S14.E13: Lebanon (Episode 300)

[Myrelle]

1 hour ago, SueB said:

And here's the part that will probably piss people off, but from my perspective, Dean would MUCH rather Sam/John get closure than work on his complicated upbringing with John.  Given the time alloted, Dean could be at peace with his relationship with John.  He got his Dad to see all the good that was done and acknowledge it.  He got to tell his Dad that he HAS a family.  He got to see his Mom & Dad reunite.  If they mentioned 'the Darkness', then John actually understands that Mary is alive because of Dean.  I'd call that something John would think is the best thing on the planet.  Dean also got to see Sam & John have closure.  These are all big wins for what is in Dean's heart.  And Dean knew right from the start -- 'just let me have one dinner' -- that this was a short time.  Even if things hadn't gone sideways so quickly, they would have come to reversing the magic pretty soon.

My feeling on that, and from both what was written AND from what Jensen conveyed through his acting in the dishwashing scene is that Dean feels that he achieved as much peace with his father as he could in the short time that they had together, but I can only see growth for him if he had come to the conclusion that John's "approval" of his life and times(all of them) just wasn't as important to him as he'd thought it would be-and the same goes for anyone else's-and that's what I'm hanging onto from that scene, if they want me to see it as true growth of any kind for him.

46 minutes ago, SueB said:

I give Dean a ton of credit here.  He's not 'sucking it up' IMO.  He's got the most he could out of the short interaction.  Dean was no where NEAR the 'yes, sir' guy from Season 1.  When John gave a veiled criticism about not going after a normal life, Dean gave a clapback that he HAD a family.  Dean of S1 would have taken his father's words to heart and felt guilty for continuing the fight.  (As if there was ever really a choice, but S1 Dean wouldn't see it that way).  S14 Dean is a much more self-aware individual who frankly demonstrated self-care in this episode.  He didn't open up a wound that couldn't be closed in a timely fashion.  He made the most out of the time they had and was grateful.  Which were the words the writers put in John's mouth.  I think the writers were ALSO aware they couldn't resolve John with 1 episode.  

I give Dean a LOT of credit for his self-awareness and ability to get what he needs out of life.  I don't know if everyone else gives Dean as much credit as I do.

Yes, but within the Winchester family unit, it's always been Dean who's had to wait for never both within the storyboard AND in the writers' room, apparently; and Dean who's usually had to "disappear" within the family unit when the family unit is together-unless he's supporting one or all of them, that is-and again, both within the storyboard AND in the writers' room. So for me, the character has so sadly had to learn to do as your bolded statement says here and to such a degree that it's become second nature to him to do that, and no one even really even recognizes it as sad any more-not in show, not in the writers' room, and not even in most segments of fandom. 

So I'm now wondering if even Jensen has decided to throw in the towel on it, too. I hope not, but I fear so-and if so, I can no longer see that as protecting his character-and for me, that would be the saddest thing of all about what's been happening on this show for some time now, and again, especially under Dabb.

Edited February 12, 2019 by Myrelle

[Myrelle]

52 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

This is why I don't see character growth for Dean.  If he's not capable of thinking about himself once in a while on an occasion when its perfectly acceptable, he's still that blunt instrument John turned him into. 

I don't think that he's anyone blunt little instrument now-nor has he ever been, IMO, even when he thought that about himself; And *I* still think of him and see him as the Righteous Man on this show-all thanks to JA for that, though, and very little to the writing.

But yes, even the best actor in the world can only do so much when the writing is as absent as it's been for Dean under Dabb, so I can understand why someone might still feel this way-but that's for another thread.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

Yes, but within the Winchester family unit, it's always been Dean who's had to wait for never both within the storyboard AND in the writers' room, apparently; and Dean who's usually had to "disappear" within the family unit when the family unit is together-unless he's supporting one or all of them, that is-and again, both within the storyboard AND in the writers' room. So for me, the character has so sadly had to learn to do as your bolded statement says here and to such a degree that it's become second nature to him to do that, and no one even really even recognizes it as sad any more-not in show, not in the writers' room, and not even in most segments of fandom. 

So I'm now wondering if even Jensen has decided to throw in the towel on it, too. I hope not, but I fear so-and if so, I can no longer see that as protecting his character-and for me, that would be the saddest thing of all about what's been happening on this show for the few seasons and under Dabb.

I think both Dean and Jensen are now rather pragmatic about it. 

The one positive development and growth for the character that I see from that is that it doesn`t hurt him anymore to the same degree. Back when YED said "they don`t need you, not like you need them", it was true and it cut deep. Now it`s still true but it no longer cuts. It`s more like a scab. 

Maybe there is just nothing to be wrung out of Dean and characters like John or Mary anymore, other than more scab. So all the "feel" scenes would just be generic fluff. At least with the mindset of never going too deep into his issues. With Mary, they made it about Sam and sidestepped the issue entirely and with John, they just pretended it wasn`t there.

IMO overall this episode was going for mindless fluff as in "the feels". I just didn`t find it effective anymore between those particular characters. Once upon a time it was passionate and raw and interesting, now it`s John smiling beatifically and softly speaking about the good times. That`s as fluffy as you can get. 

I didn`t used to associate John`s character with fluff. He was more edgy and interesting but leaving out the edginess, leaves out the interesting part for me as well. 

[Myrelle]

17 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

I think both Dean and Jensen are now rather pragmatic about it. 

The one positive development and growth for the character that I see from that is that it doesn`t hurt him anymore to the same degree. Back when YED said "they don`t need you, not like you need them", it was true and it cut deep. Now it`s still true but it no longer cuts. It`s more like a scab. 

Maybe there is just nothing to be wrung out of Dean and characters like John or Mary anymore, other than more scab. So all the "feel" scenes would just be generic fluff. At least with the mindset of never going too deep into his issues. With Mary, they made it about Sam and sidestepped the issue entirely and with John, they just pretended it wasn`t there.

IMO overall this episode was going for mindless fluff as in "the feels". I just didn`t find it effective anymore between those particular characters. Once upon a time it was passionate and raw and interesting, now it`s John smiling beatifically and softly speaking about the good times. That`s as fluffy as you can get. 

I didn`t used to associate John`s character with fluff. He was more edgy and interesting but leaving out the edginess, leaves out the interesting part for me as well. 

ITA with all of this, but the bolded part so much.

There's so much more gold to be mined from Dean and any OC on this show, IMO, if the writing wanted to go deeper or was capable of going deeper. It's just that at this point, I'm not sure of either of those things- and barring Yockey, especially from this particular set of writers.

Edited February 12, 2019 by Myrelle

[Aeryn13]

Quote

There's so much more gold to be mined from Dean and any OC on this show, IMO, if the writing wanted to go deeper or was capable of going deeper. It's just that at this point, I'm not sure of either of those things- and barring Yockey, especially from this particular set of writers.

The more I think about it, I`m really disappointed that they brought John back at all if it was in this fashion. I wasn`t a big fan of the character in Season 1 but his presence would add a level of rawness and passion to the character interaction. There was a lot of meaty scenes with him around, even when he was in a more emotional moment.

Never thought he would come back to the show what with JDM`s misgivings about how John was portrayed later on but lo and behold, they did bring him back. I expected some injection of freshness into those family scenes, at least the old passion.

Instead, the times he is back is so short and somewhat at the request of the actor, all they do with him is fluff. I like watching kitten vids on youtube but I just wanted more than the equivalent of that out of John. The scene with Sam was the ONLY one in the entire episode that had anything to say, even though it was also pretty fluffy overall. With Mary it was just smoosh smoosh blubber blubber. With Dean, it didn`t have anything of value to say. "I`m proud of you"? That`s the most generic comment ever. Then the family dinner was just saccharine and then one more "oh, feel sad, people" scene at the end. 

I guess JDM didn`t want it but I actually prefer asshole!John writing-wise (though refering to the scenes he played out in Season 1, I don`t think he objected to that so much) at least he brought some spice to the scenes. I would have prefered spice to just sugar and vanilla as this episode was.   

[rue721]

1 hour ago, SueB said:

And here's the part that will probably piss people off, but from my perspective, Dean would MUCH rather Sam/John get closure than work on his complicated upbringing with John.  Given the time alloted, Dean could be at peace with his relationship with John.  He got his Dad to see all the good that was done and acknowledge it.  He got to tell his Dad that he HAS a family.  He got to see his Mom & Dad reunite.  If they mentioned 'the Darkness', then John actually understands that Mary is alive because of Dean.  I'd call that something John would think is the best thing on the planet.  Dean also got to see Sam & John have closure. 

