All Episodes Talk: Saving People, Hunting Things

[ahrtee]

12 minutes ago, FlickChick said:

I think the only reason we had the AU was to have some reason for the Wayward characters to be needed - save the worlds and all that crap. Dabb and Berens used at least four (or more) episodes that season to set up their back-door pilot, and when it failed to be picked up, well, we all know the result of that...

Except the WS never went to the AU, just the "Bad Place."  Maybe the plan was to recognize the existence of AUs, but that was done through Chuck (and Michael).  No, no real reason for the AU except to bring back dead characters under a different guise.  So clever *gag*.  

Edited February 9, 2020 by ahrtee

[Katy M]

I hate AUs.  I will always hate AUs.  But, this particular iteration of AUs is especially annoying.  Chuck just created a bunch of universes, some of them so ridiculously alike that there was no need for others.  I mean, if he created them around the same time, how did things happen so, closely for lack of a better word, that there were that many Sams and Deans to kill each other in all the ways that Sam dreamt of.  And, it took this long, thousands of years, for a crossover to happen?  When the recipe was in the angel (?) tablet all along?  Just ugh.  don't get me started.

Having said all that I still enjoyed Seasons 13 and 14 more than this season.  I have legit only low-key liked 2 epis this season, and I did also enjoy watching Dean and his buddy have fun hanging out in the bar.  

[7kstar]

I was okay on 13 but can't really remember what it was about.  So that is telling.

14 I actually skipped some eps at first due to working and not having time and then watched some and never desired to go back and catch up.  If they had announced that they were doing two more seasons, I would have just stopped.

I usually kind find something I can like in any ep.  Christian Kane and Jensen was a great partnership and I did enjoy the ep.  A few this season have been okay but at a time in my life where I'm going through a really rough patch and can't talk about it, this show isn't adding joy.

I do blame Dabb.  He's had some story ideas that might have been okay with a better writer.  No writer will ever be a winner for all stories.  But I'm not on the positive side of Dabb.  For those that are, that's fine.  I'll never tell anyone what they should or should not like.

But I miss the boys being the lead in their own show, being bad ass.  JMO.

[Bali]

21 hours ago, 7kstar said:

  I'll never tell anyone what they should or should not like.

 

I will. We should NOT like that science hasn't come up with a way to create fuel out of used tissues. If it had, I'd personally be fueling most of the Midwestern states. And I will argue with ANYONE who says Colds are wonderful!

[ILoveReading]

9 minutes ago, Bali said:

I will. We should NOT like that science hasn't come up with a way to create fuel out of used tissues. If it had, I'd personally be fueling most of the Midwestern states. And I will argue with ANYONE who says Colds are wonderful!

A bad cold allows me to take a sick day and I get a paid day off.  😉

[Bali]

1 hour ago, ILoveReading said:

A bad cold allows me to take a sick day and I get a paid day off.  😉

my company just eliminated sick days. And we now have to use our PTO days. But we lost a week of time off. I'd rather have paid days off when it's nice.

[Aeryn13]

17 minutes ago, Bali said:

my company just eliminated sick days. And we now have to use our PTO days. But we lost a week of time off. I'd rather have paid days off when it's nice.

In Germany that would be unthinkeable. By law you get six weeks consecutively of sick leave with full pay. Then you are back a week and if you get sick again, another six weeks with full pay. And so on.

[Katy M]

23 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

In Germany that would be unthinkeable. By law you get six weeks consecutively of sick leave with full pay. Then you are back a week and if you get sick again, another six weeks with full pay. And so on.

So, theoretically speaking, if you're sickly, in Germany you could work 8 weeks and get paid for the whole year?  Great system.

[Aeryn13]

3 minutes ago, Katy M said:

So, theoretically speaking, if you're sickly, in Germany you could work 8 weeks and get paid for the whole year?  Great system.

Technically, yes. Also, after the first six week where your employer keeps paying you, your health insurance will pick up with 80 % of your original pay for 72 more weeks if you remain sick. It's a very employee-friendly system in that regard. 

[Bali]

Ironically enough, our parent company is centered in Germany.

[Whimsy]

Hey guys.  This is just a reminder to stay on topic, please.  😉

[ILoveReading]

From @NougatJack is the media thread

Quote

I can only speak for myself, I like Jack but I hate Mary since the beginning (and John too).

I don't like Mary's character.  I don't think they did a single thing right with her return.  I thought she was cold, selfish and uncaring.

But from a plot standpoint, and Sam and Dean's POV Mary is the corner stone of the entire show.  It was her death that sent John off on his quest and he dragged Sam and Dean with him. 

Mary was a big trigger for Dean and Sam always seemed curious about her.  Remember Sam told Mary, "having you here fills in the biggest blank."

They just got her back for a hot minute.  The brothers clearly made peace with their relationship with her and her death should have had a much bigger impact. 

