All Episodes Talk: Saving People, Hunting Things

[DittyDotDot]

1 hour ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

So, out of curiosity - and because I saw a few commentaries on the use of this structure early in the show, where would you say each of the brothers are in the journey now?

I think each has completed their own hero's journey now. Sam's ended in S5 and Dean's ended this season. 

[RulerofallIsurvey]

1 hour ago, DittyDotDot said:

I think each has completed their own hero's journey now. Sam's ended in S5 and Dean's ended this season. 

I disagree.  I think they've each only partially completed it.  They've gotten as far as The Supreme Ordeal.  And maybe Dean's gotten his Reward. but I don't think Sam has.  Especially if you consider his journey complete as of S5. What was Sam's Reward?  That he got pulled out of Hell without his Soul?  Or that he stopped the Apocalypse?  If the latter, okay, maybe....I could buy that (if I squint really hard and don't look too long into the light).  But then, he still has his Road Back to complete.  I guess that was S6 half without his soul?  Then there's Resurrection: S8 after Sam had given up hunting and returned?  And finally there's Restoring the World - which all I've seen so far that could fit that is a return to the Trials of Hunting Things and Saving People, but otherwise, nothing's changed.  Nothing is really better.  I'm actually hoping S12 helps fulfill the last one a little more.  

[DittyDotDot]

8 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

I disagree.  I think they've each only partially completed it.  They've gotten as far as The Supreme Ordeal.  And maybe Dean's gotten his Reward. but I don't think Sam has.  Especially if you consider his journey complete as of S5. What was Sam's Reward?  That he got pulled out of Hell without his Soul?  Or that he stopped the Apocalypse?  If the latter, okay, maybe....I could buy that (if I squint really hard and don't look too long into the light).  But then, he still has his Road Back to complete.  I guess that was S6 half without his soul?  Then there's Resurrection: S8 after Sam had given up hunting and returned?  And finally there's Restoring the World - which all I've seen so far that could fit that is a return to the Trials of Hunting Things and Saving People, but otherwise, nothing's changed.  Nothing is really better.  I'm actually hoping S12 helps fulfill the last one a little more.  

Here's how I would break it down:

• THE ORDINARY WORLD-Sam: Pilot / Dean: Gamble, Exile on Main Street; Carver, We Need To Talk About Kevin.
• THE CALL TO ADVENTURE-Sam: Dean comes to get Sam at college/Dean: Gamble, Sam invites Dean to bail on Lisa and Ben; Carver, Benny giving Dean a way out of Purgatory.
• REFUSAL OF THE CALL-Sam: Sam returns to Jessica in the Pilot/Dean: Gamble, Dean returns to Ben and Lisa in Exile on Main Street; Carver, Dean almost choosing to remain in Purgatory for Cass.
• MEETING WITH THE MENTOR-Sam: I'd say meeting Ruby in S3, but one could argue Yellow Eyes at the end of S1 or Meg mid-S1/Dean: Gamble, Grampy Campbell; Carver, Crowley.
• CROSSING THE THRESHOLD-Sam: after Dean dies and goes to Hell/ Dean: Gamble, Purgatory; Carver: Taking on the Mark.
• TESTS, ALLIES AND ENEMIES-Sam: S4/ Dean: S9
• APPROACH-Sam: S4/Dean S10
• THE ORDEAL-Sam: sacrificing himself to kill Lilith at the end of S4/Dean: sacrificing himself for the Mark and then killing Death at the end of S10
• THE REWARD-Sam: God saved him and dried him out/Dean: getting the Mark removed.
• THE ROAD BACK-Sam: S5/Dean: S11
• THE RESURRECTION-Sam: Swan Song/Dean: Alpha and Omega.
• RETURN WITH THE ELIXIR.  Sam: End of Swan Song/Dean: End of Alpha and Omega.

IMO, Dean's journey is a bit murkier because we had known him for six years before his Campbell journey started and he had two different "writers" for his journey. Even if you ignore the Campbell structure and just look at both characters bench marks for S1-5 and S6-11, I think it's clear they were trying to flip the script.

[Aeryn13]

While Kripke has explicitely said he worked in Campbellian mythstructures for Sam, I`m not convinced even he really followed the script to the letter. It was a narrative spanning the first 5 Seasons but IMO TV writers these days use the bare bones for a "hero`s journey". Those that most viewers think of when they hear "Chosen One story". Which is: a person who is somehow special (and may or may not have a special connection to the villain) and is called to an adventure (often by the villain messing up their life). They later fulfill some kind of special destiny by getting the BDH moment and save the "world". The world, depending on the story, may just be one land or something, it depends. Powers are optional but nearly always included. For maximum angst and suspense factor the special hero will have a dark period within their arc.  

Those are the cliff`s notes TV writers seem to work with. And because Campbell just collected common story elements from myth and tried to give it some kind of narrative structure, writers unwittingly will use them now as well. If you think about it, Campbell basically did his own version of "TV/movies tropes" before that existed. And even writers who won`t know the name of the trope or that it even exists as a trope will somehow use it because every-freaking-one does. 

So Sam`s story fits the rough baseline. Special. Check. Destiny. Check. Called to adventure. Check. Dark period. Check. Gets the glorious world-saving moment. Check. 

With Dean, I don`t think Gamble did anything even remotely hero journey wise. He was kinda there during those Seasons but already the call to arms from Exile on Main Street fails because he wasn`t in any way "speshul". Gamble did something there that is actually not done which  is the "reluctant sidekick". Why is that not done? Because it freaking makes no sense if the sidekick is reluctant. Those are replaceable characters. If they don`t wanna go to an adventure, you have a 1000 other possible sidekicks waiting in the wings. 

At first it looked as Sam was again the special one for Season 6 but despite having the first half to his story, he was just a red herring and Cas was actually Hero Journey boy in Season 6. They just didn`t really give it screentime. Another thing that is not done. Gamble`s Seasons were IMO a mess. Don`t get me wrong, I`m not saying everyone has to follow all the tropes all the time but doing completely nonsensical stuff narratively shouldn`t be the answer either. Of course in Season 7 we had no journey, from noone. Except the Leviathans and those were the villians. But at least it meant you needed them for the story. Certainly didn`t need either Winchester for it.

Season 8 was an attempt to kickstart another Hero`s Journey for Sam but that petered out. 

In my eyes Dean`s journey began in episode 11 of Season 9, First Born. It didn`t follow the classical structure too much and it wasn`t done with too much care or an eye for detail or investment and they didn`t give him the same flashy grandiose BDH moment in the end but it did run for those 2 and a half Seasons and it made somewhat of an attempt to give him a positive conclusion. 

So in the end, I would agree. Both have completed their journeys. Now they could start a new one for either one (in which case it would be Sam) or, after having ripped off Babylon 5 Season 4 with the battle of Dark and Light and even kinda its resolution, they will now rip off Babylon 5 Season 5 and simply do a wrap-up of sorts with littler stories here and there. 

[AwesomO4000]

1 hour ago, Aeryn13 said:

With Dean, I don`t think Gamble did anything even remotely hero journey wise. He was kinda there during those Seasons but already the call to arms from Exile on Main Street fails because he wasn`t in any way "speshul". Gamble did something there that is actually not done which  is the "reluctant sidekick". Why is that not done? Because it freaking makes no sense if the sidekick is reluctant. Those are replaceable characters. If they don`t wanna go to an adventure, you have a 1000 other possible sidekicks waiting in the wings. 

This illustrates different strokes for different folks, because I disagree for the most part. And if the "reluctant sidekick" supposedly isn't done for a reason and is so awful, why did Carver do it himself in season 8 and 9? I didn't see an attempt for a kickstart of a hero's journey for Sam in season 8 myself. To me, Sam was immediately thrown into "reluctant sidekick" and was forced to stay in that mode - and whine about it - even when narratively it made absolutely no sense for much of season 8, because Sam could've walked away - there was no big bad for them to hunt even, no apocalypse to stop, so why was Sam even staying with Dean as this reluctant sidekick and/or Dean even insisting or wanting him to? It was completely nonsensical, in my opinion. ... And even when Sam was doing the quests, they still had him whining about Amelia as late as "Goodbye Stranger". And then the "reluctant sidekick" started right up again in season 9, and was actually Sam's only arc for most of the season and especially after "Road Trip."

At least in Gamble's arc, Dean got to kill some important recurring enemies - Eve, Dick Roman - and do some very heroic things - save Sam's soul and help Castiel get his redemption... twice, both requiring a big role from Dean. I'd complain more about Sam's stint as ineffectual reluctant sidekick interspersed with brief "ineffectual 'hero'" arc, but I'd have to take it to the bitterness thread.

2 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

Gamble`s Seasons were IMO a mess. Don`t get me wrong, I`m not saying everyone has to follow all the tropes all the time but doing completely nonsensical stuff narratively shouldn`t be the answer either. Of course in Season 7 we had no journey, from noone. Except the Leviathans and those were the villians. But at least it meant you needed them for the story. Certainly didn`t need either Winchester for it.

Ironically, I thought that Gamble's season 7 was one of the least "messy" of the series. There was no annoying "bait and switch" or "surprising" twist. We knew who the enemy was - the leviathan - and we were told by mid-season who was going to kill the Big Bad. Dean told Dick Roman in "Death's Door" that he was going to kill him, and that is exactly what happened, and happened at least fairly satisfactorily for me even if the final episode itself didn't have the usual fireworks. Along the way to that "to do list" point for Dean, he saved a bunch of other people, including Sam, and helped Castiel get his redemption, but basically, there was no annoying twist to the arc, just some interesting - to me - characters and stories along the way to Dean doing exactly what he set out to do. For me that was the opposite of nonsensical in that the arc made sense, and it set Dean up for a very interesting turning point when he ended up in purgatory.

For me, a "mess" is what happened in season 8 and most of season 9, and even to a lesser extent season 4. In comparison to me season 7 was fairly straightforward, and I, personally, liked the one main arc and that that arc followed a somewhat linear path with no tricky "twist" ending that seemed to come flying out of nowhere.

And in season 6 when Gamble did do the "tricky" ending that came flying out of left field, it was actually for me one of my favorites. I certainly preferred the "Castiel is working with Crowley" twist - which I did not see coming but in retrospect made some sense - to some of the other "twist" endings that I either saw coming a long way away (Sam breaking the final seal, Sam starting the apocalypse again in season 10) or that made little sense (Dean killing Death in season 10, Sam not finishing the trials, Naomi being the "good guy", and the angels falling in season 8).

I also disagree that there was no "journey" for anyone. In addition to Dean's revenge arc, Sam went on a small emotional journey, first accepting his current situation as a consequence of his mistakes and as something he maybe deserved to in the end maybe eventually wanting something more while also being happy with what he had and that compromising - rather than running away - was okay... a subtle difference, but one that left Sam in a good place. It's not Gamble's fault that Carver threw all of that emotional growth out the window and dragged Sam back to circa season 4 - or maybe even early season 1.