So, I partly agree with this and partly don't.

I agree that Dean would rather see Sam and John reconcile than get into it with John about his own upbringing. Honestly, who in the world WOULD want to have a dark, personal confrontation in the midst of a heartwarming reunion? It would be so inappropriate and would be such an immense blower for everybody else. A tearful reconciliation or a lusty hello kiss? Totally sweet and appropriate and happy for the whole family. A conversation about upbringing shit that's festered for forty years, and which Dean says in this very episode made him angry until he got all zen about it in his 30s? No. Way to bring down the mood (at best).

And this sounds dumb because John was so gentle in this particular episode, but I also don't think that Dean bringing any of that up would have gone over too well! From everything we know about him, John doesn't just sit around when he feels attacked, and his perception of their past and relationship would probably be WAY different from Dean's anyway, and hashing things out in front of Mary would just make it more of a shitshow.

And, ultimately, what would even be the point? It's not going to result in forgiveness on Dean's part or understanding on John's, so why bother?

Where I disagree, though, is that I don't think Dean showing off his life to John and John saying "good job" really meant anything in terms of their relationship. Even how Jensen played it, it seemed like Dean was happy to see his father and to see the family together, and catching John up on everything made him feel renewed pride in his own accomplishments, but I don't think it mattered to him what John thought of his accomplishments per se. And John seemed impressed and all, but he seemed less interested in what Dean had done and more interested in who Dean had become, too. I mean, that's what he tried to get at when he asked about family, etc. And I think that if anything, the show could have gone further in that direction and not even bothered with John saying he was proud or whatever, although of course that's always a kind thing for a parent to say.

I also think the "I have a family" line is pretty open to interpretation, and frankly, the curt way that Jensen read the line made me think that Dean felt at least a bit defensive. I believe Dean when he says he's at peace with his life, but it's also not like John was coming out of nowhere with his "I thought you'd settle down with a family" thing. I think he was just saying that he thought/hoped that Dean would have found a woman to love him and make a home with him (a totally reasonable dream), not that he envisioned Dean as a soccer dad out in the burbs. It's not like John was some stereotypical father hanging out at the grill in his free time between shuttling the kids to ballet/football, nor did John himself grow up with a father like that, nor did the Winchesters seem to even know any men like that, so I don't think that was ever an expectation or even something necessarily on their radar. But I do think that both Dean and John always thought that Dean would fall in love and marry. John did, and it seems to have been the highlight of his life -- of course he would want that for his son. And Dean himself doesn't exactly eschew the ladies, he isn't much of loner, and in virtually all his "someday" fantasies, he was with a woman. Actually, I think John had a pretty light touch considering that ending up a childless confirmed bachelor living in an underground bunker (and whose life partner is apparently his little brother) is pretty extreme, especially for someone who in John's perception probably seemed like a very gregarious, loving, nurturing kid. And that's also without the added value judgment of "guess you couldn't get a woman?" which in real life would probably be happening, too. Like can't you imagine another version of John thinking, "wtf is wrong with this guy if he looks like that and he still can't seal the deal?!" Because I feel like that's what most people would wonder in the real world, and is even sort of related to what the Lebanon teens WERE wondering when they were like, "what a bunch of oddballs the Campbell brothers, Bambi Boy, and Trench Coat are -- what's UP with that crew?!"

1 hour ago, SueB said:

Personally, I think they will get there. I think they will have their closure moment.

I don't, I think there's too much water under the bridge.

Dean knows who John is and was. Based on that dish washing conversation with Sam, he's apparently learned to accept who John is and was. So now he's got to just enjoy John (or his memories of him) as best he can and let everything else go. What other closure could there be?

[SueB]

23 minutes ago, rue721 said:

So, I partly agree with this and partly don't.

I agree that Dean would rather see Sam and John reconcile than get into it with John about his own upbringing. Honestly, who in the world WOULD want to have a dark, personal confrontation in the midst of a heartwarming reunion? It would be so inappropriate and would be such an immense blower for everybody else. A tearful reconciliation or a lusty hello kiss? Totally sweet and appropriate and happy for the whole family. A conversation about upbringing shit that's festered for forty years, and which Dean says in this very episode made him angry until he got all zen about it in his 30s? No. Way to bring down the mood (at best).

And this sounds dumb because John was so gentle in this particular episode, but I also don't think that Dean bringing any of that up would have gone over too well! From everything we know about him, John doesn't just sit around when he feels attacked, and his perception of their past and relationship would probably be WAY different from Dean's anyway, and hashing things out in front of Mary would just make it more of a shitshow.

And, ultimately, what would even be the point? It's not going to result in forgiveness on Dean's part or understanding on John's, so why bother?

Where I disagree, though, is that I don't think Dean showing off his life to John and John saying "good job" really meant anything in terms of their relationship. Even how Jensen played it, it seemed like Dean was happy to see his father and to see the family together, and catching John up on everything made him feel renewed pride in his own accomplishments, but I don't think it mattered to him what John thought of his accomplishments per se. And John seemed impressed and all, but he seemed less interested in what Dean had done and more interested in who Dean had become, too. I mean, that's what he tried to get at when he asked about family, etc. And I think that if anything, the show could have gone further in that direction and not even bothered with John saying he was proud or whatever, although of course that's always a kind thing for a parent to say.

I also think the "I have a family" line is pretty open to interpretation, and frankly, the curt way that Jensen read the line made me think that Dean felt at least a bit defensive. I believe Dean when he says he's at peace with his life, but it's also not like John was coming out of nowhere with his "I thought you'd settle down with a family" thing. I think he was just saying that he thought/hoped that Dean would have found a woman to love him and make a home with him (a totally reasonable dream), not that he envisioned Dean as a soccer dad out in the burbs. It's not like John was some stereotypical father hanging out at the grill in his free time between shuttling the kids to ballet/football, nor did John himself grow up with a father like that, nor did the Winchesters seem to even know any men like that, so I don't think that was ever an expectation or even something necessarily on their radar. But I do think that both Dean and John always thought that Dean would fall in love and marry. John did, and it seems to have been the highlight of his life -- of course he would want that for his son. And Dean himself doesn't exactly eschew the ladies, he isn't much of loner, and in virtually all his "someday" fantasies, he was with a woman. Actually, I think John had a pretty light touch considering that ending up a childless confirmed bachelor living in an underground bunker (and whose life partner is apparently his little brother) is pretty extreme, especially for someone who in John's perception probably seemed like a very gregarious, loving, nurturing kid. And that's also without the added value judgment of "guess you couldn't get a woman?" which in real life would probably be happening, too. Like can't you imagine another version of John thinking, "wtf is wrong with this guy if he looks like that and he still can't seal the deal?!" Because I feel like that's what most people would wonder in the real world, and is even sort of related to what the Lebanon teens WERE wondering when they were like, "what a bunch of oddballs the Campbell brothers, Bambi Boy, and Trench Coat are -- what's UP with that crew?!"

I don't, I think there's too much water under the bridge.

Dean knows who John is and was. Based on that dish washing conversation with Sam, he's apparently learned to accept who John is and was. So now he's got to just enjoy John (or his memories of him) as best he can and let everything else go. What other closure could there be?

I think you and I are pretty close.  And thank you for expressing it better (first stuff in bold).

I think the only place we disagree is regarding the potential for future John conversation.

There's at least two or three articles out there making it clear John could come back.  And I think they left the relationship such that if he didn't, we could rationalize that Dean is cool with not having it.  But that's some REALLY good juice to not squeeze out of the story.  And they've acknowledge the issue at least 4 times in the Dabb administration:
1) conversation w/ Chuck
2) With Mary: Dean: "Dad was a mess.  And I... I had to be... more than just a brother.  I had to be a father, and I had to be a mother, to keep him safe."
3) Just in 14.12:  Sam: "Dean, you were the one who was always there for me. The only one. I mean, you practically raised me."
4) 14.13 Dean: Yeah. I used to think that, too. But, uh, I mean, look, we've been through some tough times. There's no denying that. And for the longest time, I blamed Dad. I mean, hell, I blamed Mom, too, you know? 

So... could they leave it there?  Yep.  WILL they leave it there?  Not if they don't have to (IMO).  Getting JDM is difficult.  Getting him for more than two days?  Much more difficult.  And I think they would need a later version of John.  Maybe post his death.  Pull him out of heaven or something.  But there are MANY ways this could come up.  From Sam or Mary.  From John's own recognition (if he's pulled post his death-bed confession).  Many ways.  And news flash: Dean WILL forgive him.  It's just how it plays out that people care about.  But that's where the juice is.  And I think they'll squeeze it someday.