Instead, Sam seemed to barely notice, Dean said he was wrong to get angry about it, Cas barely cared about brothers losing their mom.  Then they welcome Jack back with open arms and don't bat an eye that he's eating people's hearts.

IMO, it doesn't matter what kind of character Mary was simply because of what she represented to the brothers.   I think the writers realized they went to far with Jack killing Mary and they didn't know how to probably deal with the aftermath so they swept it under the rug, and the expense of the characterization of the 3 mains leads.

This is why Jack is a terrible character, IMO, because he causes other character to behave in ways they normally wouldn't.

 

[NougatJack]

Sure, the boys love their mother. Everybody loves his/her mother. It was very hard for Sam and Dean to lose her again. But they will get over it, they aren‘t little children anymore. Sam probably has already got over it. He even had this spell/magic from Rowena to resurrect someone, but used it on Eileen instead because he knew that his mother is at a much better place now, and together with John. 

Dean on the other hand takes Mary‘s death much harder, I think as the older brother, he knew her better.

Nevertheless, welcoming back Jack does make sense. Sam and Dean can’t even know how Mary died. They weren‘t there when it happened. But they know that Chuck has probably been there too, because Cas called for him earlier. And Chuck had a reason to kill Mary and let it look like it has been Jack. Since the events in „Moriah“ Sam and Dean know it too and give Jack the benefit of the doubt.

So, neither Sam and Dean nor the audience knows who is really responsible for Mary‘s second death. But what we all know for sure what Jack has done is: he healed Sam and saved his live. Nevertheless, people tend to judge Jack for being involved in Mary‘s death (is he really?) but that he saved Sam, prevented Lucifer from rising again, that has been swept under the rug? I don’t think it‘s fair.

[Katy M]

7 minutes ago, NougatJack said:

but used it on Eileen instead because he knew that his mother is at a much better place now, and together with John. 

That might have been part of it, but he also needed a ghost to actually lay down in the water.  How would he have gotten his mother out of Heaven and into the tub?

[catrox14]

1 hour ago, NougatJack said:

Dean on the other hand takes Mary‘s death much harder, I think as the older brother, he knew her better.

Beyond being the older brother, Dean saw his mother burn on the ceiling at 4 years old. That is the formative thing that affected his entire life. I don't think anyone ever gets over something like that.

Aside from that, Dean always questioned Jack's basic nature from birth that he was going to be evil because Lucifer spawn. And now Jack intentionally killed her with just a thought. So yeah, Dean had plenty to be upset about with Jack and still does. The problem is the show never let's Dean be right about his distrust and attitude towards Jack. He's faced with Cas and Sam insisting that Dean is in the wrong about him. Which would be okay if they didn't make it seem like poor widdle Jackie is bad because of mean old Dean, nevermind that Jack is, in fact the Spawn of Satan.

It's a bad storyline from the beginning that should have never er seen the light of day. I wouldn't be surprised if it was BuckLemmings attempt to spinoff freaking Lucifer into his own show wuth Jack. I'm not convinced that still isn't the intention.

[NougatJack]

24 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Beyond being the older brother, Dean saw his mother burn on the ceiling at 4 years old. That is the formative thing that affected his entire life. I don't think anyone ever gets over something like that.

Aside from that, Dean always questioned Jack's basic nature from birth that he was going to be evil because Lucifer spawn. And now Jack intentionally killed her with just a thought. So yeah, Dean had plenty to be upset about with Jack and still does. The problem is the show never let's Dean be right about his distrust and attitude towards Jack. He's faced with Cas and Sam insisting that Dean is in the wrong about him. Which would be okay if they didn't make it seem like poor widdle Jackie is bad because of mean old Dean, nevermind that Jack is, in fact the Spawn of Satan.

It's a bad storyline from the beginning that should have never er seen the light of day. I wouldn't be surprised if it was BuckLemmings attempt to spinoff freaking Lucifer into his own show wuth Jack. I'm not convinced that still isn't the intention.

Seems like you haven‘t read my entire post, there’s no proof that it has been Jack who killed Mary. But I can see that most people here hate Jack and want him to be the murderer, but that doesn’t necessary makes it true.

[catrox14]

10 minutes ago, NougatJack said:

Seems like you haven‘t read my entire post, there’s no proof that it has been Jack who killed Mary. But I can see that most people here hate Jack and want him to be the murderer, but that doesn’t necessary makes it true.

I did read your entire post. 

Deciding that those who dislike Jack the character want him to be the murderer, is a headcanon at this point. I didn't address it because it's basically your headcanon to which you are entitled.

That said, nothing in the narrative has suggested Jack didn't kill her.  Not even Jack.  And I think it further suggests that Jack did kill her because he showed restraint with his grandmother.  He got some control at that point, but had none with Mary. 

