it, then it was his and no longer Dean's, and why would Dean care what he did with it?  If he took it thinking Dean might want it again some day, then there were plenty of times over the years he could have given it back.  If he kept it for himself, then there were plenty of times we could have seen him look at it or just have it.  He had it when Dean was in Hell.  Why not any of the other times he thought Dean was dead, or Dean was missing?  I contend that it's because Sam never picked it up.  He (and the writers) left it behind until Chuck brought it back into the story in season 11.

Edited September 6, 2017 by CluelessDrifter

[AwesomO4000]

3 minutes ago, CluelessDrifter said:

No worries.  I just think that sneaking around and keeping a secret about having an amulet, because you don't want your brother to think you aren't respecting his wishes makes it seem as though said brother would be angered by it.  I see no other reason for secrecy.  Out of respect for said brothers wishes doesn't work for me, because if you think Sam kept it, then it was his and no longer Dean's, and why would Dean care what he did with it?  If he took it thinking Dean might want it again some day, then there were plenty of times over the years he could have given it back.  If he kept it for himself, then there were plenty of times we could have seen him look at it or just have it.  He had it when Dean was in Hell.  Why not any of the other times he thought Dean was dead, or Dean was missing?  I contend that it's because Sam never picked it up.  He and the writers left it behind until Chuck brought it back into the story in season 11.

I see your point, but I do see other reasons for secrecy. Not too long after this episode, Dean tells Sam that Sam is self-righteous, so I could see Sam not wanting Dean to think he made the decision to take the amulet based on some sort of belief that he thought he knew better than Dean. And definitely in light of season 4 where Sam was making decisions based on Sam thinking he knew better than Dean, and so he might not want Dean to think he was doing stuff like that again. Sam was still feeling some guilt here, so in my opinion some of that guilt was going to affect his actions.

If Sam did take the amulet, I don't think he took it thinking Dean might want it again some day. I actually think he took it thinking that Dean wouldn't want it again some day, which is why I think he would keep it to himself.

As for why Sam wasn't shown with it, I think part of that is except for his hallucinations, I don't remember the writers really showing Sam all that much in his alone time. We sometimes see Dean in his room listening to music or out working on the car, but for some reason, we rarely see Sam on his "down time" except sometimes jogging or exercising. Season 11 was one of the few times I really remember the writers actually writing scenes going into that. And I'm not sure why that is, since I, for one, would enjoy seeing more of that - for both brothers - but it is what it is.

I'm not going to consider why Sam wouldn't have in season 8, because it'll just make me annoyed. Little of what the writers had sam do made sense to me in that season. I like to forget most of it even exists.

Based on how I saw Sam's character at the time, I think he would've retrieved the amulet. However, Sam not having retrieved the amulet is just as valid an interpretation, based on what we know. And I personally am glad that writers who believed both interpretations were on the writing staff, because unless and until there is a canon decision one way or another - and I don't expect there will be - I think the differing opinions made for a more rounded narrative. But that's just my opinion on that.

[ILoveReading]

6 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I see your point, but I do see other reasons for secrecy. Not too long after this episode, Dean tells Sam that Sam is self-righteous, so I could see Sam not wanting Dean to think he made the decision to take the amulet based on some sort of belief that he thought he knew better than Dean. And definitely in light of season 4 where Sam was making decisions based on Sam thinking he knew better than Dean, and so he might not want Dean to think he was doing stuff like that again. Sam was still feeling some guilt here, so in my opinion some of that guilt was going to affect his actions.

If Sam did that I would think he's trying to paint himself as a victim, that he has to hide it because he doesn't want Dean to make him feel bad.    It's still Sam making all his decisions and hiding things from Dean because he thinks Dean will get mad or upset.  I agree with @CluelessDrifter  in that it makes Dean sound like an ogre and makes Dean the bad guy. 

*Not saying you were saying this, this is just how I would interpret the Sam's actions if that is what he did.