[Aeryn13]

But fact of the matter is:  as of now, we only have this recent episode. So the possibility of there maybe being an episode in the future where they do it differently has no bearing on if episode 300 did or didn`t work for someone. I`d mark this one down as inoffensive but lame.

[Dobian]

I think people expected a lot more out of this episode than it was possible to give.  They had 45 minutes to work with to cover the whole time paradox story and the John Winchester reunion.  To cover a lot of these things in more depth, you would need JDM to come back for an extended series of episodes.

[Aeryn13]

It was their choice which subject matter to tackle in the episode. So if they bit off more than they can chew? Their problem. 

However, it's not like they didn't know superficial fluff would work well for them for the most part. That's why they did it. It's rare for the show to hit some genuine emotion instead of "the feels". The 200th episode was the same "feels" over substance. It's mostly bringing back John for real instead of flashback, dream, hallucinations etc that I expected a bit more bang for the buck from.  

[AwesomO4000]

6 hours ago, Myrelle said:

I think you're misunderstanding her intent in that post. She said that criticizing the writing for how they attempted to execute the thought that this episode was meant to show us that having John back had a mostly positive effect on Dean is not the same thing as saying that it had a negative effect on Dean or that Jensen hadn't conveyed that well or well enough through his acting.

She's saying that she can see and understand the obvious here and what both the actors and the writers were attempting to do in trying to showcase all of those "of course" statements, but it was the execution within the writing of that that she had the problem with and that she thought that it was poor in a number of ways; and that's not the same thing as saying that she didn't see those things or understand that the writers and actors were attempting to convey them or even that the actors had failed in that endeavor. It's claiming that she was saying that her "of course" statements weren't conveyed to her or understood by her at all that's the strawman argument here. And IA.

That's how I interpreted it, anyway.

But for me - and I realize I'm way out in left field on this one - I don't think the writers "missed the mark" that much, because I think the writer's mark was something different. I think it was what it was: that Dean had a heart's desire to have his entire family together which is exactly what he expressed that he wanted to Sam. Dean didn't cave on that. And the narrative set things up to show that this was indeed the right thing to do by having Sam come right out and tell Dean that he was right about that. There were no lasting repercussions from the pearl wish - again an indication for me that this was the right thing and what needed to be done. And Dean did get "closure" from it. It wasn't closure concerning how John treated him, his parentification, or anything having to do with that. In my opinion, it was closure for Dean that was a continuation of "Dream a Little Dream of Me" - to let go of his desire from season 1 to have the family all together, no matter the cost.

In my opinion, what Dean got closure with was that he got to have his family altogether and even though yes, he enjoyed it, he found that he didn't need it like he used to need it. He was fine with what he did have instead - his "I have a family" declaration - and now that he got his family altogether, it was something he didn't have to wonder about and long for anymore. He could check it off his bucket list and think "you know what, that was great, and I wouldn't say no to it continuing, but it wouldn't be worth giving up what I have..." Which in my opinion was the point of having Zach and Castiel. They were there to show what Dean would have to give up in order to have the original family all together. That and the knowledge they might cause harm to someone else who would have to save the world in their stead... but even if that weren't the case, I got the impression that Dean still wouldn't want to give up what he had.

And I think that was the point. Dean did chose himself. He chose his own path, and after seeing "what could have been," he would still choose the path he had.

That may not be the closure some fans wanted from the episode, but based on what I saw, I think that was the closure the writers were writing for in this episode, and for me I got that out of what I saw. I don't see my argument as a "strawman's argument," because I disagree on what the intent of the writing was. I think the writing wanted to have Dean have a different kind of closure, and for me that was stated by Dean's wanting to have his family together for a while - something he's always wanted - and getting that and what he learned about himself and what he wanted now after getting that "heart's desire" - for me - was the closure and the whole point.

And for me, I thought the writing - whatever things missing there were otherwise - gave us(or at least me) that. It didn't give some fans what they wanted, but in my opinion, that's different from trying to tackle that - i.e. closure between John and Dean concerning Dean's childhood - and missing the mark. In my opinion, they weren't going there to begin with. This was closure for Dean - not John - but it was closure for Dean's perception going way back to his rose-colored glasses from season 1 and 2. Now not only did Dean agree that things weren't what he thought (as he expressed in season 3), but now he realizes he doesn't care that they aren't what he thought, because he's good with what he has. The fantasy is just that, a fantasy - nice, but it doesn't replace his reality, and his reality is pretty good, too. And even if he knew that for the most part before this, this was just the icing on the cake... that last "what if" now taken care of.

5 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

This is why I don't see character growth for Dean.  If he's not capable of thinking about himself once in a while on an occasion when its perfectly acceptable, he's still that blunt instrument John turned him into. 

I disagree. Dean was thinking about himself in this episode in that he didn't give in on his desire to have his family altogether despite all of Sam's logical arguments otherwise, and the episode showed that was the right thing for Dean to have done and supported his decision ...both through Sam confirming it and in there not being any lasting problems/consequences that arose form it. And Dean stood up to John and confirmed his (Dean's) choices.

I saw a Dean who very much thought about himself and what he wanted and then confirmed those choices with both John and Sam... and maybe most importantly of all: himself. And an episode which also confirmed that yes, Dean insisting on this for himself was a good thing - both through the narrative support of other characters and through what happened.

[Myrelle]

Sam only came out and told Dean that Dean was right AFTER Sam had first  had his own closure scene with dear old dad.

It was only then that Sam was okay with  Dean getting what he wanted and needed-which likely was only the family dinner, according to the writers and the writing. 

I think that Jensen was probably the only one who might have wanted something more for Dean out of John's/JDM's return, so he was the one more than any other who tried to put a little more into those scenes from what I saw.

I mean all we heard about specifically in regard to closure going into the episode was that Sam, especially, would be afforded that-which is exactly what we got.

Dean's "closure" was once again left up to "interpretation" by the wonderful writer and showrunner of this show. 

Edited February 13, 2019 by Myrelle

[Bergamot]

53 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

In my opinion, what Dean got closure with was that he got to have his family altogether and even though yes, he enjoyed it, he found that he didn't need it like he used to need it. He was fine with what he did have instead - his "I have a family" declaration - and now that he got his family altogether, it was something he didn't have to wonder about and long for anymore. He could check it off his bucket list and think "you know what, that was great, and I wouldn't say no to it continuing, but it wouldn't be worth giving up what I have..." Which in my opinion was the point of having Zach and Castiel. They were there to show what Dean would have to give up in order to have the original family all together. That and the knowledge they might cause harm to someone else who would have to save the world in their stead... but even if that weren't the case, I got the impression that Dean still wouldn't want to give up what he had.

I guess I don't follow you here. What is it exactly that Dean was not willing to give up in order to have John? I was assuming that the choice was between having Mary and having John, and John was willing to go so Mary could stay.

[MysteryGuest]

I personally think that everyone got what they needed from John's return, considering he was only there for a day.  Sam got to let go of his guilt.  Mary got to see her husband again.  And Dean got to have his whole family together one last time (sorry, Adam). 

The reality is that both Sam and Dean love their father.  Yes, he made mistakes which left some scars, but he didn't beat them or molest them.  He wasn't a drunk or a deadbeat.  There were extenuating circumstances, and I think both Sam and Dean have repeatedly cut him some slack for that.  The brothers, whether right or wrong, were raised in the hunting life.  John was a young father of two small boys suddenly thrown into some nightmare he didn't understand.  That would definitely screw you up a bit.

So when John suddenly appears in the bunker, do you really think their first thought was "good, now I can vent my spleen over all of the ways he fucked up my life"?  I don't think either one of them thought that at any time.  He was back with them, and they were going to enjoy it while it lasted.  Had he been back for good, then I'm sure some of those conversations might have been had, but under these circumstances, it wasn't the time or the place.

[Myrelle]

2 hours ago, MysteryGuest said:

I personally think that everyone got what they needed from John's return, considering he was only there for a day.  Sam got to let go of his guilt.  Mary got to see her husband again.  And Dean got to have his whole family together one last time (sorry, Adam). 

The reality is that both Sam and Dean love their father.  Yes, he made mistakes which left some scars, but he didn't beat them or molest them.  He wasn't a drunk or a deadbeat.  There were extenuating circumstances, and I think both Sam and Dean have repeatedly cut him some slack for that.  The brothers, whether right or wrong, were raised in the hunting life.  John was a young father of two small boys suddenly thrown into some nightmare he didn't understand.  That would definitely screw you up a bit.