[gonzosgirrl]

24 minutes ago, NougatJack said:

Seems like you haven‘t read my entire post, there’s no proof that it has been Jack who killed Mary. But I can see that most people here hate Jack and want him to be the murderer, but that doesn’t necessary makes it true.

Aside from the "Chuck is responsible for everything from Scene 1, Episode 1" pile of crap Dabb has settled us with at the moment, how do you get this? Jack's temper got riled up by Mary haranguing him over the way he killed Nick, and when it exploded, he killed Mary. It happened on screen. ETA: Okay, it is heavily implied on screen, and as @catrox14 says, nothing has happened since that contradicts it. In fact, he admits to Rowena that he did kill her, 'by accident'. If they pull that out of their asses at this point, it will just be another jump the shark moment in Dabb's quest to make Jack the hero of the show.

Edited February 13, 2020 by gonzosgirrl

[Aeryn13]

2 hours ago, NougatJack said:

So, neither Sam and Dean nor the audience knows who is really responsible for Mary‘s second death. But what we all know for sure what Jack has done is: he healed Sam and saved his live. Nevertheless, people tend to judge Jack for being involved in Mary‘s death (is he really?) but that he saved Sam, prevented Lucifer from rising again, that has been swept under the rug? I don’t think it‘s fair.

My problem is rarely what a character does or doesn`t do but how the narrative presents it. And Jack is forever the cute little baby who is never wrong for anything because there are always endless excuses. And he is the most important being in the universe bla bla. That is why I hate the character. I would have at least respected it if they had given him some edge already and stopped with the "it wasn`t really him, poor thing" for the 1000th time.  

Personally, I could care less who killed Mary, I loathed her. Dean and Sam should not feel this way, though, and should not think their whole world revolves around Jack. This "he is their kid" story is really reaching and unconvincing to me. Other than with Cas who seems flat out obsessed with Jack. He would probably happily run Dean and Sam through with an angel sword if it was for his precious baby. 

[NougatJack]

As I said before, Chuck wanted all of TFW (and that includes Jack) to believe that Jack killed Mary. He wanted Dean to use his free will to go after Jack and kill him, for his (Chuck‘s) entertainment. That’s why Jack admitted that he accidentally killed her, because he only could rule out that it was on purpose.

That‘s typical for Chuck: He isn’t responsible for everything that happens, he gave  humans free will (see above), but sometimes he manipulates people, especially the Winchester’s, because you know, they are his favorite show.

BTW, Jack usually doesn’t kill people accidentally, even when he’s soulless and furious.Otherwise, Sam, Dean, Cas and  grandmother Kline would not be alive anymore.

[ILoveReading]

If they tried to say that Chuck killed Mary and let Jack off the hook, I'd just end up resenting the character even more.  Because its proof posistive they want the character to be the most purest snowflake ever.

This makes characters boring.  Give me messy complicated ones any day.

[Aeryn13]

2 minutes ago, NougatJack said:

As I said before, Chuck wanted all of TFW (and that includes Jack) to believe that Jack killed Mary. He wanted Dean to use his free will to go after Jack and kill him, for his (Chuck‘s) entertainment. That’s why Jack admitted that he accidentally killed her, because he only could rule out that it was on purpose.

That‘s typical for Chuck: He isn’t responsible for everything that happens, he gave  humans free will (see above), but sometimes he manipulates people, especially the Winchester’s, because you know, they are his favorite show.

BTW, Jack usually doesn’t kill people accidentally, even when he’s soulless and furious.Otherwise, Sam, Dean, Cas and  grandmother Kline would not be alive anymore.

See, but that is exactly it. Your argument boils down to "Jack is too pure and innocent to ever do such things..."  Which might endear the character to some people but is a giant turn-off for others. In a ahow where they made God evil, noone should becof limits from getting some dark smudges on their character. Jack somehow is. 

I might have actually started to like the character if for once there wouldn't be any "it was really Chuck, it was really this, it was really that" excuses for him and the narrative actually stone-cold said he was guilty as sin and held him accountable. No more cutesy puppy dog eyes and all that. But what you state above just makes him a weak, mollycodled and annoying character to me. At least if he was a killer, there would be some interesting edge about him finally.

[gonzosgirrl]

16 minutes ago, NougatJack said:

BTW, Jack usually doesn’t kill people accidentally, even when he’s soulless and furious.Otherwise, Sam, Dean, Cas and  grandmother Kline would not be alive anymore.

I'd say the town girl he stabbed ''accidentally" might disagree.

[NougatJack]

12 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

I'd say the town girl he stabbed ''accidentally" might disagree.

You mean the town girl who ran willingly in his angel blade while he played with it? 😆

Anyway, even if Jack eventually  hasn’t killed Mary, he isn’t that innocent anymore. He has killed at least three people while he has been with Dumah.

Hmm, that’s also a general problem in this show: nobody cares about victims and collateral damage if those people aren’t related to the Winchesters.