3 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

Now they could start a new one for either one (in which case it would be Sam)...

Well, I would hope so... or at least something, since during Dean's hero's journey the writers did an awful lot of damage to Sam's character in the process. Since Sam's hero's journey was concluded in season 5 and he was matured in season 7, Sam's character has since been dragged through the mud, and he started another apocalypse which he had little role in stopping and that the narrative has made it a point to put the blame on him for (including in the finale of this season). So in a way Sam is still a little bit in the hole in my opinion and is due for something beyond moping and messing up. However since Sam's big moment in the Carver reign has been mostly just his being there to rally the troops, I'm not sure the writers will let him do too much. I'm more expecting another Samsel in distress rescue mission for him next season, and will be pleasantly surprised if he gets to do something both active and positive for once.

[Aeryn13]

At this point I would prefer no big Chosen One arcs anymore. To me Sam got a 10 out of 10 and Dean got a kinda 7 out of 10 and I had to make my peace with that because at least he got something. But to keep that fragile peace I would need them strictly on an even keel now.  

Just do shorter, more small-scale stories. I was kidding earlier about copying the wrap-up Season of another show but by all means, do the wrap-up Season. With the glacial pacing, they can easily stretch it to two years. Stuff only needs to happen every 8th episode or so anyways. 

Quote

And in season 6 when Gamble did do the "tricky" ending that came flying out of left field, it was actually for me one of my favorites.

I didn`t necessarily hate the twist in Season 6 but for me it came after the bane-of-my-existance episode which was the Season 5 Finale and then the first half of Season 6 focused on a supernatural Sam-plot so frankly, I was already livid at that point. And then the story switched to being about Cas really, it was like "anyone before Dean? are you fucking kidding me?" so the Season just managed to be offensive on practically every level. 

If Season 5 had ended in a more satisfactory manner or the first 5 Seasons played out differently, I would have likely responded better and differently to Season 6. As it was, I was not in the mindset to enjoy any of it.

In comparism I just found Season 7 to be a waste of time. And the Leviathans were a cool concept in the beginning that I felt held promise. Oh well, better be bored than offended.

[AwesomO4000]

1 hour ago, Aeryn13 said:

At this point I would prefer no big Chosen One arcs anymore.

$#@!ing site ate my response... again. I'll summarize...

I don't want any big Chosen One arcs either, but I would like it if Sam got at least a small chance for redemption beyond apologizing... again (and not over 3 seasons later). Dean is riding high off of saving the world, but Sam still has starting an apocalypse hanging over his head. And it probably wouldn't be so bad except that the plotline included the death of a few thousand innocents (again, like season 5) and had important characters pointing out it was Sam's fault, including none other than God, and ending with Lady GoScrewYourself Milady pointing it out yet again.

So I hope the conclusion to that doesn't just end up with Sam being Samseled and saved by Dean. I don't think I'm crazy, here. And maybe I wouldn't think that the story only has Sam screw up most of the time if the plot didn't actually have Sam screw up most of the time and then have important characters hang a lampshade on it. Just saying.

2 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

...so the Season just managed to be offensive on practically every level. 

That's how I felt about the first 2/3rds of season 8 and the last half of season 9.

I said some things here about how Dean did some nice heroic things in season 6 and how I loved the brother's relationship in the second half of the season, but screw it, I've probably said it all before anyway, and we all have our own opinions, so no one likely needed to read it again anyway. "Season 6, moving on..." (I loved that episode by the way, including the irony of Kripke being killed by one of his angels.)

Also pretend I talked about how there was the season 2 finale and season 3, and how Sam raised Lucifer and so needed a save *blah blah my usual spiel cakes* ; ) 

2 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

In comparism I just found Season 7 to be a waste of time. And the Leviathans were a cool concept in the beginning that I felt held promise. Oh well, better be bored than offended.

Even though the main plotline wasn't the most exciting, there were a lot of new one off and recurring characters I enjoyed and found memorable * and a lot of smaller stories I enjoyed. Since characters are my favorite part there was a lot for me to enjoy in season 7, including villains who had more motivations than just wanting to do evil. I also sometimes enjoy dark comedy and satire, and season 7 had a lot of that. I also appreciated the irony of the leviathans mocking the flaws of the humanity they were trying to enslave while at the same time having their own foibles - arrogance, greed, gluttony, or want for power - that often lead to their own undoing. I was entertained, and for me, that's never a waste of time.

* Dick Roman, Chet, Leviathan Sam and Dean, Frank, even that leviathan real estate lady and her assistant, that guy who wanted his demon back (I found that episode fascinating), Kevin, Ranger Rick, and others.

I think my original post was better - except the *blah bah cakes*, because that part was probably better here -  but ehn... what can I do?

[catrox14]

From the Road Trip thread.

I disagree that Dean was allowing Sam to believe he was "wrong" or "tainted".

Ezekiel had the power over Sam's life and Dean had no idea whether Ezekiel was lying but Dean was becoming increasingly agitated over the situation. He didn't want to withhold the truth from Sam anymore and in 9.08 he was going to tell Sam the whole truth because that was when Sam brought up being "wrong". Dean told Sam he was tired from the trials. Was it the entire truth? No.

Here is the exchange from 9.08.

Quote

EAN What's up?

SAM What if there is something wrong with me -- something...really wrong?

DEAN You're just crapped out, man. You need some rest.

SAM Oh, it's more than that. I mean, Vesta said I was practically dead inside.

DEAN Oh, and she's in the circle of trust now?

SAM Why would she lie?

DEAN It's probably the trials, okay? Probably some sort of a, you know, aftereffect. It's not like you're bouncing back from the flu here. I mean, you were glowing with freaking trial juice.

SAM I don't know.

DEAN Well, what else would it be?

SAM Why does it have to be something else? It's always something else. We're always scraping to find some other explanation when maybe it is... just me.

DEAN Oh, come on, Sam.

SAM I'm a mess, Dean. You know it. And sometimes, I feel like maybe I'm never gonna actually be all right.

DEAN You will. All right, 'cause whatever it is, we'll figure it out.

SAM Or this is... just the way I am.

[DEAN closes his eyes in resignation. He shakes his head and goes to sit next to his brother.]

DEAN I can't. I can't let you put this on yourself. Listen to me. It's not you, Sam.

[SAM's eyes glow bright blue and EZEKIEL starts to speak.]

EZEKIEL I wouldn't do that, Dean.

DEAN He deserves to know.

EZEKIEL Your brother is not ready. If he ejects me, he will not make it.

DEAN Damn it, Zeke! How much longer we got to keep playing this?

EZEKIEL Not much longer. I promise you that.

[EZEKIEL's eyes glow blue again and he is gone.]

SAM What?

DEAN [looking guilty and exhausted] What?

SAM What? What -- what's not me?

DEAN Nothing. I just -- I-I meant that...if there is something wrong...it's not your fault. We'll deal with it. But you got to have a little faith, Sammy.

[DEAN stands up and starts packing. SAM wearily picks up his bags and slowly walks out the door. DEAN's sad and guilty eyes watch him go.]

 

It seems to me Dean was going to tell Sam the whole story, until Ezekiel disrupted the discussion and told Dean he would leave Sam and Sam might not survive. Dean said, "IF there is something wrong, it's not your fault".   That's not the whole truth but it's the opposite of allowing Sam to believe he was "wrong" or "tainted". 

[AwesomO4000]

2 hours ago, catrox14 said:

It seems to me Dean was going to tell Sam the whole story, until Ezekiel disrupted the discussion and told Dean he would leave Sam and Sam might not survive.

I  agree that Dean was going to tell Sam the whole story at that point, but I disagree that that was enough. Ezekiel threatened to leave, that is true, but at that point - or a bunch of points before that, even - in my opinion, it was no longer a decide-now-or-Sam-will-die situation. Sam was at a point where he could competently decide for himself whether or not he wanted "Ezekiel" there. And at that point arguably, for me, Dean should've given Sam that choice. As I said in the episode thread, even if Gadreel wouldn't let Dean tell Sam directly, with a little ingenuity, Dean could've found a way to let Sam know. Dean chose not to, and in my opinion, that was where Dean went wrong.

Of course in many ways that's mostly moot, because even though I think Sam would have a legitimate point on that, the narrative didn't really follow that up. In my opinion, it should've been crystal clear that Sam was angry about the lying and in Dean's propensity to "protect" Sam even if Sam might not want it - as Sam seemed to be saying in "Road Trip" - but the writers confused that whole issue with "The Purge" and in that episode, seemed to turn the whole thing around to make Sam the bad guy for criticizing Dean with things that weren't true and turning him into the "ungrateful" brother unfairly criticizing Dean who was only trying to save his life (hence my comment about needing something to throw at the screen in three episodes in the "Road Trip" episode thread). And to further the Sam was wrong stance, there was Sam's "I lied" at the end of the season.

So apparently we're not supposed to have an issue with Dean's lying... or what he does below...

3 hours ago, catrox14 said:

Dean said, "IF there is something wrong, it's not your fault".   That's not the whole truth but it's the opposite of allowing Sam to believe he was "wrong" or "tainted". 

I also disagree that "IF there is something wrong, it's not your fault" is the opposite of allowing Sam to believe he is "tainted." It's true that it isn't telling Sam that he is tainted, but one interpretation of what Dean said could be "well, if you are tainted (i.e. if there's "something wrong" with you) it's not your fault." I wouldn't exactly call that not letting Sam believe he's tainted. Sam likely knows deep down it isn't his fault that Azazel gave him demon blood, but that didn't make Sam feel entirely better about having it inside him, "pumping through his veins" - as he told Dean in season 4. He still knew it was there. Dean knew what was wrong with Sam and was referring to that in the "it's not your fault," but Sam didn't know what it was so the "something wrong" Sam was referring to was himself being "wrong." So what Dean said wasn't as entirely comforting as it could've been. If he'd even said something like "You're not tainted, Sam. Why would you be, huh? Remember the trials? Trust me, it's just you needing to heal, okay? Now stop being a *insert big brotherly teasing insult here* and let's get home/get something to eat/etc." then I would agree with you.

And considering Sam's almost naked hope near the end of season 8 that the trials were "purifying" him of that demon blood taint, for me it was kind of heartbreaking to hear Sam here thinking that maybe it didn't happen and that he would always be tainted. Telling Sam that it's not his fault is a bit comforting, true, but it isn't really taking away Sam's deep, down feeling that there is presently something not right with him and that it's maybe because that old stain is rearing it's ugly head again that he feels that way. Sam is bearing his soul here, and Dean is mostly trying to find the best way to deflect so that Sam will just shut up about it. And throwing Sam's faith into it - either in general or in Dean specifically (I couldn't tell which Dean was referencing) - was a little underhanded, too, in my opinion. Because no, Dean, Sam doesn't just have to have a little faith that this will all get better.