So when John suddenly appears in the bunker, do you really think their first thought was "good, now I can vent my spleen over all of the ways he fucked up my life"?  I don't think either one of them thought that at any time.  He was back with them, and they were going to enjoy it while it lasted.  Had he been back for good, then I'm sure some of those conversations might have been had, but under these circumstances, it wasn't the time or the place.

Apparently, it WAS the time and the place for Sam and John to iron something important out. 

It just wasn't the time and/or place for anyone on the show to even touch on the thought or idea that there might even still BE issues between Dean and John. I mean half of the posters here think that Dean resolved all of his issues with John long ago.

And sorry, but I have to LOL at half of the stuff that they think they conveyed in that documentary. 

The Mary stuff alone had my eyes rolling so far to the back of my head that I could see behind me.

Edited February 13, 2019 by Myrelle

[AwesomO4000]

6 hours ago, Myrelle said:

I mean all we heard about specifically in regard to closure going into the episode was that Sam, especially, would be afforded that-which is exactly what we got.

In reference to John, yes. And to me, this makes sense, because Sam was the one who got closure with John. The closure that I think Dean got wasn't specifically with John... it was related to John in that John was a part of it, but Dean didn't actually get full closure with John. He got closure for something else (in my opinion), but it wasn't dependent on his getting closure with John.

Quote

Dean's "closure" was once again left up to "interpretation" by the wonderful writer and showrunner of this show. 

But in a way, I was okay with that - at least in reference to John.*** Sam may have gotten closure with John, but that closure also included/required Sam to apologize to John as well and to tell him that he (John) did his best, basically pretty much absolving John of much of his wrong-doing against Sam. I wouldn't have wanted that for Dean. And that's also why I'm glad that Sam didn't bring up Dean and Dean being messed up by John, because then Dean would've gotten added to the "I'm sorry, too" and the "You did your best" pile. And then there would have been complaints of Sam speaking for Dean.

So if Sam had brought up Dean as some have suggested should've / could've been done, then in my opinion, Dean would have - by being brought up - been included in that "you did your best" thing, and I wouldn't have wanted that for Dean. Sam can decide that for himself, sure, but not also for Dean. In my opinion, John doesn't get specifically forgiven for that until Dean decides - if he ever decides - to do so.

*** I didn't think that Dean's closure - in my opinion, I get that miles vary - was that questionable. I thought it was fairly straightforward in terms of what Dean wanted going forward.

5 hours ago, Bergamot said:

I guess I don't follow you here. What is it exactly that Dean was not willing to give up in order to have John? I was assuming that the choice was between having Mary and having John, and John was willing to go so Mary could stay.

Yes, the choice was between John and Mary... So I didn't explain what I was getting at specifically enough. What I meant was that even if Dean could have theoretically had both John and Mary - in other words if that could have continued without Mary being affected - he still would have had to give up Castiel and probably Jack (though Castiel I think would've been the much more distressing), and Castiel is family as Dean was describing.

Which is what I meant by Zach and Castiel's part of being in the episode. Dean was pretty distressed by Alternate Castiel, in my opinion, and I'm not sure he would have been willing to give up his relationship with Castiel to have his father back... that's an interesting question to ponder. I can't say for sure that he wouldn't choose Castiel at this point, though I could be wrong.

There was also Dean's relationship with the town and basically his life and the way he lives it. In a way it might just be too late for Dean to have John back. Maybe he's moved beyond that and become too different / independent / changed for that to work any more, and I think that's maybe part of what Dean was figuring out in his dishes-washing talk. And that was the kind of closure that I was talking about.

Edited February 13, 2019 by AwesomO4000

[Aeryn13]

18 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

In reference to John, yes. And to me, this makes sense, because Sam was the one who got closure with John. The closure that I think Dean got wasn't specifically with John... it was related to John in that John was a part of it, but Dean didn't actually get full closure with John. He got closure for something else (in my opinion), but it wasn't dependent on his getting closure with John.

But in a way, I was okay with that - at least in reference to John.*** Sam may have gotten closure with John, but that closure also included/required Sam to apologize to John as well and to tell him that he (John) did his best, basically pretty much absolving John of much of his wrong-doing against Sam. I wouldn't have wanted that for Dean. And that's also why I'm glad that Sam didn't bring up Dean and Dean being messed up by John, because then Dean would've gotten added to the "I'm sorry, too" and the "You did your best" pile. And then there would have been complaints of Sam speaking for Dean.

So if Sam had brought up Dean as some have suggested should've / could've been done, then in my opinion, Dean would have - by being brought up - been included in that "you did your best" thing, and I wouldn't have wanted that for Dean. Sam can decide that for himself, sure, but not also for Dean. In my opinion, John doesn't get specifically forgiven for that until Dean decides - if he ever decides - to do so.

*** I didn't think that Dean's closure - in my opinion, I get that miles vary - was that questionable. I thought it was fairly straightforward in terms of what Dean wanted going forward.

Yes, the choice was between John and Mary... So I didn't explain what I was getting at specifically enough. What I meant was that even if Dean could have theoretically had both John and Mary - in other words if that could have continued without Mary being affected - he still would have had to give up Castiel and probably Jack (though Castiel I think would've been the much more distressing), and Castiel is family as Dean was describing.

Which is what I meant by Zach and Castiel's part of being in the episode. Dean was pretty distressed by Alternate Castiel, in my opinion, and I'm not sure he would have been willing to give up his relationship with Castiel to have his father back... that's an interesting question to ponder. I can't say for sure that he wouldn't choose Castiel at this point, though I could be wrong.

There was also Dean's relationship with the town and basically his life and the way he lives it. In a way it might just be too late for Dean to have John back. Maybe he's moved beyond that and become too different / independent / changed for that to work any more, and I think that's maybe part of what Dean was figuring out in his dishes-washing talk. And that was the kind of closure that I was talking about.

They pretty specifically made the timeline reset solely about Mary, not Cas, not their different lives, just Mary. So your closure for Dean doesn't track at all for me.

He didn't really get any in the ep, he got a new memory, no more and no less.

And Sam really was only agreeing with him on this being a good thing after he got his closure scene so it certainly wasn't about being swayed by Dean's words. And ultimately the episode proved Sam right and acted as if Dean was too foolish to have understood this from the start.

In the grand scheme of things Dabb has written way worse episodes where Sam was everything and Dean was nothing, this one was comparatively really mild. But it was still a Dabb episode. I think stuff like the post office lady was Glynn.  

[juppschmitz]

14 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

This is why I don't see character growth for Dean.  If he's not capable of thinking about himself once in a while on an occasion when its perfectly acceptable, he's still that blunt instrument John turned him into. 

Hmm, I think he does think about himself, always has, but mostly comes to the conclusion to not act on it.

Also, I liked how he almost defiantly said to John, "I have a family." Not actually voicing out loud "In spite of all that you did to me."

Maybe this line delivery of Jensen's, you know, kind of petulant, was his way of getting the confrontation scene about his childhood that he had been hoping for. Seeing as there's very little chance of JDM coming back again in the near future, if ever.

I also wonder if Dabb knew about Jensen's thoughts of a possible Dean/John conrontation scene.

[Emma9]

On 2/10/2019 at 11:29 PM, rue721 said:

I also think instead of a family dinner, it would have been more interesting to see a family hunt. Like these people have never eaten together in their lives, Sam wasn't even on solid foods the last time they were all together at dinnertime, I don't give a shit about seeing that. I want to see what they do when there's danger -- I want to see how John and Mary have each others' backs in the field, how John and Dean work together as equals in the field, how John and Sam cooperate in the field, how John reacts to seeing Sam and Dean work so well together (now THAT would make him proud, I would think, but also a bit sad because he's left out of their well-oiled machine), how John reacts to Mary hunting at all...That's where we would be able to see their relationships and the changes between/within them, I think.

Damn, that would have been awesome. Same with what someone else mentioned about how John should have suspected it was all a trick at first - yes, fixing their way out of him being as pissed and paranoid as the character would logically be, in time to still include the heartwarming stuff, probably wouldn't have been feasible, but some nods to the fact that these people are still hunters, with all the reflexes and habits that implies, would have made the fluffy bits even better because they would be pure Supernatural, rather than (albeit loving) moments that could have happened between any characters on any show.

On 2/11/2019 at 2:31 PM, Aeryn13 said:

The problem is really that this episode hinged on the idea that Dean specifically had a deep heart`s desire to have John back. Which is downright weird for someone who has moved on.