[Lemuria]

24 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

I'd say the town girl he stabbed ''accidentally" might disagree.

Not to mention, the security guard.  

And his mother, whom he prevented from aborting him and thus intentionally killed her so that he could be born.

Quote

That’s why Jack admitted that he accidentally killed her, because he only could rule out that it was on purpose.

Are you suggesting that Chuck actively prevented Jack from say that Jack hadn't done it at all? Other than not wanting it to be Jack, where is this coming from?  There's nothing in the show that says this.  This is, IMO, pure wishful thinking to excuse an molly-coddled character who has previously demonstrated no control over his temper or powers.

Edited February 13, 2020 by Lemuria

[ahrtee]

 

1 hour ago, NougatJack said:

As I said before, Chuck wanted all of TFW (and that includes Jack) to believe that Jack killed Mary. He wanted Dean to use his free will to go after Jack and kill him, for his (Chuck‘s) entertainment. That’s why Jack admitted that he accidentally killed her, because he only could rule out that it was on purpose.

That‘s typical for Chuck: He isn’t responsible for everything that happens, he gave  humans free will (see above), but sometimes he manipulates people, especially the Winchester’s, because you know, they are his favorite show.

So if Chuck doesn't kill directly and just wanted TFW to believe that Jack killed Mary, then who did?  

This whole discussion makes my head hurt.  Either Chuck has done everything, and therefore *no one* is guilty of anything (including lying, cheating, killing, stopping--or starting--the apocalypse) or he just sets the chess pieces in motion and watches what they do.  Either TFW actually *has* free will and Chuck doesn't interfere (except to bring people back to life to continue the game, or to end the game entirely) or nothing they do is on their own.  The writers can't (or, TBH, *shouldn't* be able to) have it both ways, though that's what they're trying.

Incidentally, I thought the show was pretty clear that Jack killed Mary.  We saw him torturing Lucifer (his father!)**  We saw Mary try to stop him.  There was no one else there.  We saw him glare at Mary and (IIRC) raise his hand and a bolt of white light appeared and Mary disappeared.  We saw him feel guilty, be afraid to face Sam and Dean because he knew they'd be angry, and later we saw them try to resurrect Mary, only to end up with an empty shell.  We also learned that Mary was safe in heaven. 

So what part of that would indicate that Jack was innocent?  That white light has been used before by angels to disintegrate people in a fit of rage, so we don't have to see the body afterwards to know it happened.

And all that happened *before* the boys knew anything was wrong, so they weren't misinterpreting the actual events that we saw. 

The next question has to be:  does Chuck write the stories for his children (the angels and archangels) to follow as well, or just for the humans he created?  If not, the angels/archangels seem to be acting on their own (though they used to just follow orders blindly).  Therefore, Chuck should have no control over Jack, as a half-archangel supposedly stronger than any of them.  He didn't create Jack--Lucifer did.  Just a thought.  

**ETA: OK, it was really Nick, but Nick certainly seemed to have channeled Lucifer permanently.  

Edited February 13, 2020 by ahrtee
clarification.

[Katy M]

1 minute ago, ahrtee said:

So if Chuck doesn't kill directly and just wanted TFW to believe that Jack killed Mary, then who did?  

This whole discussion makes my head hurt.  Either Chuck has done everything, and therefore *no one* is guilty of anything (including lying, cheating, killing, stopping--or starting--the apocalypse) or he just sets the chess pieces in motion and watches what they do.  Either TFW actually *has* free will and Chuck doesn't interfere (except to bring people back to life to continue the game, or to end the game entirely) or nothing they do is on their own.  The writers can't (or, TBH, *shouldn't* be able to) have it both ways, though that's what they're trying.

And this is why this entire season is making me want to go homocidal.  Don't worry. I think I can control the urges.

I don't think Chuck had anything to do with Jack killing Mary.  He was just getting annoyed with her bugging him, he snapped, and killed her. And, if Chuck wasn't allowing free will, how would he have a "favorite" Sam and Dean?  Wouldn't they all be doing the same things?  

Yeah, my head hurts also.  This is worse than time travel and for me that's saying a lot.

[Katy M]

1 hour ago, NougatJack said:

BTW, Jack usually doesn’t kill people accidentally, even when he’s soulless and furious.Otherwise, Sam, Dean, Cas and  grandmother Kline would not be alive anymore.

What does that even mean--usually?  He killed the guard.  Five minutes later (OK it was longer than that), even though he had accidentally killed the guard doign the exact same thing he used his powers to throw S, D, and C against the wall, just so he could disappear.  Something he could have easily have done sans violence.

Whether or not she ran into the blade, he still accidentally killed that girl because he wouldn't stop playing with the blade when they kept screaming at him to.  