[pixelcat]

Mom watch update #1

So I've got my mom binging her way through Supernatural on Netflix.  I did step in and watch season 1 with her partly from DVD because of the music (some episodes I don't mind so much, but "Faith" I had to have the original, and when we got to "Salvation" I had forgotten we were on Netflix, and when that craptastic song started for THE ROAD SO FAR I said "Nope nope nope we have to watch the REAL version").  As an aside, has there EVER been talk of fixing the streaming licensing issues with music for season 1 ?  I noticed that the pilot had the correct music, at least through half of it; I was watching it and completely forgot it was on Netflix, and got to the "guy in the car talking to girlfriend" scene and thought "wait a minute, shouldn't that music be a bit louder?"  But it was the correct music.  I switched to DVD after that.

I'm having her skip episodes when possible, trying to get ones that are important to either overall character development or the storyline for the season(s), just so she'll possibly have time to finish before season 12 starts up.  At her rate she might even make it!

We just finished up season 4 and got two into season 5 while I was visiting over the weekend.  Some Mom comments:

• "Faith" was just an average episode for her.  She was put off by the revival tent holy roller part.
• Hated (with a capital H) "It's the Great Pumpkin, Sam Winchester" as she put it "it made no sense".  Had I known that, I would've had her skip this episode, as not much is learned except a bit more about dick angels and that Dean (possibly) remembers Hell (which is covered in later episodes anyway)
• She really disliked "A Very Supernatural Christmas", even knowing that it's a fan favorite (mine included).  She said the young Dean/Sam parts were too sad, showing what shitty holidays they had growing up.  Also did not like the fingernail removal, and for some reason thought kids were being taken instead of the dads.  She also thought they were trolls, rather than pagan gods.  I think when Sam said "Hold Nickar" she somehow heard "trolls".
• Liked "mini-Dean" (Ben from "The Kids Are Alright")
• Really enjoyed "Mystery Spot", or as she called it, "The Groundhog Day episode"
• When season 4 ended, she yelled "I would've KILLED someone if I had to wait after that!"
• Starting with season 5, she kept saying Dean needs to quit being mad at Sam, and start being mad at everyone else who tricked them into playing the roles they wanted them to play (angels especially).
• She loves "Carry On Wayward Son" but had no idea who Kansas was (I LOL'd at that, the band is more her era than mine!)
• She also spotted an actor from "Heartland" (she loves the show), I think this was Tommy from "Wendigo" ?

Overall she seems to be enjoying the show.  Told her to keep track of episodes she likes so I can comment on them.  I'll see how far she's gotten when I visit in a few weeks, the weekend before the premiere!

Edited September 19, 2016 by pixelcat
Forgot about the end of season 4!

[DittyDotDot]

It's entirely awesome you got your mom to visit our little crazy town, @pixelcat! I have to ask though, if she's skipping ones now--I understand why--are you going to encourage her to go back and pick them up later? I always have such a hard time suggesting to people what they can skip and what they need. I'm such a completionist, though, I can't ever skip any, no matter how much I want to at times. I am curious what you've had her skip now?

7 minutes ago, pixelcat said:

She also spotted an actor from "Heartland" (she loves the show), I think this was Tommy from "Wendigo" ?

Yes, the actor who plays Tommy in Wendigo plays a major role in Heartland. It's kinda funny to see him on two very different shows and in two very different roles. You can tell her there's another Heartland actress coming in S7. Took me until just this summer to figure out where I'd seen Jenny Klein before though (the actess who plays character Jenny Klein, not the writer).

9 minutes ago, pixelcat said:

"Faith" was just an average episode for her.  She was put off by the revival tent holy roller part.

I love your mother! While I acknowledge it's an important episode for the show, I really don't get all that much out of watching it. 

10 minutes ago, pixelcat said:

She loves "Carry On Wayward Son" but had no idea who Kansas was (I LOL'd at that, the band is more her era than mine!)

That's totally hilarious!! 

[pixelcat]

1 minute ago, DittyDotDot said:

I have to ask though, if she's skipping ones now--I understand why--are you going to encourage her to go back and pick them up later? I always have such a hard time suggesting to people what they can skip and what they need. I'm such a completionist, though, I can't ever skip any, no matter how much I want to at times.

I'm not sure at this point.  She is not a completist, and likes to read the end of books so she can follow along so.... in fact while we were deep in season 4, she asked me how the season ended (which I did briefly explain).

It's kind of a shame though, some of my personal faves are in the ones I've had her skip.  Like "Wishful Thinking", which I adore, so at some point I might tell her to go back and watch them.  Or just watch them when I visit and make her watch with me :)  A few she's seen out of order, just by watching the show with me, as I tend to jump around.

20 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

I am curious what you've had her skip now?

From season 1, skipped "Dead in the Water", "Hook Man", "Bugs", "Asylum", "Route 666", "The Benders", "Hell House", "Something Wicked" (mostly pretty sure on this one).

From season 2, skipped "Children Shouldn't Play with Dead Things", "No Exit", "Playthings" (I had watched this with her previously), "Houses of the Holy", "Roadkill", "Heart", "Hollywood Babylon".

From season 3, skipped "The Magnificent Seven" (told her "all you need to know is a blonde named Ruby shows up with a demon-killing knife"), "Sin City", "Bedtime Stories", "Red Sky at Morning", "Ghostfacers", "Long Distance Call" (I think?  I debated on this one, and can't remember what I finally decided).

From season 4, skipped "Metamorphosis", "Monster Movie", "Yellow Fever", "Wishful Thinking", "Family Remains" (which I REALLY dislike), "Criss Angel Is a Douchebag", "Sex and Violence" (this one was iffy for me, could've gone either way).

When we watched "It's a Terrible Life", I explained beforehand about the Ghostfacers, since I had her skip both of their episodes.

[DittyDotDot]

You did very well with your skipping-suggestions. I think it's always so hard for me because some of the episodes I wouldn't skip aren't necessarily plot-necessary, just episodes I really like for other reasons. One of the reasons I like this show so much is the way they actually make the show, so sometimes I latch onto an episode because the art department did something stellar or it's directional style is something novel.

Here's another question, I noticed you're not fond of The Benders in the survival game thread, and I see you had your mother skip it, just curious what about it you dislike so? I tend to think of it as one of S1's best, but S1 is really hard for me to rate since I don't think they had yet figured out who they were yet.

23 minutes ago, pixelcat said:

From season 4, skipped "Metamorphosis", "Monster Movie", "Yellow Fever", "Wishful Thinking", "Family Remains" (which I REALLY dislike), "Criss Angel Is a Douchebag", "Sex and Violence" (this one was iffy for me, could've gone either way).

S4 and S5 would be the hardest, I think, to skip any because they did a better job of blending the MotW episodes with the overall mythology. But I think you choose well if you want to make that deadline. I kinda think Criss Angel is a Douchebag is only relevant in that Sam goes back to working with Ruby, but his reasons are a little nonsensical in the scope of that episode, so I kinda think the episode is annoying and pointless. Metamorphosis and Sex and Violence are pretty important as to Sam and Dean's relationship, but probably could easily remove them and still understand the overall arc and Sam and Dean's realtionship.

25 minutes ago, pixelcat said:

From season 2, skipped "Children Shouldn't Play with Dead Things", "No Exit", "Playthings" (I had watched this with her previously), "Houses of the Holy", "Roadkill", "Heart", "Hollywood Babylon".

This is the season I have the hardest time skipping, but probably only a handful of them are actually necessary to the overall story arc. I just love so much of S2, though. It's really when I think the show found it's legs, IMO. Only would suggest she go pick up Hollywood Babylon because it's fun, but nothing about it is actually necessary.

[pixelcat]

19 hours ago, DittyDotDot said:

Here's another question, I noticed you're not fond of The Benders in the survival game thread, and I see you had your mother skip it, just curious what about it you dislike so? I tend to think of it as one of S1's best, but S1 is really hard for me to rate since I don't think they had yet figured out who they were yet.

I had my mom skip it because it doesn't really add anything to the overall story, and we never see the sheriff again (despite having a sheriff's conference in Hibbing).

I personally don't like it because it gives me the heebie jeebies.  Something about stories with backwoods (possibly inbred/incestuous) families, hunting people, then killing and eating them really gets to me.  Every time I think of this episode my mind immediately goes to Mama from the X-Files episode "Home", rolling around under the bed, and I just want to turn it off.  I keep thinking it's going to turn into Saw, even though I have seen this episode many times and KNOW that this does not happen, and I can't enjoy it.  (On a side note, I looked up "Home" on wikipedia and saw it was watched by nearly 19 million viewers, and I think the most Supernatural has ever had for an episode was just under 6?  How TV viewing has changed...)

One part I do really like in the episode is when Dean comes out of the bar, and gets more and more frantic looking for Sam.  He spots the traffic camera, walks into the middle of the road, and I fully expect him to yell SAM!!! but instead, he barely whispers, "Sam..."

I forgot to mention, Mom and I got into a discussion of Sam's demon blood addiction during the latter half of season 4.  She said Dean should just let Sam do what he's got to do, since he would have the power to kill Lilith, instead of trying to detox him.  So I asked if she'd be OK with my brother doing the same thing, and she said "Hey if he's saving the world, then yes."  So... go Mom I guess? LOL.

She also wanted to know how Sam started drinking demon blood, and when I told her we never find out, she said "that's stupid".  I did not disagree.  I told her that TPTB probably decided that no matter what explanation they gave, there'd be blood in the streets, so decided to give no explanation at all.  Then each of us could come up with our own theory that made (sort of) sense to us. 

My pet theory:  when Ruby first starts working with Sam, he's getting headaches and nosebleeds and not having much luck.  She tells him she'll make him a witches' brew tonic, and (without him knowing) puts a few drops of her blood into it before giving it to him.  He drinks it, feels better.  This goes on long enough to get him addicted to the blood, all the while associating Ruby with "Hey I feel better after she takes care of me".  Then one time Ruby "accidentally" lets Sam see her putting in the blood, he gets upset, she tells him how it's enhancing his abilities.  He refuses for a few days, starts feeling shaky and weak, and gives in.  Ruby explains about how in the tonic the blood is diluted, it'd be better if he just took it direct.  She turns it into a ritual, with the knife in the boot, combines power and pleasure, blood and sex, into a knot of addiction that ties Sam up completely.

Eh it's not perfect, and it doesn't explain how he went for months (?) without it while off with Dean, but I like it and it works for me.

[DittyDotDot]

3 minutes ago, pixelcat said:

I personally don't like it because it gives me the heebie jeebies.  Something about stories with backwoods (possibly inbred/incestuous) families, hunting people, then killing and eating them really gets to me.  Every time I think of this episode my mind immediately goes to Mama from the X-Files episode "Home", rolling around under the bed, and I just want to turn it off.  I keep thinking it's going to turn into Saw, even though I have seen this episode many times and KNOW that this does not happen, and I can't enjoy it.  (On a side note, I looked up "Home" on wikipedia and saw it was watched by nearly 19 million viewers, and I think the most Supernatural has ever had for an episode was just under 6?  How TV viewing has changed...)