Mileage may vary, I guess. My father passed away nine years ago. I don't have any ongoing psychological issues that I need closure from him to resolve - but I miss him every day. If you handed me a blank-check wish, I wouldn't need a moment to think about it. With the possible exception of experiencing something on the level of losing a child, I can't imagine a future in which that would stop being true.

Whether this should have been less the case for Dean because of the ways John screwed up is debatable, but even after we started seeing examples of Dean's anger towards him, we subsequently got episodes like 'In The Beginning' that made it clear that the core of love was unchanged.

When Chuck and Amara said they wanted to reward Sam and Dean with what they 'needed most', at the end of s11, I'll own to being pissed that it wasn't Mary and John both they brought back - because god and godette don't have the juice for two resurrections? - but again, there's that in-universe/out-of-universe conflict at play. And with the pearl, it wasn't even about need - it was about desire. Want. Time and closure don't mean you stop wanting someone back.

All of which is my baggage, of course, but here is your data point that there are weird people in this world.

Edited February 13, 2019 by Emma9

[Aeryn13]

15 minutes ago, Emma9 said:

Damn, that would have been awesome. Same with what someone else mentioned about how John should have suspected it was all a trick at first - yes, fixing their way out of him being as pissed and paranoid as the character would logically be, in time to still include the heartwarming stuff, probably wouldn't have been feasible, but some nods to the fact that these people are still hunters, with all the reflexes and habits that implies, would have made the fluffy bits even better because they would be pure Supernatural, rather than (albeit loving) moments that could have happened between any characters on any show.

Mileage may vary, I guess. My father passed away nine years ago. I don't have any ongoing psychological issues that I need closure from him to resolve - but I miss him every day. If you handed me a blank-check wish, I wouldn't need a moment to think about it. With the possible exception of experiencing something on the level of losing a child, I can't imagine a future in which that would stop being true.

Whether this should have been less the case for Dean because of the ways John screwed up is debatable, but even after we started seeing examples of Dean's anger towards him, we subsequently got episodes like 'In The Beginning' that made it clear that the core of love was unchanged.

When Chuck and Amara said they wanted to reward Sam and Dean with what they 'needed most', at the end of s11, I'll own to being pissed that it wasn't Mary and John both they brought back - because god and godette don't have the juice for two resurrections? - but again, there's that in-universe/out-of-universe conflict at play. And with the pearl, it wasn't even about need - it was about desire. Want. Time and closure don't mean you stop wanting someone back.

All of which is my baggage, of course, but here is your data point that there are weird people in this world.

It was actually just Amara and she just wanted to give Dean a gift, not both, based in the photo she saw of Mary and young Dean. She meant well but ultimately didn't really understand the inplications or knew Dean very well. Nor did she probably know it would turn out to be such a trash gift.   

Edited February 13, 2019 by Aeryn13

[AwesomO4000]

1 hour ago, Aeryn13 said:

They pretty specifically made the timeline reset solely about Mary, not Cas, not their different lives, just Mary. So your closure for Dean doesn't track at all for me.

He didn't really get any in the ep, he got a new memory, no more and no less.

I disagree. For me, there was a reason why alternate Castiel was there, and it was to reflect how much Dean valued Castiel as he currently was rather than what he could have been. It's why the interaction in that fight scene was between Dean and Cas, rather than Sam/Cas and Dean/Zach. To me, Dean appeared very upset and rattled that he couldn't get through to Castiel. For me that scene was written for a purpose and that was to highlight Dean's later "I have a family" line and how that current "family" would be missed if he (Dean) didn't have it.

Just because they chose to stop the timeline to save Mary, for me, doesn't take away the fact that Dean clearly tells Sam that not only were they saving Mary, but they were taking the responsibility of their lives so other's wouldn't have to and because it was their lives and Dean wouldn't change that. For me, that was the main part of Dean's closure. He got his new memory, but upon getting that new memory, he could put that desire/want behind him and also know that given the givens, he wouldn't change who he was, and he was good with that. ...And he "taught" Sam that, too.***

*** I put "taught" in quotes, because theoretically Sam also should know this (and not to shirk your responsibilities on others), but apparently Dean had to teach Sam that again, since apparently Dabb thought Sam needed to have that lesson again (Man, I miss Gamble).

Quote

And Sam really was only agreeing with him on this being a good thing after he got his closure scene so it certainly wasn't about being swayed by Dean's words.

Well, of course it wasn't... when is either brother ever just swayed by the other's words, especially right out of the gate? They almost always have to find out the other was right some other way and then say "you were right."

And that still doesn't change the fact that the narrative has Sam change his mind and tell Dean that he was right, thereby validating Dean's position - which was my point: that Dean stuck up for his position and then the narrative validated Dean's right to stick up for that position.

Quote

And ultimately the episode proved Sam right and acted as if Dean was too foolish to have understood this from the start.

I disagree. In my opinion, if the episode was going to prove Sam "right," then there would have been lasting consequences for Dean wanting his one dinner with the family. There wasn't. The narrative even conveniently paused the shift in the timeline - leaving Dean and Sam as themselves, rather than turning into alternate Sam and Dean and having Mary not "fade away" as Sam had theorized would happen - just so Dean could have his dinner. And after the pearl was destroyed, things went back to normal: no harm, no foul. As I've theorized before, I think the show is pretty clear when they want to show something as "wrong," and this wasn't it. If anything, it was the opposite, in my opinion. The narrative went out of its way to show that Dean having this dinner was important and good, important enough to pause the change over of Sam, Dean and Mary in the timeline for.

And if anyone was shown as not "understanding," in my opinion it was Sam for some reason. After Sam first arguing that messing with the timeline can mess things up - which it only "conveniently" did while leaving them and Mary intact (silly Sam for not realizing that - heh) - for some reason Dean has to then later semi-lecture Sam on the virtues of not changing the timeline, because then other people have to take your responsibilities, which is both a crappy thing to do and not being true to yourself. Which, in my opinion, showed that Dean wasn't too foolish to understand it at all, and actually understood even more nuances than Sam argued from earlier.

So I didn't see Dean as being shown as wrong or foolish at all. Dean was somehow right about both things: first in his family dinner not messing the timeline up permanently and then in saying that wishing things to be different is morally wrong, since others may have to suffer in your place.

Edited February 13, 2019 by AwesomO4000

[Emma9]

23 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

It was actually just Amara and she just wanted to give Dean a gift, not both, based in the photo she saw of Mary and young Dean. She meant well but ultimately didn't really understand the inplications or knew Dean very well. Nor did she probably know it would turn out to be such a trash gift.   

Thanks for refreshing my memory; I rarely rewatch the recent seasons.

[Myrelle]

On 2/10/2019 at 12:21 AM, Dobian said:

I see a lot of comments about the episode not going deep enough and just being emotionally manipulative.  I think Dean summed it up best in the episode when he told Sam, "Why can't you just give me this?"  As in, let's put all the other crap aside for one damn day and just enjoy the moment with our parents.  And that's what this episode was, a respite from all the crap in the series to just enjoy the moment with these characters.  This show goes deep all the time, sometimes too deep for its own good.  Melodrama for the sake of melodrama.  Sam and Dean with the weight of the world on their shoulders, again...and again.  This episode didn't need to and didn't want to go places that have been gone to a zillion times on this show already.  Like Dean said, just give it a rest for a day, or in our case, an episode.  And enjoy the moment.

I disagree totally and completely with the bolded statements in this post-especially in these latter seasons of the show and especially regarding going deeper into any father/son and parent/child issues that the big three characters in this one had. 

And I especially didn't appreciate them bringing up more stuff that John did to Dean as a child that fucked him up, in some very recent episodes, if Dabb was just going to completely ignore them anyway in this episode and when we had the perfect opportunity to at least acknowledge them a tiny bit, FCOL-and God forbid, maybe even have John offer an apology to Dean, also, but one completely sans another soul-crushing directive this time.

But nope, no time for that. No time for Dean again and some more on this show. 

GRRRRRR!! The more I think about it, the more angry and bitter I'm becoming.

On 2/10/2019 at 5:22 AM, Aeryn13 said:

In that case I still just found it rather dull. I can't make myself blubbery cry over those family scenes nor do I want to. Either the episode itself manages to get me emotional or not. This one didn't. 

So yeah, they can stuff the wonderful family dinner AFAIC now, too. 

I think that I'm just going to try and pretend that this episode never even happened.

What a waste of JDM and the John character. Such a boring portrayal, too.