[gonzosgirrl]

21 minutes ago, NougatJack said:

You mean the town girl who ran willingly in his angel blade while he played with it? 😆

Anyway, even if Jack eventually  hasn’t killed Mary, he isn’t that innocent anymore. He has killed at least three people while he has been with Dumah.

Hmm, that’s also a general problem in this show: nobody cares about victims and collateral damage if those people aren’t related to the Winchesters.

I don't know what the smiley at the end of the first sentence is, but I'll assume it's a LMAO because, okaaay.

As to the last part, since Jack lied (or lied by omission) about the people he killed (just because he healed townie girl doesn't change the fact his hubris and ego got her stabbed) and the unfortunate snake, then the Winchesters weren't aware there were victims to care about.

[Aeryn13]

3 minutes ago, Katy M said:

And this is why this entire season is making me want to go homocidal.  Don't worry. I think I can control the urges.

I don't think Chuck had anything to do with Jack killing Mary.  He was just getting annoyed with her bugging him, he snapped, and killed her. And, if Chuck wasn't allowing free will, how would he have a "favorite" Sam and Dean?  Wouldn't they all be doing the same things?  

Yeah, my head hurts also.  This is worse than time travel and for me that's saying a lot.

Time travel is just confusing because no two time travel adventures ever follow the same rules. Or any consistent logic or anything. Though I personally like a lot of time travel stories.

However what is currently being done with Chuck is the most counter-intuitive writing I`ve ever seen. Even Deadpool isn`t so meta, it actively tries to throw you out of the story every five seconds. But by hammering over and over how Chuck is a writer and how he writes the stories you are currently watching and how certain characters are his favourites and how he has certain tropes and how he is a bad writer etc, it is completely blowing away any necessary suspension of disbelief to emotionally engage with a story. It`s like the writers are shooting their own ego-documentary where they sit around, are lazy and ponder what bad stories about the Winchesters and pals they are gonna tell next. I hate reality TV. 

[gonzosgirrl]

1 minute ago, Aeryn13 said:

Time travel is just confusing because no two time travel adventures ever follow the same rules. Or any consistent logic or anything. Though I personally like a lot of time travel stories.

However what is currently being done with Chuck is the most counter-intuitive writing I`ve ever seen. Even Deadpool isn`t so meta, it actively tries to throw you out of the story every five seconds. But by hammering over and over how Chuck is a writer and how he writes the stories you are currently watching and how certain characters are his favourites and how he has certain tropes and how he is a bad writer etc, it is completely blowing away any necessary suspension of disbelief to emotionally engage with a story. It`s like the writers are shooting their own ego-documentary where they sit around, are lazy and ponder what bad stories about the Winchesters and pals they are gonna tell next. I hate reality TV. 

I am 97% sure Dabb writes (or reads) these scripts with one hand down the front of his pants.

[Katy M]

2 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

However what is currently being done with Chuck is the most counter-intuitive writing I`ve ever seen. Even Deadpool isn`t so meta, it actively tries to throw you out of the story every five seconds. But by hammering over and over how Chuck is a writer and how he writes the stories you are currently watching and how certain characters are his favourites

Here's the real question.  Did he want Sam to shoot him with his "equalizer?"  I'm going to assume no.  I'm also going to assume that he did want Dean to shoot Jack since he kept yelling at him to do so.  If he has the power to control everyone's thoughts and actions, why did he have to try so hard, and yet fail, to get Dean to shoot Jack?  Why?  

I can handle it if he's just selling them a pack of lies.  But, shouldn't Sam and Dean be able to figure this out logically.  

[NougatJack]

3 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

...and the unfortunate snake, then the Winchesters weren't aware there were victims to care about.

Ohh, I really felt for that snake, I have two little corn snakes myself, last year one of my snakes died, this really hurts so bad. 

 

Anyways, I hope that they will adress Mary’s death in one of the remaining episodes. Maybe Billie can bring some light into the dark, I mean, she’s death, and she has to know?

[NougatJack]

3 minutes ago, Katy M said:

Here's the real question.  Did he want Sam to shoot him with his "equalizer?"  I'm going to assume no.  I'm also going to assume that he did want Dean to shoot Jack since he kept yelling at him to do so.  If he has the power to control everyone's thoughts and actions, why did he have to try so hard, and yet fail, to get Dean to shoot Jack?  Why?  

...

Because it‘s so much more fun for him if Dean kills Jack because Dean wants it.

Unfortunately, it didn’t work because Dean noticed that Chuck wanted to manipulate him, so Chuck had to kill Jack directly.

[Katy M]

1 minute ago, NougatJack said:

Because it‘s so much more fun for him if Dean kills Jack because Dean wants it.

But, if Chuck's whole point is that he can control everything, he could have made Dean want to without Dean even being aware, right?  Isn't his whatever, I can't think of the word I want, that he has been controlling their entire lives and that every decision they have made has been because of him.  What would one more be?