I can totally see that, it is a disturbing image. I do always say The Benders is X-files Home-light. It never quite reached that level of creep and ick the X-files managed to capture for me though. 

It's funny, that episode of the X-files you mentioned, I had still not completely watched it until I did a rewatch this summer. For some reason it didn't hit me as hard this time and I was able to make it to the end. I've never been able to make it past the point you realize these boys were having sex with their mother who lived under the bed. Ewww! I don't know if it's just that TV has changed so much that the makeup and prosthetics seemed kinda goofy to me this time; or if it's because I've seen a lot more disturbing things on TV in recent years that I'm somewhat desensitized; or if I was just properly prepared for the ick-factor?

12 minutes ago, pixelcat said:

She also wanted to know how Sam started drinking demon blood, and when I told her we never find out, she said "that's stupid".

Did I mention that I love your mother? ;) I just assumed Ruby got him to do it like she got him to do everything else--manipulated him by telling him he could get payback for Dean--but man it still blows my mind he fell for it. I mean, I know he was down and out, but how does one think tainting yourself further by drinking sulfur-enriched blood is a perfectly reasonable course of action in any state of mind?

16 minutes ago, pixelcat said:

I forgot to mention, Mom and I got into a discussion of Sam's demon blood addiction during the latter half of season 4.  She said Dean should just let Sam do what he's got to do, since he would have the power to kill Lilith, instead of trying to detox him.  So I asked if she'd be OK with my brother doing the same thing, and she said "Hey if he's saving the world, then yes."  So... go Mom I guess? LOL.

That's funny! I always think Bobby has a certain logic when he tells Dean maybe they should stop, but at the end of the day, I think I agree with Dean, "It doesn’t mean that we throw away the rule book and stop acting like humans." Maybe it's just that I was never convinced that Sam was saving the world, but probably doing something to end it--which in the end was what he did. But I love your mom's pragmatism! ;)

[companionenvy]

I don't know. The demon blood did help Sam save a lot of people. I can see him looking at it as a disgusting sacrifice he had to make to be strong enough to do what he needed to do. The moronic part was not telling someone like Bobby who could control him if he started going off the rails. 

And as I always like pointing out, Sam ultimately did need to drink demon blood in order to defeat Lucifer. Dean even supplied him with the blood. So it isn't entirely black and white.

[DittyDotDot]

18 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

I don't know. The demon blood did help Sam save a lot of people. I can see him looking at it as a disgusting sacrifice he had to make to be strong enough to do what he needed to do. The moronic part was not telling someone like Bobby who could control him if he started going off the rails. 

And as I always like pointing out, Sam ultimately did need to drink demon blood in order to defeat Lucifer. Dean even supplied him with the blood. So it isn't entirely black and white.

Nothing is black and white, but Sam wouldn't have had to defeat Lucifer if he hadn't started drinking the demon blood in the first place, which allowed him to kill Lilith and let Lucifer out of his box. As I always say, you could drive yourself nuts with this sort of thing! ;)

I'm just not one who generally believes the end justifies the means. That's a very slippery slope and usually ends with more bad than good, IMO. But, I do get why the idea of it could be appealing if you can convince yourself the good will outweigh the bad...I'm just more of a glass half empty sort of gal, I guess.

[DittyDotDot]

18 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

I don't know. The demon blood did help Sam save a lot of people. I can see him looking at it as a disgusting sacrifice he had to make to be strong enough to do what he needed to do. The moronic part was not telling someone like Bobby who could control him if he started going off the rails. 

And as I always like pointing out, Sam ultimately did need to drink demon blood in order to defeat Lucifer. Dean even supplied him with the blood. So it isn't entirely black and white.

Nothing is black and white, but Sam wouldn't have had to defeat Lucifer if he hadn't started drinking the demon blood in the first place, which allowed him to kill Lilith and let Lucifer out of his box. As I always say, you could drive yourself nuts with this sort of thing! ;)

I'm just not one who generally believes the end justifies the means. That's a very slippery slope and usually ends with more bad than good, IMO. But, I do get why the idea of it could be appealing if you can convince yourself the good will outweigh the bad...I'm just more of a glass half empty sort of gal, I guess.

[DittyDotDot]

18 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

I don't know. The demon blood did help Sam save a lot of people. I can see him looking at it as a disgusting sacrifice he had to make to be strong enough to do what he needed to do. The moronic part was not telling someone like Bobby who could control him if he started going off the rails. 

And as I always like pointing out, Sam ultimately did need to drink demon blood in order to defeat Lucifer. Dean even supplied him with the blood. So it isn't entirely black and white.

Nothing is black and white, but Sam wouldn't have had to defeat Lucifer if he hadn't started drinking the demon blood in the first place, which allowed him to kill Lilith and let Lucifer out of his box. As I always say, you could drive yourself nuts with this sort of thing! ;)

I'm just not one who generally believes the end justifies the means. That's a very slippery slope and usually ends with more bad than good, IMO. But, I do get why the idea of it could be appealing if you can convince yourself the good will outweigh the bad...I'm just more of a glass half empty sort of gal, I guess.

[DittyDotDot]

22 hours ago, pixelcat said:

we never see the sheriff again (despite having a sheriff's conference in Hibbing).

I had a wack-a-do dream that had Kathleen from The Benders in it last night and it reminded me, the actress also has a recurring role on Heartland. You have no idea how much I was hoping we'd see her again in Hibbing 911 along with Jodi and Donna.

[Boopsahoy]

On ‎9‎/‎19‎/‎2016 at 11:47 AM, pixelcat said:

From season 4, skipped "Metamorphosis", "Monster Movie", "Yellow Fever", "Wishful Thinking", "Family Remains" (which I REALLY dislike), "Criss Angel Is a Douchebag", "Sex and Violence" (this one was iffy for me, could've gone either way).

You had her skip Yellow Fever and Monster Movie???? Oh no!!

Edited September 21, 2016 by Boopsahoy

[rue721]

22 hours ago, DittyDotDot said:

Nothing is black and white, but Sam wouldn't have had to defeat Lucifer if he hadn't started drinking the demon blood in the first place, which allowed him to kill Lilith and let Lucifer out of his box. As I always say, you could drive yourself nuts with this sort of thing! ;)

I'm just not one who generally believes the end justifies the means. That's a very slippery slope and usually ends with more bad than good, IMO. But, I do get why the idea of it could be appealing if you can convince yourself the good will outweigh the bad...I'm just more of a glass half empty sort of gal, I guess.

Do you think that even Sam himself bought the idea that he was drinking the demon blood for the greater good? I think that was just a justification, not the actual reason he was doing it.

I mean, that was even part of Ruby's sales pitch to Sam, wasn't it? (I don't really remember, it's been a LONG time since I saw S4!).

Also, I don't think that it turned out for the best anyway, because the blood drinking was what kept Sam so loyal to Ruby and kept him breaking seals left and right...but even if his choice to drink blood had turned out for the best, it's not like anyone could have predicted that beforehand (like DDD said). I mean, the decision that Sam had to make was whether drinking the blood RIGHT THEN was a good idea or not. Pretending to know what would happen as some "butterfly flapping its wings" kind of very-far-removed consequence of drinking it, and predicated his decision on that (supposed) consequence, seems like self-serving bullshit to me.

I dunno, even though I thought that Dean acted like kind of jerk during basically that whole season, I think he was correct to find the whole thing appalling and to be dubious about Sam drinking blood in general. I didn't think it was ever justified, or justifiable.

Anyway! I actually wanted to pop in to say that I love your description of your mom's rewatch, pixelcat!

That Hollywood Babylon/Folsom Prison Blues/What Is and What Should Never Be 3-episode arc in S2 is the best mini-arc of the whole series (in my opinion), though! I think it's DEFINITELY worth your mom watching Hollywood Babylon, even just to make sense of that short character arc of Dean's (and because those are all wonderful episodes). Just putting in a plug for a personal favorite :P

[Partly]

18 minutes ago, rue721 said:

Do you think that even Sam himself bought the idea that he was drinking the demon blood for the greater good?

I'm sure it's what he believed the first time he did it. Back when Dean was dead and he was left alone. Then, like every addiction, it takes hold and such justifications and denials are part of the sickness. With Sam, since demon blood did actually allow him to save people, that justification was even easier to assert. 

24 minutes ago, rue721 said:

and kept him breaking seals left and right..

Sam only broke one seal: the last one when he killed Lilith.  Or am I misremembering?

[Diane]

4 minutes ago, Partly said:

I'm sure it's what he believed the first time he did it. Back when Dean was dead and he was left alone. Then, like every addiction, it takes hold and such justifications and denials are part of the sickness. With Sam, since demon blood did actually allow him to save people, that justification was even easier to assert. 

Sam only broke one seal: the last one when he killed Lilith.  Or am I misremembering?

I think you are correct Dean broke the first one and Sam broke the last one.

[companionenvy]

Oh, I'm not saying that Sam's blood drinking worked out well, or that doing it was the right call. I'm just saying I find it understandable and not out of character for him to have done it given that it actually was, in the short term, allowing him to save people. I also think that a lot of the effects would have been mitigated had he told Dean and/or Bobby what was going on as a safeguard, and hadn't been purely relying on Ruby and his own, increasingly blood-addled judgment.

And yeah, the blood drinking, by letting Sam kill Lillith, led to Lucifer's return, and then necessitated Sam to defeat him (with the help of a generous amount of demon's blood), but none of our heroes had any way of knowing that killing Lillith was a bad thing. I blame Sam for killing the nurse on the way, but not for killing Lillith. If Dean had been able to kill Lillith, he would have done it too. 

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I also think that a lot of the effects would have been mitigated had he told Dean and/or Bobby what was going on as a safeguard,

I don`t think that would have worked. Ruby playing the supportive little lackey, that was something he liked. Even after it was revealed all Ruby did was topping him from the bottom, he still held her up as basically the better example towards Dean`s "bullying". Still not sure how someone you look down upon and make that fact known on more than one occassion can bully you but alas. If it didn`t matter that Ruby called the shots but how she did it, then nothing short of that would have surficed.

Dean and Bobby likewise would have had to give at least the outward appearance of submissive cheerleaders to be an acceptable counterweight. Bobby, I could go either way with in pulling that off. Dean is just not the type for it. When he put himself under John`s command, he did so genuinely, it wasn`t a manipulative ploy. And that was John where the situation arose more naturally from childhood. He wouldn`t (and shouldn`t) do it ever again with someone else.

I get that the technique works on Sam. If I were in Ruby`s position I would have used it too. Just as for Dean, I would have used something completely different because he responds to other triggers.  Say what Gadreel used. That works like a charm. And frankly, I think nothing whatsoever has changed. That exact same technique would still work on Sam and what worked on Dean in Season 1, still works now. The characters have not grown even half an inch beyond their respective weaknesses. As long as that remains the case, they will always be vulnerable to the right manipulator. And they can`t help each other in those cases either. Dean will never be the topping from the bottom guy - which gives the manipulator always, always a leg up - and Sam could never do anything to counteract stuff like the Gadreel manipulation either because Sam happens to be the main blackmail material for Dean as it is. All they can pray is for bad guys who are too stupid to realize how easy it is to puppeteer the good guys.   