On 2/11/2019 at 9:01 AM, Lemuria said:

 Not to mention, Chekhov’s “Dad sent me away to punish me.”  This is  something that has never been said before in the show. Why bring it up the week before John returns if you have no intention of doing anything with it? 

This. So much.

On 2/10/2019 at 2:21 PM, Aeryn13 said:

The way the episode rolled, you could very well deduce that John only ever screwed up with Sam. 

GRRRRRR!! And this too!

On 2/10/2019 at 9:12 AM, Bergamot said:

One of the essential elements of Supernatural, though, has always been its own special and distinct tone of straightforward sincerity. What you see is what you get. While some people might look down on the show and think of it as less "grown-up" because of it, I've always loved my show for unabashedly being itself.All this is to say that when Dean and Sam call themselves "heroes who save the world", I believe that it is a straightforward statement, and we are supposed to cheer for them. And of course, I absolutely do believe that they are heroes.

So what's the problem?

For me, the problem is indicated when you have John in this episode saying something like, "I wish I could have been there to see it" after hearing the story of what his sons have been up to since he died. He wishes he could have been there to see it? That's when I realized, even more than I have before, that Dabb has a very fundamentally different view from me of what the show is.

In my opinion, for Dabb the show is essentially all about the triumph of the good guys against the bad guys. It is the kind of story that it actually makes sense that John would want to be there to see, because we can all cheer our heroes' victory and celebrate and high-five each other at the end. Go Winchesters!

But for me, the story of the Winchesters was never the stirring story of two starry-eyed boys who grew up to be big victorious heroes and became THE GUYS WHO SAVE THE WORLD. It is not about that kind of triumph -- it is about a tragedy. It is the terrible tragedy of a family caught up in and destroyed by huge supernatural events, full of unimaginable pain and desperate, impossible choices and things that can never be fixed. And the thing that makes it worth watching, the one amazing thing, is how the story of two brothers is like the Greek myth of Pandora, who opened the box containing all the evils of the world. Because like Pandora, the brothers found hope shining at the very bottom of the box, and they desperately grabbed hold of it,  and have refused to let it go.

The last paragraph in this post is one of the best and most perfect descriptions of the Supernatural that I fell head over heels in love with.

It was like a much loved and cherished book on TV to me, but then Dabb as showrunner entered the picture and just UGH! and BLECH! to what he's done it to it. 

And this is likely how it's going to end.

Shit. 

I'm so mad about this today...

Edited February 13, 2019 by Myrelle

[rue721]

19 hours ago, SueB said:

And news flash: Dean WILL forgive him.  It's just how it plays out that people care about. 

Dean was forgiving John for like the first thirty years of his life. He was more than forgiving him, he was actively enabling him.

I think for Dean, forgiving John is comfortable and easy. Holding him accountable is hard. Even when Dean's own thoughts or a conversation with someone else (Sam, Mary) goes in the direction of holding John accountable, Dean shuts things down and/or redirects back to himself. So growth would probably mean Dean learning to hold John accountable.

ETA:  I mean, for Dean to hold John accountable in his own thoughts/perception/conversation. ACTUALLY holding a dead person accountable isn't really doable. No enforcement power 😛

Edited February 13, 2019 by rue721

[catrox14]

15 hours ago, MysteryGuest said:

Yes, he made mistakes which left some scars, but he didn't beat them or molest them.  He wasn't a drunk or a deadbeat.  There were extenuating circumstances, and I think both Sam and Dean have repeatedly cut him some slack for that.  The brothers, whether right or wrong, were raised in the hunting life.

John did have a drinking problem which Dean and  Sam both talked about frequently throughout the course of the show. IIRC, it was brought up by Sam in the pilot, about how Dad would come stumbling in after Miller time. Sam commented on how John was often drunk during the Christmas ep in s4. Dean called him a deadbeat Dad in s5, which I think he meant as John abandoning him and Sam for weeks at a time to hunt or look for Azazel, whether that meant he left Dean alone to care for Sam,  or sent them away to another caregiver like Pastor Jim or Caleb or Bobby. We now know John sent Dean away when he got upset with Dean. (Sidebar: I wondered if Michael was speaking through Dean about his relationship with Chuck, which directly paralleled Dean and John). Either way John still wasn't there for his boys much of the time. He left Dean in the boys home. I realize this is debatable but I think John did physically abuse Dean. And he mentally and emotionally abused Dean pretty often by forcing him to be Sam's caregiver and be his own emotionally crutch, which John a knowledged in s2. And then turned around and did even worse to Dean right after telling him how proud he was of him in the same breath almost.

IMO, Dean isn't settled with John at all. I think he had an edge to his tone with John when he said he had his family and IMO there was almost a disdainful expression on Dean's face as if to say, that John still doesn't get what he did to Dean. My headcanon is that the only thing Dean has accepted is that John will never get what it means to be Dean. And sure he cried but I think that was Dean crying for what he'll never have again, given his fate in his death book. And some tears because he essentially had to choose between his parents.

[Dobian]

5 hours ago, Myrelle said:

I disagree totally and completely with the bolded statements in this post-especially in these latter seasons of the show and especially regarding going deeper into any father/son and parent/child issues that the big three characters in this one had. 

And I especially didn't appreciate them bringing up more stuff that John did to Dean as a child that fucked him up, in some very recent episodes, if Dabb was just going to completely ignore them anyway in this episode and when we had the perfect opportunity to at least acknowledge them a tiny bit, FCOL-and God forbid, maybe even have John offer an apology to Dean, also, but one completely sans another soul-crushing directive this time.

Some people are into family drama more than others.  I have enjoyed and appreciate the depth of the character relationships in this show, don't get me wrong.  But when I watch Supernatural I don't want to watch This is Us: Supernatural Edition.  I get the dynamic between Sam, Dean, and their dad.  It's been explored ad nauseam.  I just don't need to explore it again.

Edited February 13, 2019 by Dobian

[Aeryn13]

Quote

GRRRRRR!! The more I think about it, the more angry and bitter I'm becoming.

When they first announced the Lebanon concept - and that the ep was gonna be written by Dabb - I feared a horror show of Dabb-ian proportions. Then they announced John and lots of promotion focused on John/Sam, with a side of John/Mary. 

Watching the actual episode, it wasn`t remotely as horrible as I initially feared. I thought it was more or less okay. Not a milestone episode in my book but neither were the 100th or 200th. 

But I don`t think the episode has a lot of rewatch potential or even re-think potential. At least not for me. It was saccharine fluff that didn`t have an emotional impact on me the first time, let alone entices me to watch again. And if I think about it, the prevalent feeling is some sort of detached disappointment. John may have been the most significant side character this show has had in terms of determining who the characters are, where they come from, who shaped them. And he was someone most people probably never thought would be back. So they bring him back what is probably gonna be the only time for a cutesy number. Which only makes it a gimmick. 

If I had been another random guest star of yesteryore, that wouldn`t really bug me so much. But with John, I just prefered the dynamic way his exit played in Season 2. For John to be back, I wanted that matched or even topped, otherwise why bring him in? Maybe it was already too late in the show for that, that`s possible.     

So overall, this is an episode I don`t think will have any lasting repercussions (maybe for Mary but I couldn`t care less about the current incarnation of that character) either emotionally or plotwise. So it will be ultimately easy to forget and that`s what I plan to do with it. 

[Myrelle]

45 minutes ago, Dobian said:

But when I watch Supernatural I don't want to watch This is Us: Supernatural Edition

Heh. And yet THIS episode felt like it would fit that mold pretty well to me. Go figure.

33 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

When they first announced the Lebanon concept - and that the ep was gonna be written by Dabb - I feared a horror show of Dabb-ian proportions. Then they announced John and lots of promotion focused on John/Sam, with a side of John/Mary. 

Watching the actual episode, it wasn`t remotely as horrible as I initially feared. I thought it was more or less okay. Not a milestone episode in my book but neither were the 100th or 200th. 

But I don`t think the episode has a lot of rewatch potential or even re-think potential. At least not for me. It was saccharine fluff that didn`t have an emotional impact on me the first time, let alone entices me to watch again. And if I think about it, the prevalent feeling is some sort of detached disappointment. John may have been the most significant side character this show has had in terms of determining who the characters are, where they come from, who shaped them. And he was someone most people probably never thought would be back. So they bring him back what is probably gonna be the only time for a cutesy number. Which only makes it a gimmick. 

If I had been another random guest star of yesteryore, that wouldn`t really bug me so much. But with John, I just prefered the dynamic way his exit played in Season 2. For John to be back, I wanted that matched or even topped, otherwise why bring him in? Maybe it was already too late in the show for that, that`s possible.     