[gonzosgirrl]

12 minutes ago, Katy M said:

But, if Chuck's whole point is that he can control everything, he could have made Dean want to without Dean even being aware, right?  Isn't his whatever, I can't think of the word I want, that he has been controlling their entire lives and that every decision they have made has been because of him.  What would one more be?

Conceit?

Alas, they have made Chuck the autistic boy, and the Earth, Winchesters et al, his snow globe.

(apologies to those who never watched St. Elsewhere)

[NougatJack]

32 minutes ago, Katy M said:

But, if Chuck's whole point is that he can control everything, he could have made Dean want to without Dean even being aware, right?  Isn't his whatever, I can't think of the word I want, that he has been controlling their entire lives and that every decision they have made has been because of him.  What would one more be?

I know what you mean and I agree. I think it only shows the risk of declaring god as a villain. 

[7kstar]

6 hours ago, NougatJack said:

Sure, the boys love their mother. Everybody loves his/her mother. It was very hard for Sam and Dean to lose her again. But they will get over it, they aren‘t little children anymore. Sam probably has already got over it. He even had this spell/magic from Rowena to resurrect someone, but used it on Eileen instead because he knew that his mother is at a much better place now, and together with John. 

Dean on the other hand takes Mary‘s death much harder, I think as the older brother, he knew her better.

Nevertheless, welcoming back Jack does make sense. Sam and Dean can’t even know how Mary died. They weren‘t there when it happened. But they know that Chuck has probably been there too, because Cas called for him earlier. And Chuck had a reason to kill Mary and let it look like it has been Jack. Since the events in „Moriah“ Sam and Dean know it too and give Jack the benefit of the doubt.

You have several fallacies in your argument.  No, not everyone loves their mother.

Assuming because Mary has already died once and the second time is no biggie.  well I know adult children that aren't handling the death of their parents well.  It depends on their relationships of course, but the time that has gone by since Mary's death hasn't been that long, so no I don't expect them to be over it.

Nor do I agree with them welcoming Jack with open arms.  I resent that they are making Dean ignore his feeling so that Dabbnatural can spin this crap the way he is.

My hatered of this story has nothing to really do with Jack.   He has been badly done.  Period.  So if you are looking for validation of your feelings of Jack you may have to go to the places that they love Jack but don't think about what is Jack doing to the show.  Jack could have been interesting especially if he had been allowed to be flawed.  If Jack believes he killed Mary where do you get that Jack isn't at fault.  He dreamed about it.  The show didn't visually set it up that Chuck killed Mary, but they did do it with Jack killing Mary.

Just because you want this to be true, doesn't mean that others do.  I really don't hate Jack.  I JUST don't care.  At this point I would like to snap my fingers and have Jack and Chuck both gone.  I hate how both characters are ruining the show I cared about. 

I can agree to disagree.  But your argument isn't persuading me.  Nor is it something I want to see.  I can only say what I think.  The bad thing about the internet is that you can think you have so many people in agreement with you but in reality it may only be a handful.  And remember I can make statistics to say anything I want. 

[Castiels Cat]

On 2/13/2020 at 4:45 PM, 7kstar said:

You have several fallacies in your argument.  No, not everyone loves their mother.

Assuming because Mary has already died once and the second time is no biggie.  well I know adult children that aren't handling the death of their parents well.  It depends on their relationships of course, but the time that has gone by since Mary's death hasn't been that long, so no I don't expect them to be over it.

Nor do I agree with them welcoming Jack with open arms.  I resent that they are making Dean ignore his feeling so that Dabbnatural can spin this crap the way he is.

My hatered of this story has nothing to really do with Jack.   He has been badly done.  Period.  So if you are looking for validation of your feelings of Jack you may have to go to the places that they love Jack but don't think about what is Jack doing to the show.  Jack could have been interesting especially if he had been allowed to be flawed.  If Jack believes he killed Mary where do you get that Jack isn't at fault.  He dreamed about it.  The show didn't visually set it up that Chuck killed Mary, but they did do it with Jack killing Mary.

Just because you want this to be true, doesn't mean that others do.  I really don't hate Jack.  I JUST don't care.  At this point I would like to snap my fingers and have Jack and Chuck both gone.  I hate how both characters are ruining the show I cared about. 

I can agree to disagree.  But your argument isn't persuading me.  Nor is it something I want to see.  I can only say what I think.  The bad thing about the internet is that you can think you have so many people in agreement with you but in reality it may only be a handful.  And remember I can make statistics to say anything I want. 

I think the show has established that losing Mary pretty much was the defining moment in Dean's life. It was the moment he lost happiness... the moment he lost his childhood... the reason he hunts... the reason he vocalized the Family Business mantra... Hunting Things and Saving People for Dean means saving families. It has all grown out from losing Mary.