[rue721]

It's hard for me to believe that Sam's reasoning was ever that drinking blood would be a net positive in the long run, because that is just such a counter-intuitive, unlikely idea. It's not even like he had never heard of drinking demon blood before -- the "special kids" from S1 & 2 were just kids who the YED had fed demon blood. And that didn't turn out well, to say the least. Sam had even repeatedly wondered if the demon blood had "tainted" them somehow, and that continued to be a serious worry/preoccupation of his for years and years and years.

Also, on top of Sam's whole wretched history with the YED and all the psychodrama that went along with that, there's just the common sense thing of it being absolutely disgusting and creepy to be drinking demon blood and taking on demon powers. I mean, what next, he was going to eat demon hearts to gain their strength? It's gross. And kind of cannibalistic.

I think his intent was self-destructive pretty much from the get go, because willingly drinking demon blood is just such a clearly messed up thing to do -- especially within the context of him having been force-fed demon blood as a baby by the YED, and how the YED and being a "special kid" basically ruined Sam's life and his family.

To me, the choice to start drinking demon blood seems wayyyyyy more likely to be coming from a place of nihilism and self-hatred than from a place of wanting to be a hero, or even being a positive force in the world.

The justification that it was for the greater good -- or really, for ANYONE'S good -- seems tacked on after the fact, to me. And any good that ultimately came of it seems (to me) incidental.

I guess what it comes down to is that I just can't see Sam honestly believing that the "ends justify the means" in this situation, where the "ends" were really unlikely to be anything good, and the "means" were so obviously disgusting and terrible.

[companionenvy]

Sam was not in a good place, to say the least, when he started working with Ruby. Both Sam and Dean deal with intense self-loathing at various points in their stories. He was also desperate to get Dean back (part of the source of the self-loathing is that he hadn't been able to save him), and thought Ruby might be able to help with that. And I agree that drinking the blood became, aside from a physical addiction, a power trip. He liked feeling that he was the strong one.

I don't, however, see it as nihilism (Sam definitely had goals, even if they weren't always the healthiest ones), and think that a more positive and equally accurate way of saying "power trip," in this case, is "hero complex."  Sam wasn't, IMO getting off on exerting power over other people, he liked being the strong one who could save everyone, from Dean to strangers to the world itself. There's a lot of ego involved in that, but it still remains that when Sam got loads of power, the thing he chose to do with it is continue (he thought) fighting the good fight. 

Drinking demon blood is objectively gross, which Sam clearly recognized. But it wasn't directly harming anyone, and on a general moral level, if doing a really disgusting thing that doesn't hurt anyone is the price to pay for saving a life, I think the ends do justify the means, and it would be frankly selfish not to do it. And again, canonically, the defeat of Lucifer, once he was out of the cage, required the drinking of demon blood, which Cas, Bobby, and Dean all accepted. So, the show acknowledged that that was something that could be necessary in extreme circumstances.

Should Sam have anticipated that there might be other side effects to the demon blood, side-effects that would make him a danger to others? Yes. Ruby manipulated him, obviously. But Ruby actually had built up a lot of good-will by then. It isn't like Sam was trusting demon henchman # 6. Ruby had helped the Winchesters on multiple occasions at (by all appearances) significant risk over the past year. Even Dean at times grudgingly accepted her as an ally.

[AwesomO4000]

4 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

I don`t think that would have worked. Ruby playing the supportive little lackey, that was something he liked. Even after it was revealed all Ruby did was topping him from the bottom, he still held her up as basically the better example towards Dean`s "bullying". Still not sure how someone you look down upon and make that fact known on more than one occassion can bully you but alas. If it didn`t matter that Ruby called the shots but how she did it, then nothing short of that would have surficed.

I've never really seen this dynamic myself, or that this is what Sam was responding to. For me Ruby's manipulation had much more to do with acceptance. Sam, in my opinion, deep down liked that Ruby accepted him for who he was, because even though Sam didn't like being "tainted" or a "freak" himself, it was even worse when someone else pointed this fact out to him. So Ruby telling him that it was okay to be that freak, that maybe he might even be able to turn it into a good thing by helping people - turn the curse into at least something potentially good - after everything that had happened with losing Dean and Sam feeling powerless to stop it... That had to be tempting. In my opinion it had little to do with Ruby being a good little lacky, especially since Ruby was basically the teacher and was often pushing Sam - nothing "lacky" about that.

Also in my opinion, Sam has no problem following - he follows Dean's lead all the time. He even openly lamented in "All Hell..., pt 1" when everyone was either following his lead or praising him for a job well done was that what he most wished for was that Dean was there, because Dean would know what to do... with the unspoken part being that Dean would be the leader.

And this buys right into what Sam told Dean in "Fallen Idols." Sam feeling like the "little brother" in my opinion didn't have to do with being "bullied" or bossed around at all. Sam in my opinion doesn't mind being bossed around as long as he knows the score and trusts who is doing the bossing - which in my opinion is why Sam was so gruff with Ruby in what on the surface appeared to be him bossing her around: he didn't trust her and he was annoyed with her for that. Sam wants to feel accepted for who he is, and it's not always in Dean's nature to do that, because he can't while in Big Brother mode nor - and even more importantly - is it in Sam's nature not to feel judged sometimes when he's with Dean. It's that whole parent/older sibling "I'm so disappointed in you" fear. With Ruby he was free to be wrong and mess up without having to worry about "disappointing"her. So what if he disappointed Ruby?

And it is that in my opinion where Sam didn't change - which is why we got Sam's confession at the end of season 8 that his biggest sin was all the times he let Dean down.

I just don't see Sam as needing or wanting Dean to be his "cheerleader" so much as he doesn't want Dean to be disappointed in him. And for me those are two very different things. From what I've seen, Sam is much more comfortable in the following role in the brother dynamic. He just wants Dean to be proud of him anyway despite that.

4 hours ago, rue721 said:

To me, the choice to start drinking demon blood seems wayyyyyy more likely to be coming from a place of nihilism and self-hatred than from a place of wanting to be a hero, or even being a positive force in the world.

I think this had something to do with it also, and I think that at some point it morphed into "screw it. I'm messed up, I'm worthless, but Ruby doesn't care and she'll just go with it, so why the hell not? What the $%^& do I have to lose?" Then when miraculously helping people came out of it, well as Spike would say "Bonus."

[bearcatfan]

3 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I've never really seen this dynamic myself, or that this is what Sam was responding to. For me Ruby's manipulation had much more to do with acceptance. Sam, in my opinion, deep down liked that Ruby accepted him for who he was, because even though Sam didn't like being "tainted" or a "freak" himself, it was even worse when someone else pointed this fact out to him. So Ruby telling him that it was okay to be that freak, that maybe he might even be able to turn it into a good thing by helping people - turn the curse into at least something potentially good - after everything that had happened with losing Dean and Sam feeling powerless to stop it... That had to be tempting. In my opinion it had little to do with Ruby being a good little lacky, especially since Ruby was basically the teacher and was often pushing Sam - nothing "lacky" about that.

Also in my opinion, Sam has no problem following - he follows Dean's lead all the time. He even openly lamented in "All Hell..., pt 1" when everyone was either following his lead or praising him for a job well done was that what he most wished for was that Dean was there, because Dean would know what to do... with the unspoken part being that Dean would be the leader.

And this buys right into what Sam told Dean in "Fallen Idols." Sam feeling like the "little brother" in my opinion didn't have to do with being "bullied" or bossed around at all. Sam in my opinion doesn't mind being bossed around as long as he knows the score and trusts who is doing the bossing - which in my opinion is why Sam was so gruff with Ruby in what on the surface appeared to be him bossing her around: he didn't trust her and he was annoyed with her for that. Sam wants to feel accepted for who he is, and it's not always in Dean's nature to do that, because he can't while in Big Brother mode nor - and even more importantly - is it in Sam's nature not to feel judged sometimes when he's with Dean. It's that whole parent/older sibling "I'm so disappointed in you" fear. With Ruby he was free to be wrong and mess up without having to worry about "disappointing"her. So what if he disappointed Ruby?

And it is that in my opinion where Sam didn't change - which is why we got Sam's confession at the end of season 8 that his biggest sin was all the times he let Dean down.

I just don't see Sam as needing or wanting Dean to be his "cheerleader" so much as he doesn't want Dean to be disappointed in him. And for me those are two very different things. From what I've seen, Sam is much more comfortable in the following role in the brother dynamic. He just wants Dean to be proud of him anyway despite that.

I think this had something to do with it also, and I think that at some point it morphed into "screw it. I'm messed up, I'm worthless, but Ruby doesn't care and she'll just go with it, so why the hell not? What the $%^& do I have to lose?" Then when miraculously helping people came out of it, well as Spike would say "Bonus."

Agree with everything you said here.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I've never really seen this dynamic myself, or that this is what Sam was responding to. For me Ruby's manipulation had much more to do with acceptance.

But it`s not possible to always have acceptance. If any kind of misgivings or critique just becomes "you don`t trust me" and that becomes basically "you bully me by having a different opinion", then what that person wants IS a lackey by all accounts. Sam himself has, frankly, no problem making it known if he has a less than glowing opinion of someone or something. Other people have the right to reciprocate and it doesn`t make him a martyr. When he confessed his sin about letting Dean down, it was all about Dean`s hurtful - to Sam - reactions to it. Apparently, the act itself wasn`t the problem, it was that Dean dared to feel hurt and betrayed by it. And that is always the vibe I`m getting.

A character who was the same way was Bobby IMO. He could dish out all the "tough love" he wanted but the sky was falling if anyone ever did it to him. I can`t stand that, I just can`t.  

So I still think that Dean would have had no chance to get Sam away from Ruby unless he would have played the fully supportive submissive. And probably not even then because Sam had decided on that course of action, had decided he needed Ruby for it and would have expected full support of those decisions. So, no dice. When Sam did have his big victory in 5.22 Dean`s role WAS the supportive submissive so apparently the show agrees that this is who he should be. I don`t but alas.    

[AwesomO4000]

Disclaimer: I realize that this post for some might veer into "Bitterness" territory, but because it will mostly be discussion rather than bitterness, I thought it belonged here. For those who don't want to potentially come across what might be bitterness or bitter opinions, feel free to skip.

And as always with my posts, if I don't mention it enough, this is all my opinion only. I apologize in advance for the potential length.

1 hour ago, Myrelle said:

Sorry I just saw this...