So overall, this is an episode I don`t think will have any lasting repercussions (maybe for Mary but I couldn`t care less about the current incarnation of that character) either emotionally or plotwise. So it will be ultimately easy to forget and that`s what I plan to do with it. 

It does help a lot to know that others feel the same about it. So thanks for that. 

[rue721]

I didn't have a problem with any supposed lack of melodrama, and I watch the show about equally for the spooky stuff and the character stuff. And overall, I liked this episode. The Winchesters have amazing chemistry as a family, and there were lots of fun and/or interesting bits. I also think John is a fascinating character in his own right and am always going to be delighted when he shows up.

But I think the writing was too superficial and, honestly, kind of amateur hour in terms of plotting/structure. And I do think that's disappointing.

My main problem with the plotting/structure was that the episode felt too disjointed to me, both plot-wise and emotionally. There are tons of setups that never get paid off. The teens show up as a catalyst to the Winchesters getting the pearl, and then they have this huge secret hanging over their heads, but the secret never gets told. The creepy teddy bear never gets his string pulled. John shows up based on Dean's wish but it's never explained where Dean's wish was initially coming from and we can't know whether his "deepest desire" was fulfilled in the end. We don't even get to see Sam, Dean, and Mary react to John's visit in a tag scene at the end. John is snatched into the future and gets to reunite with his entire family, even his long-dead wife and...apparently isn't changed by it at all? He just assumes it's a dream and moves on, I guess.

Sam and Mary got some very touching moments with John, and those were the highlights of the episode, I think. There were some LONG AGO setups that were finally paid off in those scenes -- basically Sam giving John a real goodbye (which he didn't get to do when he went to college or when John died) and Mary proving that it really was true love between her and John and not just that God had "mated" them together for breeding purposes (blech). But all the setups created within the actual episode just sort of faded away without any payoffs or only with very vague/anticlimactic payoffs.

The biggest shame about that, I think, is that the setups were really great. I love that John appearing is so character-driven, that it's based on Dean's unconscious wish. I love that the "hunters" are being "hunted" by the town's gossips/teens. And maybe the latter storyline will be picked back up at some point, but the former won't be.

And the other shame about that is that episodic plot structure used to be this show's strength, to the point that, in "Fan Fiction," the kids were able to do a super literal/meta version of a Supernatural episode in their musical, with similar story beats as an actual episode right down to the "brother's moment" tag at the end, EVEN WHILE that actual episode hewed successfully and even whimsically/fluently to that structure, too (with the very self-aware Sam-napping and everything). I mean, the whole gag was that SPN always hits its marks in terms of plotting. And like, the formula can get old and I also know that some people don't like Fan Fiction, etc. But it really was well-written from a craftsmanship perspective, and it's a pretty impressive feat in the sense that it managed to make fun of SPN's formula while still using that formula as the foundation for an awesome and innovative episode.

I know this is all incredibly dorky but it actually makes me want to rewrite Lebanon how I want it to be, because I really think the plotting could have been SO MUCH BETTER. Even with the constraints of JDM's time on set (which I do think created a lot of limitations in terms of plotting). Like the show could have used his very limited availability to make a more meta statement, like if the writers had had the pearl get broken suddenly at an inopportune moment and then John is suddenly gone AGAIN and the rest of the family are left to pick up the pieces AGAIN. Similarly to how John had to pick up the pieces when Mary died and/or how Sam and Dean had to pick up the pieces when John died.

Anyway, the main way that I think the writing was too superficial is that it seemed pretty generic to me. I forgive JDM not getting super deep into John's head because he hasn't been on the show in over a decade and probably hasn't kept up with it in a real way. And I think the other actors actually did A LOT to get us into their characters' heads as much as possible. They were clearly bringing their A-game. One thing that I think is really notable about Dean in this episode is that Jensen's line readings are really what a lot of the tone and import of Dean's story rests on. Specifically, if he had read "I have a family" with pride instead of so curtly, that would have given the audience a completely different takeaway.

But highlighting a stereotypical family dinner rather than a family hunt, characterizing John as a stereotypically smiling papa rather than a hunter totally freaked out by this obviously supernatural and suspicious occurrence, Dean and John's milquetoast reunion with a very literal conversation about family, etc...that could all be ANY family. I mean, any family other than the Winchesters, who specifically share hunts rather than family dinners, don't have a stereotypical papa smiling down on them, talk about family through the prism of "the family business" rather than literally, and on and on.

I don't mean to give the impression that I disliked the episode, because I didn't. I just don't think that it ended up doing justice to its own premise. And I lay the blame at the feet of the writers, who I think really didn't work hard enough to craft a story specific to these characters and this show.

[SueB]

Singer has been with the show for 14 years:

Singer: “It’s really not about fancy shots or big visual effects.  It’s just kind of this emotional boiling pot just great to watch. Wow. That’s real drama.”

In short, a major force from TPTB thinks this is a drama.  I agree  

[tessathereaper]

3 hours ago, SueB said:

Singer has been with the show for 14 years:

Singer: “It’s really not about fancy shots or big visual effects.  It’s just kind of this emotional boiling pot just great to watch. Wow. That’s real drama.”

In short, a major force from TPTB thinks this is a drama.  I agree  

Singer has also been responsible for some of the worst decisions in the show and put his wife and her writing partner on the payroll who are considered by many as two of the worst writers.(The infamous Bucklemming duo).

[rue721]

OK everybody, I'm about to stop bothering you, but first -- please look at this picture of the Raw Kale & No Friends AU version of Sam Winchester and listen to to Panic! At the Disco singing High Hopes.

The combination makes me laugh because to me, that totally sounds like a song that Turtleneck!Sam's would blast whenever it pops up on his workout mix AND YET it also reminds me why I always have to love Sam, even a flatulent and lonely version of him that's giving a faux TED Talk. Poor kid. He's just so earnest, I find it touching.

Had to have high, high hopes for a living
Shooting for the stars when I couldn't make a killing
Didn't have a dime but I always had a vision
Always had high, high hopes
Had to have high, high hopes for a living
Didn't know how but I always had a feeling
I was gonna be that one in a million
Always had high, high hopes

Mama said
Fulfill the prophecy
Be something greater
Go make a legacy
Manifest destiny
Back in the days
We wanted everything, wanted everything
Mama said
Burn your biographies
Rewrite your history
Light up your wildest dreams
Museum victories, everyday
We wanted everything, wanted everything

Mama said don't give up, it's a little complicated
All tied up, no more love and I'd hate to see you waiting

Had to have high, high hopes for a living
Shooting for the stars when I couldn't make a killing
Didn't have a dime but I always had a vision
Always had high, high hopes
Had to have high, high hopes for a living
Didn't know how but I always had a feeling
I was gonna be that one in a million
Always had high, high hopes

Edited February 14, 2019 by rue721

[mertensia]

On 2/12/2019 at 9:24 AM, SueB said:

 He got to tell his Dad that he HAS a family.  

 "This is my family. I found it, all on my own. It's little and broken but still good. Yeah, still good. "

[Bergamot]

On 2/12/2019 at 5:45 PM, AwesomO4000 said:

In my opinion, what Dean got closure with was that he got to have his family altogether and even though yes, he enjoyed it, he found that he didn't need it like he used to need it. He was fine with what he did have instead - his "I have a family" declaration - and now that he got his family altogether, it was something he didn't have to wonder about and long for anymore. He could check it off his bucket list and think "you know what, that was great, and I wouldn't say no to it continuing, but it wouldn't be worth giving up what I have..." Which in my opinion was the point of having Zach and Castiel. They were there to show what Dean would have to give up in order to have the original family all together. That and the knowledge they might cause harm to someone else who would have to save the world in their stead... but even if that weren't the case, I got the impression that Dean still wouldn't want to give up what he had.

On 2/13/2019 at 12:34 AM, AwesomO4000 said:

What I meant was that even if Dean could have theoretically had both John and Mary - in other words if that could have continued without Mary being affected - he still would have had to give up Castiel and probably Jack (though Castiel I think would've been the much more distressing), and Castiel is family as Dean was describing.

Which is what I meant by Zach and Castiel's part of being in the episode. Dean was pretty distressed by Alternate Castiel, in my opinion, and I'm not sure he would have been willing to give up his relationship with Castiel to have his father back... that's an interesting question to ponder. I can't say for sure that he wouldn't choose Castiel at this point, though I could be wrong.