When he lost Mary again in season 13 he lost his way and the show actually showed this well. He did reckless acts for selfish reasons, even unheroic acts and finally he says yes to AU Michael which in my book is a tragic fall punctuated by a resounding wireworks fall from grace. 

So... yes. It was totally in character for Dean to be angry and vengeful when Jack kills her in a fit of pique without remorse. They had telegraphed this conflict and Dean's turmoil... his love enabled him to see Jack as his son and Jack played at remorse in that moment.

Given this powerful backstory it would feel wrong for Dean to just put this all away. I do not think he has. Jensen did some powerful emoting in that reunion scene. 

And Jack is back to doing the murderous bidding of a supernatural player without asking questions, caring or showing remorse. He assumes that he is right because he's told it's right.

Edited February 16, 2020 by Castiels Cat

[Castiels Cat]

On 2/13/2020 at 2:17 PM, Katy M said:

But, if Chuck's whole point is that he can control everything, he could have made Dean want to without Dean even being aware, right?  Isn't his whatever, I can't think of the word I want, that he has been controlling their entire lives and that every decision they have made has been because of him.  What would one more be?

Meh. Chuck's a writer just like Metatron was when he emulated him. Chuck writes and for the most part that seems to do the trick. In HJ Chuck outlined the process. It's not all Chuck. He stacks the deck.

Dean has always been the wildcard. There's several canonical instances recognized by Chuck that have occurred in multiple seasons including two instances in season 5. He was not supposed to call Chuck and show up at Stull. Based on Metatron's reaction I would say that Dean's decisions changed Chuck's story in s 11 and of course Moriah most infamously. Chuck calls out Dean in HJ. Dean is Mr. Team Free Will. Dean is the one Chuck is concerned about because Dean is the one may just not play.

Chuck also can exercise  bodily control per Eileen when in close proximity. And he must have controlled heaven by fear of finger snap or whatever.

On 2/13/2020 at 2:15 PM, NougatJack said:

Because it‘s so much more fun for him if Dean kills Jack because Dean wants it.

Unfortunately, it didn’t work because Dean noticed that Chuck wanted to manipulate him, so Chuck had to kill Jack directly.

Chuck is a fan of the OPT. Dean would have given great angst and man pain after killing his monster child.

[Katy M]

1 minute ago, Castiels Cat said:

Chuck also can exercise  bodily control per Eileen when in close proximity. And he must have controlled heaven by fear of finger snap or whatever.

He was in close proximity to Dean in Moriah.  Why not control him then?  

It's absolutely ludicrous to have an all-powerful being as the enemy in this show or any other.  Especially if they end up by taking him down by throwing him in a wood chipper or something.  

[Castiels Cat]

Just now, Katy M said:

He was in close proximity to Dean in Moriah.  Why not control him then?  

It's absolutely ludicrous to have an all-powerful being as the enemy in this show or any other.  Especially if they end up by taking him down by throwing him in a wood chipper or something.  

Maybe he can't. Maybe that would ruin it. Because the point was to see Dean suffering afterwards. 

It would not be fun if he is essentially doing it.

On 2/5/2020 at 12:53 AM, falltime said:

In 'The Gambler' thread several people commented that they thought the figure in 14x20 to be Lucifer. That has never crossed my mind. I think the figure is the keeper of the empty. I would love to never see Lucifer again.

 

I agree. It was the Empty. 

[Katy M]

9 minutes ago, Castiels Cat said:

Maybe he can't. Maybe that would ruin it. Because the point was to see Dean suffering afterwards. 

Wouldn't he be able to control Dean without Dean knowing?  Or, do it and then wipe Dean's memory of him controlling him?  If the angels can do it, surely Chuck can.  Heck, even a witch had that capability in one epi.

[PAForrest]

15 hours ago, Castiels Cat said:

I think the show has established that losing Mary pretty much was the defining moment in Dean's life. It was the moment he lost happiness... the moment he lost his childhood... the reason he hunts... the reason he vocalized the Family Business mantra... Hunting Things and Saving People for Dean means saving families. It has all grown out from losing Mary.

...

So... yes. It was totally in character for Dean to be angry and vengeful when Jack kills her in a fit of pique without remorse. They had telegraphed this conflict and Dean's turmoil... his love enabled him to see Jack as his son and Jack played at remorse in that moment.

Given this powerful backstory it would feel wrong for Dean to just put this all away. I do not think he has. Jensen did some powerful emoting in that reunion scene. 

And Jack is back to doing the murderous bidding of a supernatural player without asking questions, caring or showing remorse. He assumes that he is right because he's told it's right.

Losing Mary in the pilot episode is not just a defining moment - it's the raison d'etre of the entire series. Without this incident, John never falls headlong into hunting supernatural beings, dragging his children along with him. Without that happening there is NO SHOW. No show for whoever the hell your favorite character is now - be it Jackie Poo or Asstiel or the Waywards or anyone else. Period.