Dean putting Sam in the panic room wasn't shown to be the correct course of action in PONR, IMO; and this was only one of the things about that episode that, in hindsight, has turned it into one of my least favorite episodes of the show. This, along with two other S5 episodes, Metamorphosis and Fallen Idols, is when, IMO, the writers decided that to make the Sam character somewhat sympathetic again, after the debacle of the demon blood drinking and Sam choosing Ruby's words over Dean's time and time again in s4, they would silence Dean, for the most part, in the brother confrontations. They took his voice away in those episodes and in PONR he told Sam that Sam would have never locked him(Dean) away the way that he had done to Sam. Dean(or to be more specific, the writing) also downplayed Sam's S4 betrayals in PONR, IMO;  and Sam said nothing while Dean apologized for not trusting him-not even a "You had every right to not trust me, Dean. You still could be feeling that way and it wouldn't be wrong." because, again IMO, Dean had every right and reason not to trust Sam for all of S4 AND! for most of S5. Again IMO. Maybe that's an unpopular thought here. It likely is. But IMO, and again, in hindsight, the writing in PONR made Sam out to be the only wounded party in S5 simply because Dean couldn't trust Sam up until this episode AKA Sam's strangely written "apologies" didn't do the trick this time for Dean. The narrative in PONR had Dean apologizing and/or feeling guilty over things that didn't warrant it at all, IMO. And Sam said very little to dispel Dean's guilt or regret. It was as if the writers wanted everyone to think that Dean was wrong for every feeling that he had in S4 and 5 and he should have just trusted Sam more and/or sooner. Or Dean was being MEEN! for not forgiving Sam sooner or quickly enough, whereas personally, I might still be side-eyeing Sam to this day, if I were Dean. Of course, now since S9  they might believe that they've shown us Dean as having walked in Sam's shoes and Sam as having walked in Dean's, it's all good. That seems to be how these writers operate to me.

You'll probably guess that I disagree with all of this. I haven't seen Dean's "voice" taken away on these points - at all. I don't see where Dean's opinion was overridden or dismissed, even in PONR. And when Dean apologized in PONR, the writers had Sam specifically say that Dean didn't owe him an apology. Dean wanted to keep talking, so he did, but all that he said was that he finally had decided maybe he should start giving Sam another chance and that they should work together. And in my opinion, it was about time that Dean forgave Sam. Sam had been working all season to gain Dean's trust back... and Dean did express his opinion on that front, multiple times (even sneaking it in in paces where it was just an aside - like in "Abandon All Hope"), and the narrative generally didn't have Sam retaliate or often he even outright admitted that Dean was right - including, for me, "Fallen Idols" where Sam outright admitted that it was his (Sam's) fault. (And I don't buy the argument that Sam deflected it onto Dean for being "meen" or bossy either. Sam could entirely feel like he was "the little brother" without Dean having to do a damn thing but stand there and be something Sam compared himself to and be worried that he would disappoint - that's still on Sam, just as Sam said. And in my opinion, saying that Sam was blaming Dean for his feeling like a little brother is taking away how Sam feels and giving Dean that power over Sam... which I don't buy. Sam is in charge of his own feelings), so I'm just not seeing Dean's voice as being taken away as you are.

Sam didn't come right out and say "You were right Dean for not trusting me," but he didn't put up much of a fight as Dean called him arrogant, self-righteous, and said that Sam was going to give in to Lucifer (no downplaying Sam's wrong-doings in the narrative there in my opinion) - not exactly the nicest things to say. Yet still Sam told Dean he didn't owe him an apology at the end of the episode, so he was accepting those criticisms from Dean earlier in the show.

Interestingly the strongest admittance of wrong, in my opinion, in PONR was from Sam. The narrative had Sam say that every time he ran way, he (Sam) was the one who was wrong... which would include his going away to college. Talk about swaying things to make Sam in the wrong for things that he wasn't necessarily wrong about and trivializing his stance on things. That's a pretty big compromise to have Sam make, in my opinion. (And we didn't see Dean saying, "no, dude, it wasn't always wrong for you to leave," either.) I love the episode, because I saw compromise and the willingness to rebuild and work together on both brothers' parts. And Sam's compromise here was one of those things.

And as for the narrative supposedly making Dean look guilty for things he shouldn't and the narrative not dispelling it, I can compare this to season 3, when Sam was angry at Dean - legitimately in my opinion - for Dean making the deal. Yet Sam was made to look bad for being angry. Dean didn't apologize - and in fact justified his position, saying that he deserved to be selfish for taking care of Sam's ass for all of those years - and told Sam not to be angry at him. The narrative then had some fun at Sam's expense, making him feel guilty (with Dean playing on that guilt to get out of researching and scamming extra time at the bar) and grateful for Dean's making the deal to save his life and feeling totally crappy for not being able to save Dean and blaming himself. Dean didn't really do all that much to assure Sam throughout the season that this wasn't Sam's fault or that Sam had a right to be angry and even got self-righteous when Sam did express his anger. ("That didn't last long"). And sure, there was an apology and a "this is my fault" at the end of the season, but that was after 15 episodes of the narrative not really admitting much that Dean did that to himself by making a crappy decision. And even though Sam's "bad decisions" with Ruby have been brought up again and again - we're still hearing about Sam trusting Ruby and starting the apocalypse directly (no mention of the angels' or Castiel's parts at all) 6 or 7 seasons later - no (direct) mention has been made of Dean's making a bad decision by making the deal since some time in season 4. It was alluded to in season 9 in the crappy "Purge" speech, but the narrative made sure to turn that around into Sam being wrong and pretty much a hypocrite, because Sam admitted that he would do the same thing ("I lied")... thereby also in retrospect justifying Dean's decision to make the deal in the first place, too, I guess.

So there are multiple ways to interpret things the narrative of the show does.

Quote

IDK with this. The worst for me has been that as the seasons have goone on, Sam has done similar things and made similar mistakes that Dean has made, but Sam is never written to apologize for them or even think twice about them as having been wrong. That ridiculous speech in Sacrifice along with the Benny business are just two, that I can think of off the top of my head.

But it was the narrative that shaped those things. To me, it's interesting that Sam should even be in the position to have to apologize for Benny at all. When before in the show, besides Lenore - who was ultimately shown to be a monster also - was a monster ever been shown to be "good" except when they are an ally of Dean's.  When Sam trusted Ruby, this was shown ultimately to be bad, awful, and a betrayal of Dean in the highest order that Sam ever deemed to trust her. But when Dean trusts Benny and Sam questions it, this is somehow also a slight against Dean and that it somehow means that Dean is never supposed to have any friends except Sam. And, of course, Dean was totally right to trust Benny... okay narrative, whatever. (I hate season 8). I also don't blame Sam for questioning Castiel's judgement, either, considering. Castiel had betrayed Dean (twice - though Dean didn't know about the first one) - and Sam (where Cas ultimately could have killed Sam with what he did, and that was before Castiel was affected by the souls) - much more recently than Sam had, and was currently acting completely squirrelly. Yet again Sam is supposedly a horrible, awful person for even feeling insecure about Dean trusting Castiel over him. Really? I was questioning Dean trusting Castiel over Sam... and look what happened.

So there is an example in the narrative where Sam has a demon friend and it is horrible, but Dean has a monster friend, and it is good and the monster is a hero. And the writers do this a lot when it comes to Sam and Dean. Sam does something = bad. Dean does it = good. Even when Crowley is involved - a demon just like Ruby - somehow when he's friends with Dean, he's often somehow helpful in the end. So if I'm seeing any bias towards one brother's point of view on things... it ain't Sam here. I don't see it often actually in general, but when it comes to supernatural beings - and actually supernatural things in general - the trend is definitely towards Dean being right like 95% of the time.

And as for Sam not apologizing. Sam apologized for season 8's not looking for Dean very specifically and sincerely. He apologized for stuff he did while he was soulless. Has Dean ever apologized for Gadreel? Nope - Dean was shown to be right. Sometimes I think it would only be acceptable to some if Sam crawled on the floor and kissed Dean's feet for every, little wrong Sam's ever done and even then there would be complaints that he didn't do it correctly.

Quote

These hypocrisies are so exasperating to me.

*points to above example about Benny and Crowley vs Ruby*

Quote

At this point in the series, I'm not sure what the writers have been going for with Sam's almost allergic reaction to the two simple little words of "I'm sorry." with no conditions or rejoinders or buts involved or attached to them.

And I argue that Sam has had those apologies. I'm not remembering the statistics done in the "Bitterness" thread, but I'm fairly sure that the numbers were close to the same.

Quote

Sam treating Dean like John would have treated him only makes me feel how wrong their up-bringing was and it doesn't make me disrespect Dean for something like this that's been on-going in the family dynamic since he was small.

I guess I just don't see Sam treating Dean like John does. Not remotely. Sam often follows Dean's lead, usually without question, and when he screws up - as he did with Ruby - Sam admits it rather than blaming it on someone else - like Sam admitted in season 5 that he was wrong, rather than blaming it on his son (Sam) like John did - and fixes it himself rather than foisting it off on Dean as John did with the "save Sam or kill him" thing. Sam does keep secrets sometimes, but he doesn't keep Dean out of the loop when they are hunting together. I just don't see what you see there.

Quote

MMV, of course, but I wish for Dean to have more of a voice over this in S12-and for his mother to help him understand that it's alright for him to feel that he was cheated out of his childhood, because he was, for the most part.

Interestingly, Sam was telling Dean that for a while, but Dean kept telling Sam he was crazy, their childhood was great, and Sam was just remembering it wrongly through his selfishly abandoning the family glasses until Sam finally somewhat agreed with Dean on that. In my opinion, it's not Sam's fault that Dean finally changed his mind.

Quote

If this was too long for some, I'll just say that IMO and generally, Dean is written as recognizing and owning up to his faults and flaws-strictly within the brothers' relationship, that is-in a much more thorough, thought-provoking, and detailed manner than they've ever written Sam. Maybe that's because up to this point, with Sam, they've focused more on the darkness within him than on his part in the shared dysfunction of the brothers' relationship. Maybe this would be a good time for another one of those role-reversals that these writers have seemed to love so much over the seasons.

I'm not seeing this either. In my opinion Sam has pretty much admitted to a lot of his faults - his anger being one of them. He's just usually told to stuff it down and that it doesn't matter, stop being selfish and arrogant, and everything will be just fine. Sam admitted very specifically why he fell off the wagon with Ruby - she made him feel strong, more in control of his life. Especially in recent years, I'm not remembering the faults that Dean has admitted to. With Gadreel, Dean didn't admit any wrong-doing (similar to the deal)... not even for the lying after the fact, and he was instead shown to be in the right. Same with taking on the mark. If Dean admitted that was wrong which he probably did somewhere - it was pretty low-key and downplayed, and it didn't address why Dean did it in the first place or why that's a problem. So your miles may vary.

 

I'm really not sure what it is that you are looking for Sam to admit or do that he hasn't already done. He's apologized to Dean for not looking for him, he admitted that he would do the same as what Dean did in the Gadreel situation, and he's said that what he wants is to be hunting with Dean and that his relationship with Dean is all he needs. He's pretty much deferred to Dean in just about everything at this point, so I'm not sure what else there is left for him to do here, myself. Again your miles may vary.