Messing with that iconic storyline was doomed to failure even in the hands of competent showrunners and writers. But in the talentless mitts of the typing monkeys we have now, it was inevitably and hideously bungled. Frankly Kripke should have sued.

Of course Dean should have been a tad bit upset when the murderous child slaughtered her, regardless of how much many of us despised Mary 2.0. And murder her he did, we see that, the murderous child and his accomplice Asstiel make it clear they believe he did it. Being enraged at the murderer of one's mother or any family member is a NORMAL HUMAN reaction. Being enraged at someone who is defending and caring more about said murderer is also a NORMAL HUMAN reaction that no one should be expected to justify.

What is not normal is a talentless group of typing monkeys using a scenario like that to try and turn it back on the person who is upset at the murder of his parent, trying to turn the victim's family member into the BAD GUY! At that point we are far beyond bad writing and into wondering who the hell these typing monkeys are and what has gone so wrong in their lives that they are this soulless.

15 hours ago, Katy M said:

It's absolutely ludicrous to have an all-powerful being as the enemy in this show or any other.  Especially if they end up by taking him down by throwing him in a wood chipper or something.  

Turning Chuckles into the ultimate all-powerful villain and pitting him against an all powerful heart-chomping spawn of Satan has rendered every other character useless and destroyed the entire fabric of the series. But wasn't that exactly Dabb's intention?

Edited February 15, 2020 by PAForrest
spelling!

[trudysmom]

PAForrest, I heart you.  I wish the typing monkeys could read your post.  Amen.

[gonzosgirrl]

1 hour ago, trudysmom said:

PAForrest, I heart you.  I wish the typing monkeys could read your post.  Amen.

I agree. (Although it is a little insulting. To monkeys.)

[Castiels Cat]

14 hours ago, PAForrest said:

Losing Mary in the pilot episode is not just a defining moment - it's the raison d'etre of the entire series. Without this incident, John never falls headlong into hunting supernatural beings, dragging his children along with him. Without that happening there is NO SHOW. No show for whoever the hell your favorite character is now - be it Jackie Poo or Asstiel or the Waywards or anyone else. Period.

Messing with that iconic storyline was doomed to failure even in the hands of competent showrunners and writers. But in the talentless mitts of the typing monkeys we have now, it was inevitably and hideously bungled. Frankly Kripke should have sued.

Of course Dean should have been a tad bit upset when the murderous child slaughtered her, regardless of how much many of us despised Mary 2.0. And murder her he did, we see that, the murderous child and his accomplice Asstiel make it clear they believe he did it. Being enraged at the murderer of one's mother or any family member is a NORMAL HUMAN reaction. Being enraged at someone who is defending and caring more about said murderer is also a NORMAL HUMAN reaction that no one should be expected to justify.

What is not normal is a talentless group of typing monkeys using a scenario like that to try and turn it back on the person who is upset at the murder of his parent, trying to turn the victim's family member into the BAD GUY! At that point we are far beyond bad writing and into wondering who the hell these typing monkeys are and what has gone so wrong in their lives that they are this soulless.

Turning Chuckles into the ultimate all-powerful villain and pitting him against an all powerful heart-chomping spawn of Satan has rendered every other character useless and destroyed the entire fabric of the series. But wasn't that exactly Dabb's intention?

I disliked the Dean is wrong for being mad at Cas storyline. Dean had reasons a plenty and Mary died what... has it been that long... The one thing Cas has going for him is that he is better at apologizing than Jack.

 

[7kstar]

I had lunch with my nephew, and he's late 20's.  He says the best seasons were 1-5 and Jack's story should have been cut down to one ep.  Thought that Jack was pretty dull.  He agreed that Jack was more interesting before he was born.

He's watching by Netflix so he hasn't watched this season.  It was kind of fun to have one family member I could talk about this show even if it wasn't a long discussion.  What really had his interest was the Urban Myth Legends. 

[SueB]

On 2/13/2020 at 2:17 PM, Katy M said:

But, if Chuck's whole point is that he can control everything, he could have made Dean want to without Dean even being aware, right?  Isn't his whatever, I can't think of the word I want, that he has been controlling their entire lives and that every decision they have made has been because of him.  What would one more be?

Because Free Will.  It really DOES exist.  He violated Eileen’s Free Will and she was a crude instrument for him.  That’s not what Chuck wants.  He likes to be a puppet master but more by creating circumstances, not direct control.  

[Bali]

On 2/13/2020 at 2:31 PM, gonzosgirrl said:

Conceit?

Alas, they have made Chuck the autistic boy, and the Earth, Winchesters et al, his snow globe.

(apologies to those who never watched St. Elsewhere)

I still love that show. I will still love the early seasons of Supernatural. Because to me, the last couple of seasons are just crappy fanfiction. (Although is it fanfiction when it's written by people aren't fans of the original to begin with?)