[companionenvy]

Fantastic post. I do have some disagreements -- I think Sam was very much in the wrong about Benny, and don't think Dean was really proven right with Gadreel -- but, as you may have gathered from my previous posts on this subject, I fundamentally agree that the narrative very is often more forgiving of Dean than of Sam. You've pointed out that this is in no small part because Sam frequently winds up conceding Dean's point even when Dean is actually in the wrong, while Dean rarely comes around to Sam's perspective. 

[AwesomO4000]

On 9/22/2016 at 10:37 AM, Aeryn13 said:

But it`s not possible to always have acceptance. If any kind of misgivings or critique just becomes "you don`t trust me" and that becomes basically "you bully me by having a different opinion", then what that person wants IS a lackey by all accounts. Sam himself has, frankly, no problem making it known if he has a less than glowing opinion of someone or something. Other people have the right to reciprocate and it doesn`t make him a martyr.

Agreed but it goes both ways. To me Dean insisting that only his opinion is right and being affronted if Sam doesn't agree entirely and not being willing to compromise either is the same thing... see below...

On 9/22/2016 at 10:37 AM, Aeryn13 said:

So I still think that Dean would have had no chance to get Sam away from Ruby unless he would have played the fully supportive submissive. And probably not even then because Sam had decided on that course of action, had decided he needed Ruby for it and would have expected full support of those decisions.

I disagree. Dean could've gone along on that last trip with Sam and Ruby and showed Ruby's hand. Dean's smart. He could've thought of a way, even if it was just to stab Ruby in the back or pick a fight to show Ruby's true colors. But Dean insisted that Sam see everything his way and kill Ruby or else Dean wouldn't go with him against Lilith. In my opinion, that's just as much asking Sam to be the submissive or Dean wasn't going to help. Maybe if Dean had been willing to compromise a little more, Sam might've met him halfway eventually. The goal was supposedly to kill Lilith - and if Sam thought that they needed Ruby, compromise on that for now. Dean could always find a way to ditch her later. Dean turned it into a "if you don't pick me over her, I'm taking my ball and going home. And, oh, by the way, don't you bother coming home either." To me that showed that for Dean it was at least as much about Dean as it was the goal of killing Lilith. At least if he'd gone with Sam, he could've protected him from Ruby's supposed influence and/or harm.

It's not often brought up on the show, but Dean threw his hat in with the angels... who turned out to be just as much of the bad guys as Ruby turned out to be if not more so. Castiel didn't turn out to be all that much help, and actually hindered the situation, letting Sam out of the panic room in the first place and then helping to keep Dean prisoner until it was too late. But the revisionist history is that it was all Sam's bad decisions that caused the apocalypse, so Sam gets all the blame.

On 9/22/2016 at 10:37 AM, Aeryn13 said:

When he confessed his sin about letting Dean down, it was all about Dean`s hurtful - to Sam - reactions to it. Apparently, the act itself wasn`t the problem, it was that Dean dared to feel hurt and betrayed by it. And that is always the vibe I`m getting.

I guess I don't see that the same way. For me Sam was being sincere there in his emotions, and he likely wouldn't have even mentioned it until Dean brought up the platitudes. "I can't do it without you?" Like Sam is going to believe that when Dean was making it very clear he had little faith in Sam recently and thought that both Benny and Castiel (which really?) were more reliable. It even took a while for Dean to see that Cas was acting weirdly when Sam pointed it out (if I'm remembering correctly). But Sam is just supposed to believe what Dean is feeding him because he wants to get Sam to stop doing the trials? I don't blame Sam for being skeptical and letting Dean know that he (Sam) is hurt by Dean not trusting him. For me it wasn't so much "how dare you feel hurt and betrayed" as it was "I feel hurt." And even if it was a little "how dare you feel hurt," - which I don't think it was - Sam wouldn't be the only one to pull that. Dean did something similar to Sam in season 3 with the deal as I talked about above. "Don't be mad at me." Why the hell not, Dean? And then Dean would get pissy with Sam if he did get frustrated and/or angry about it rather than saying "yeah, I shouldn't have done it."

And Sam's apology later for not looking for Dean was similarly sincere, I thought. He was saying he understood why Dean felt angry about it. Besides, as I said above, in my opinion, I thought that Sam had a (general) point about Benny and Castiel (especially).

5 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

I think Sam was very much in the wrong about Benny,

I actually agree with this for the most part. The narrative did make Sam very wrong about Benny (That episode with Martin? ugh). I was mainly talking about Benny in general... in that Benny was a vampire and generally on the show monster = bad and up until that point monster had almost always = bad in the end, without exception. So that Sam questioning a monster was mostly bad because it was Sam questioning the monster. Somehow I couldn't see the show having Sam being friends with a monster and that monster turning out to be good (Garth the werewolf being the exception and friends with both Sam and Dean, but even more so Dean). And if Dean questioned a friendship with Sam and a vampire, it would be seen as entirely reasonable, because of what had happened in the past. (And the vampire would likely turn out to be entirely evil, too - hee.)

[auntvi]

Quote

Even when Crowley is involved - a demon just like Ruby - somehow when he's friends with Dean, he's often somehow helpful in the end.

Yes!! At the beginning of season 10, the writing tells us that Crowley, the f***ing King of Hell, is basically a good guy & Dean's best friend.  And in the end Dean's trust in Benny was shown to be well-founded. Benny even went back to save Sam. For someone who tends to see everything in black & white, Dean has been friends with a couple really dark people, and hasn't yet been shown to be wrong.

Edited October 5, 2016 by auntvi

[DittyDotDot]

32 minutes ago, auntvi said:

Yes!! At the beginning of season 10, the writing tells us that Crowley, the f***ing King of Hell, is basically a good guy & Dean's best friend.  And in the end Dean's trust in Benny was shown to be well-founded. Benny even went back to save Sam. For someone who tends to see everything in black & white, Dean has been friends with a couple really dark people, and hasn't yet been shown to be wrong.

I'm sorry, I don't think the writing has ever said Crowley was a good guy. Deanmon Dean hanging out with Crowley only tells me there's something very wrong with Dean. They may have needed his help this season, but I don't think that makes him a good guy nor Dean's bestie.

And, I know this is an unpopular opinion, but I never trusted Benny. I think it was a very poor decision on Dean's part to let him free in the world regardless if he was a good guy. He was a monster and nothing Benny did would change that for me. It was a recipe for disaster from the very beginning and IMO, the writing supported that. BTW, I'm of the opinion Benny fell off the wagon and was draining folk after Dean broke up with him.

[Demented Daisy]

1 hour ago, companionenvy said:

Fantastic post. I do have some disagreements -- I think Sam was very much in the wrong about Benny, and don't think Dean was really proven right with Gadreel -- but, as you may have gathered from my previous posts on this subject, I fundamentally agree that the narrative very is often more forgiving of Dean than of Sam. You've pointed out that this is in no small part because Sam frequently winds up conceding Dean's point even when Dean is actually in the wrong, while Dean rarely comes around to Sam's perspective. 

For what it's worth:

Sam, through 6 seasons, said that he was wrong once.  (Dean said it twice.)

Sam told Dean that he was right 8 times.  Dean told Sam he was right 11 times.

I stopped counting after season 6 because no one seemed to care.  If I have time, I can start counting again.  (Page 25 of the Bitterness thread is when I started counting right/wrong/sorry/thanks.)

[catrox14]

58 minutes ago, auntvi said:

Yes!! At the beginning of season 10, the writing tells us that Crowley, the f***ing King of Hell, is basically a good guy & Dean's best friend.  And in the end Dean's trust in Benny was shown to be well-founded. Benny even went back to save Sam. For someone who tends to see everything in black & white, Dean has been friends with a couple really dark people, and hasn't yet been shown to be wrong.

Edited 56 minutes ago by auntvi.

Crowley called Demon!Dean his best friend. No iteration of Dean ever reciprocated that delusion. Crowley was not good. He possessed a woman, had an orgy with her husband and their friends and slaughtered them all.  He facilitated Dean's rebirth as a demon and did so without Dean's knowledge nor consent.   How can Dean being turned into a demon against his will and behaving as such and hanging with the King of Hell out of boredom IMO, be considered an endorsement of Crowley's "goodness" when there is none?    

[companionenvy]

Quote

For what it's worth:

Sam, through 6 seasons, said that he was wrong once.  (Dean said it twice.)

Sam told Dean that he was right 8 times.  Dean told Sam he was right 11 times.

I stopped counting after season 6 because no one seemed to care.  If I have time, I can start counting again.  (Page 25 of the Bitterness thread is when I started counting right/wrong/sorry/thanks.)

I obviously haven't looked at this nearly as closely as you have, DD, but I'd really have to see context rather than going by raw numbers, which I think is generally true of your (still excellent) lists. I'm also not sure how exactly you were counting what constituted saying one is wrong/ apology, and suspect it isn't always so black and white. One brother can come around to the other's position without ever saying "I'm wrong" or "I'm sorry." 

I also think the show was much more equal in a lot of respects through the Kripke years than it became afterwards, especially season 7-on. For instance, Sam, whether or not he apologizes to Dean about Benny, ultimately has to trust Benny to save his life. By comparison, he winds up telling Dean that he was right to kill Amy the Kitsune, which seems to be more or less the final word on that subject. Moving to other issues, in the post-Kripke years Dean has taken the lead in defeating Eve, Dick Roman, Abbadon and Amara (albeit non-violently, in the last case). Sam has failed to kill Crowley and decided not to complete the trials, not to mention being primarily responsible for apocalypse II. Yes, he has had supporting roles in the big wins, and some impressive one-off victories, but at the end of the day, it is really hard for me to see this as anything but Dean coming out on top, heroism-wise.

By the way, re: Benny: my issue with Sam's behavior there was that to me, it seemed motivated more by petty jealousy and insecurity born of his own failure to look for Dean than by legitimate issues with trusting a vampire. Sam has consistently been more likely to trust "monsters" than Dean. If he had appealed to Dean about Benny based on his own mistake with Ruby, that would have been one thing, but he doesn't seem to have changed his view on giving monsters the benefit of the doubt since that experience. Not long before Benny, Sam had been willing to give Amy a pass, and both Sam and Dean let Kate the werewolf live.

[AwesomO4000]

3 hours ago, DittyDotDot said:

And, I know this is an unpopular opinion, but I never trusted Benny. I think it was a very poor decision on Dean's part to let him free in the world regardless if he was a good guy. He was a monster and nothing Benny did would change that for me. It was a recipe for disaster from the very beginning and IMO, the writing supported that.

For what it was worth, I agree with you on the Benny thing. I thought it was a bad idea on Dean's part, also, and that Sam wasn't entirely wrong in questioning Dean's trusting him. The show had made a point that even the one "good" vampire Sam and Dean knew eventually fell off the wagon when things got rough. Same with the Rugaru guy. But I disagree that the writing supported Dean being wrong in trusting Benny in the end. I think it started out that way, but then the writers maybe wimped out? Maybe Benny was supposed to go bad, but after he became so popular, they changed their mind?

I wonder that, because of how terrible the writing made Sam out to be in "Citizen Fang." It was like that episode went out of its way to have Sam make every bad and unreasonable decision possible rather than let Sam actually have a valid viewpoint and try to get his point across to Dean reasonably.  That episode made Sam appear almost crazy, in my opinion. And it painted Benny as the hurt and sympathetic one in this, making it so that Benny had to kill Martin to save his relative and had to leave his only support system all because of Sam... also thereby kind of giving an excuse that if Benny did fall off the wagon after killing Martin, it would sort of partially be Sam's fault for sicking Martin on Benny in the first place.

And then of course, Benny helped Dean and sacrificed himself to save Sam... with Sam saying about Benny when Dean buryied his bones in case he ever considered getting Benny back "No, no, no. You know what? I get it. I do. He's a... He's a little different from what I thought. So, go ahead and leave the door open if you want." (Another instance where Sam came around to Dean's way of thinking even when I wasn't so sure it was the right one.) At that point, I think any plan that the writers might've had to make Dean wrong about Benny sort of was beside the point, since now Sam would be complicit in anything that went wrong from it in the future anyway.

4 hours ago, DittyDotDot said:

BTW, I'm of the opinion Benny fell off the wagon and was draining folk after Dean broke up with him.

Now had the writing shown this - or even shown Benny being seriously tempted or contemplating it - then I would agree that the writing supported it being a bad or at least reckless decision on Dean's part to trust Benny. But since Benny onscreen lived up to Dean's trust (Over on TWoP, I even predicted early on in the season that Benny would end up saving Sam and proving Dean's trust in him), and even got to be a hero, I ultimately didn't think it did in the end.

4 hours ago, Demented Daisy said:

I stopped counting after season 6 because no one seemed to care.

I did! I cared. However, I kind of feel for you on this one, because it's a tougher thing to gauge. Especially since sometimes the boys say the other is right without actually saying those words... as my above example with Sam conceding to Dean about Benny illustrates.

Or as @companionenvy said above while I was writing this.

13 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

By the way, re: Benny: my issue with Sam's behavior there was that to me, it seemed motivated more by petty jealousy and insecurity born of his own failure to look for Dean than by legitimate issues with trusting a vampire.

Agreed. Sam wasn't really given a rational argument here in my opinion. He was made, more or less, to be in the wrong for what he was doing concerning Benny. It's one of the reasons why I think in the end the writing didn't really support Sam's questioning Dean's trusting of Benny (I discussed this in more detail above where I talk about how yes, the writers did ultimately have Sam agree with Dean about Benny).

[DittyDotDot]

1 hour ago, companionenvy said:

By the way, re: Benny: my issue with Sam's behavior there was that to me, it seemed motivated more by petty jealousy and insecurity born of his own failure to look for Dean than by legitimate issues with trusting a vampire.

Of course it was all about jealousy, but that doesn't negate how foolish I think it was for Dean to resurrect a vampire and then set him loose on the world without any supervision. His entire attitude was if Benny slipped up and someone killed him, so be it, but he wasn't going to take care of it. Sorry, I think it was foolish and a set up for failure from the start. And it doesn't matter to me what Benny did for Dean in Purgatory. They helped each other survive, Dean didn't owe Benny anything, IMO.

Don't get me wrong, I liked Benny, as a character, but I think Dean should've left him in Purgatory. And, I'm in no way saying Sam didn't act like an asshat about it all and caused more problems, though. But, Dean was acting like a jealous jerk about Amelia too. Granted, he didn't threaten to kill her, at least. Or sick a crazy nut job on her...or wait, he kinda did when he sent Sam that text message. ;)

1 hour ago, AwesomO4000 said:

But I disagree that the writing supported Dean being wrong in trusting Benny in the end. I think it started out that way, but then the writers maybe wimped out? Maybe Benny was supposed to go bad, but after he became so popular, they changed their mind?

Oh, but I think Benny did go bad. He basically admitted it to Dean right before Dean lopped off his head. And watching him walk around that park like he was trying to decide which human would be tastiest made me think it was only a matter of time. Of course, mileage varies.

[rue721]

11 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

But, Dean was acting like a jealous jerk about Amelia too. Granted, he didn't threaten to kill her, at least. Or sick a crazy nut job on her...or wait, he kinda did when he sent Sam that text message. ;)

OK, I had to give you a "like" for that punchline alone. LOL.

[Myrelle]

One thing I'm certainly seeing as true is that miles vary greatly especially with regards to how apologies have been delivered(series-long, that is) on this show and the execution of the depiction of one brother "coming around" to the other brother's way of thinking(does this count as an apology?-because what Sam said about Benny after Benny had saved his life was no apology from Sam at all, IMO; and neither was "I lied". Again, not IMO).  Oh, and also as far as the downplaying of fault and betrayals within the writing goes, too-and by within, I mean both what's written in a script and what isn't-and more often the "what isn't" is the thing that I have the biggest problems with on this show.

And FWIW, I thought one of the best and funniest lines of S11 was that one where Dean said that sometimes a person just needs to say words of apology to another because sometimes people just need to hear the words-and it doesn't really matter if the person issuing them feels that they're true or not. It works great on a number of levels.

Edited October 6, 2016 by Myrelle

[Bessie]

14 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

It's not often brought up on the show, but Dean threw his hat in with the angels... who turned out to be just as much of the bad guys as Ruby turned out to be if not more so.

The way Dean handled the angels always befuddled me a bit and it was never addressed on the show that I can recall.  They put Dean in the position of playing the middleman with Sam and he mostly just accepted that role at face value.  Sure, he talked a good game about the dick angels, but he pretty much went with the program.  

It never really made sense to me that Dean didn't suggest that they talk to Sam themselves and maybe provide a rationale for why Sam should stop doing what he was doing. "Because the angels said so" was about as likely to be successful as "because dad said so." And Dean knows this.

It was obvious early on that the angels were up to no good and I hated how Dean was duped by them. I chalk it up to hell trauma combined with undeserved gratitude (although he didn't know it was undeserved at the time) for rescuing him from the pit. But it's one of the reasons I've never rewatched season 4 mytharc episodes. Both boys were snookered by nefarious forces.

Edited October 6, 2016 by Bessie

[DittyDotDot]

46 minutes ago, Bessie said:

But it's one of the reasons I've never rewatched season 4 mytharc episodes. Both boys were snookered by nefarious forces.

I always thought that was the point, myself. Neither were right or wrong, but both were right and wrong.

[catrox14]

12 hours ago, DittyDotDot said:

Of course it was all about jealousy, but that doesn't negate how foolish I think it was for Dean to resurrect a vampire and then set him loose on the world without any supervision.

I would think being inured in 24/7 kill or be killed mode for 365 days whilst trying desperately to find Cas messed with Dean's head. That said I'm still disinclined to say the guy with PTSD is foolish for honoring a bargain with the one ally that helped him try to save his best friend.

[companionenvy]

I agree, Catrox. On an ethical level, I also think Dean was obligated to give Benny a chance once he committed to not killing people, even if he had his doubts about whether or not he'd be able to hack it long-term. Benny had earned at least that much. 

Someone mentioned Lenore earlier. I don't think Lenore's "fall off the wagon" proves much about the reform possibilities of monsters, given that she was being influenced by Eve, any more than things that humans do while possessed says something about their character. If anything, the fact that she recognized that she was out of control and asked to be killed rather than continuing harming others demonstrates her level of commitment. And yes, in retrospect, had the Winchesters killed her back in S2, that would have saved her future victims. I don't think that means it was the right choice at the time. 

By that logic, Gordon was absolutely right, morally, to try to kill Sam in season 2. I think the show has pretty comprehensively rejected that line of reasoning, even as it has raised serious issues about the amount of harm the Winchesters have done over the years. 

[Demented Daisy]

*sigh*  This is why I never tried to count who was right and who was wrong, only when they said it about themselves or each other.  Because it's much, much too complex.

Besides, if neither screwed up, we'd have a couple of "Mary Sue"s on our hands and not much of a show to watch.  Their mistakes are what make them human and relatable and compelling.

[AwesomO4000]

1 hour ago, companionenvy said:

By that logic, Gordon was absolutely right, morally, to try to kill Sam in season 2. I think the show has pretty comprehensively rejected that line of reasoning, even as it has raised serious issues about the amount of harm the Winchesters have done over the years.

Sometimes it's a little more gray though. For example, Amy. Theoretically, she was done killing once she saved her son and would go back to feeding off of dead people's brain parts like she had been for years, because theoretically there would be no reason for her to keep killing, and she knew that it was wrong. Likely the situation that she would have to kill would never come up again. But Dean wouldn't take that chance of giving her a second chance. Amy wasn't being influenced by Eve, but her child being mortally ill was an extenuating circumstance. And then there was the Rugaru guy. He was considering living his life the hard way and not becoming a monster, but the hunter threatened his wife, forcing his hand into protecting her. Should he have let his wife be killed? There is often the possibility for an extenuating circumstance, no matter how much a monster might want to resist. And I think by having Sam and Dean agree on Amy was the show showing that there is a gray area there when it comes to monsters.

As for Gordon, he was actually an interesting dilemma for me in that, theoretically, Gordon was right. The problem was that the way Gordon went about trying to do something about it turned him into a monster - literally. He also wasn't above potentially taking out innocent bystanders either (like Ava) even when it wasn't necessary but just convenient. Even despite that, I couldn't help but feel a little bit of sympathy for Gordon* - with respect to Sam anyway. Not necessarily Lenore, because Gordon was also shown to be a bit sadistic and non-compassionate there.

* And especially Kubrik. Gordon - and the weird coincidences - really did convince him that killing Sam was the right thing to do. Other than that, he seemed to be a pretty decent guy for a hunter.

[DittyDotDot]

8 hours ago, catrox14 said:

I would think being inured in 24/7 kill or be killed mode for 365 days whilst trying desperately to find Cas messed with Dean's head. That said I'm still disinclined to say the guy with PTSD is foolish for honoring a bargain with the one ally that helped him try to save his best friend.

Well, considering Benny couldn't have cared less about Dean's best friend and that Benny wasn't helping Dean because he just wanted to be a nice guy, I'm thinking it was a tad foolish for Dean not to suss out what Benny's actual plans were before he let him loose on the world. 

I'm not saying Dean didn't have his reasons or that they weren't necessarily good reasons--nor am I saying that it makes Dean a bad guy--but the reality is, Benny had been locked in Purgatory for decades and Dean had no way of knowing how he would act or what he would do once he was returned to the land of the living. But he went ahead and turned him loose anyway. That's kind of the definition for foolish, in my book. 

This is not a criticism of Dean, though. I love the little ball of guilt and don't blame him for making the choice he did, I'd probably have done the same thing, foolish or not. Sometimes we do foolish things hoping for the best. It's kinda the way of the universe, if you ask me. 

Edited October 7, 2016 by DittyDotDot