Thanks, I think I do understand better what you meant. Of course, I am pretty sure now that I don't agree! 🙂

To begin with, even if you argue that simply having his family back together was all the closure that Dean would need, which I think is debatable, I disagree that having one family dinner gave him this. The family dinner was not an end in itself; it was a symbol of what he longed for: the restoration of his original family unit. Getting a small taste of this could not be enough to cause Dean to feel that this great longing  was totally satisfied, and that he no longer needed this in his life. It was a bittersweet moment where he briefly experienced what could have been, but the fact that John immediately had to disappear again from their lives meant that it was no more than that. Some things can't be fixed, and Dean will never really get back all that he lost when he was four years old.

It is an important point to consider, though -- what price would Dean think was too high to pay in order to have his family back together again?  As much as he loves and values Castiel, I think it would be completely out of character for Dean to decide that having his father back would not be worth losing his friend.

But then, I also disagree that the reason pre-Dean Castiel was shown with Zachariah was in order to indicate that Dean was making this valuation.  I think that their appearance was simply to show that it wasn't just Dean and Sam's lives being altered by the pearl, but that everything that they had done was coming unraveled. It was to show how far-reaching the alteration of the timeline was.

Now, of course it can be debated whether the world would be better or worse off as a whole if the Winchesters were removed from the equation, leaving it to "some other poor sons-of-bitches" to save it. But I think there is no arguing that the show itself asserts that the world needs the Winchesters, and more importantly for the sake of this particular discussion, the Winchesters believe this too.

I think this is why Dean and Sam went almost instantly from "the timeline is being altered" to "Dad has to go". There was no agonizing over what choice to make, except maybe in regard to John versus Mary.  (As a side note, I found it kind of amusing, and also pretty sexist, that Mary was apparently completely left out of the "keep John or let Mary go?" discussion. I mean, I'm not suggesting they should have drawn straws, but shouldn't she have a say? A chance to assert, "No, your father should stay, it's okay if I fade away as a result"? Or was she just like, "Yep, okay, too bad but he obviously has to be the one to go")?

But setting aside the "John versus Mary" thing and going back to the question as to what price would be too great: as far as Dean was concerned, in a way this was a question he had already faced and answered before, standing in front of his father's grave in "What Is and What Should Never Be".  As he said then, "Course I know what you'd say....Your happiness for all those people's lives, no contest. Right?"

That's the same question Dean is talking about in the dishwashing scene. And it shows the one price that would be too high to pay. In the djinn-created world, before he realized that it was not real, Dean thought that he had achieved his heart's desire. His mother was alive, Sam was safely out of the hunting life and happy with Jessica, and his father, while not alive, had lived a happy family life and died of natural causes. Still, Dean could not abandon the responsibility he felt, to be the one saving people and hunting things. The difference now, I think, is that as he tells Sam at the end of this episode, he is good with that, and with who he is, in a way I don't believe he was back then, and he would not want to change it.

In regard to this, as has been mentioned, I do like the symbolism of the pearl here for the choice that had to be made, with the reference to the parable in the Bible: "the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls. Who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it." For Dean and Sam, the price of the pearl was too great, and they were not willing to "sell" everything to buy it.

Edited February 14, 2019 by Bergamot

[PAForrest]

On 2/13/2019 at 2:47 AM, Aeryn13 said:

It was actually just Amara and she just wanted to give Dean a gift, not both, based in the photo she saw of Mary and young Dean. She meant well but ultimately didn't really understand the inplications or knew Dean very well. Nor did she probably know it would turn out to be such a trash gift.   

I remember Emily Swallow saying something very similar on twitter the next season (12?) about maybe returning Mary to Dean wasn't such a good gift after all. LOL! Yeah, the girl has eyes. Certainly the return of Mary was that quintessential "be careful what you wish for" item ... except Dean didn't even wish for that one.

If nothing else, having his family back intact for one night in this episode should have dispelled the fantasy entirely for Dean. Mary is Mary, Dean has seen by now that she has almost no feelings for him, even though he's going to love her to an extent anyway because he's Dean, and he's a better man than most. And because he had no meaningful interaction with John here, but instead got some superficial moment and a generic one-liner that seemed to make Dean realize John has and probably always would have had no idea whatsoever who he was, what kind of man he was, I think - I hope - Dean is finally over it, over the Winchester family fantasy that never was and never would have been.

IF these writers who don't talk to each other can, from here on out, not regress Dean into ever caring about said unrealistic fantasy again, then I'll accept that kind of growth as the best, if only, thing Dean got out of this scenario.

Edited February 14, 2019 by PAForrest

[Wateroflife]

A bit late but I am playing catch up 

On 2/9/2019 at 6:40 PM, catrox14 said:

Heh. 

On that note, I was actually kind of offended that they used John Wayne Gacy.   That maniac raped and killed 30 boys.   I wish they hadn't brought it up at all. I mean it was good they killed his ghost but I wish they would have just left that out altogether.

+1000. I found this super distasteful. And the first person the clown went for was a boy in the bathroom!!! They should have known better. I think this is the 2nd time the show has featured a real serial killer, but at least the first one was from 100 years ago. Gacy was the 70's. That's far too fresh to be making dumb jokes.

I have had serious concerns with Dabb's taste level in the past, but this whole bit really took the cake. Gross.

[AwesomO4000]

9 hours ago, Bergamot said:

But then, I also disagree that the reason pre-Dean Castiel was shown with Zachariah was in order to indicate that Dean was making this valuation.  I think that their appearance was simply to show that it wasn't just Dean and Sam's lives being altered by the pearl, but that everything that they had done was coming unraveled. It was to show how far-reaching the alteration of the timeline was.

I actually agree with this, too. Dean's decision and what he got from this in my opinion wasn't one dimensional. I think he got multiple things out of this, including:

Quote

That's the same question Dean is talking about in the dishwashing scene. And it shows the one price that would be too high to pay. In the djinn-created world, before he realized that it was not real, Dean thought that he had achieved his heart's desire. His mother was alive, Sam was safely out of the hunting life and happy with Jessica, and his father, while not alive, had lived a happy family life and died of natural causes. Still, Dean could not abandon the responsibility he felt, to be the one saving people and hunting things. The difference now, I think, is that as he tells Sam at the end of this episode, he is good with that, and with who he is, in a way I don't believe he was back then, and he would not want to change it.

I agree, and I think that one of the reasons that Dean is "good with that" now is because he has a "family" including Castiel and Jack, so even if he does have to give up his dream of his original family being together and that hurts (his flinch at the pearl being broken), the one he has now is worth having and something that he didn't have back then.

Putting aside the whole issue of everyone else in the world in general - which admittedly is very important and was critical to Dean - I wasn't meaning exactly that Castiel was the entire reason Dean would likely decide that John might not be the way to go. I was meaning more like Dean's life in general as it was now - not just Castiel, but the bunker (i.e. a home), a more defined purpose (loosely the Men of Letters legacy), and a hometown where people knew them. I think Dean liked that. And remember, if they turned into that alternate Dean and Sam eventually, he likely wouldn't have Sam either... Or even if Dean could have everything as he wanted with no consequences to the townspeople (unless Castiel got a promotion and decided to come back and do something to the town) as I said above, the fantasy is nice, but exactly how long would that last?

How long would there be a nice honeymoon before John became John again? Would John leave the bunker or would Sam? Would Dean hunt with John or Sam? Would Mary and John leave to be together and maybe call once in a while? I think part of what Dean realized was that he liked what he had, and it works for him. Having John back - even if it could happen the way he wanted - wasn't going to let Dean be the Dean he is now. Family dynamics don't work that way as far as I've experienced.

The dinner worked out eventually and gave Dean (and Sam) some good memories, but in my opinion it was pretty awkward to begin with, and I don't think that it was just the feeling of doom and gloom that made it that way. In general, they don't know each other very well anymore. If John could stay, I don't think it was going to stop being kind of weird any time soon, and I think that was maybe one of the things that Dean knows now that he maybe didn't back during "What Is..." (i.e. that his perception of his family was partly colored with rose-colored glasses and the reality wasn't/isn't ever going to live up to those memories, like John's "perfect marriage" after Mary died. I think Dean had similar perception issues and the family being all together was great after they'd broken up and then John died.) And I think maybe Dean sees that more now. He started seeing it during season 3, but I think this helped also, and I think Dean's "I have a family" kind of hinted at that.

Though as I said in my quoted post above: I could be wrong, and Dean might have been willing to give up Castiel and Jack and his current way of life to have John back... I think however, in my opinion, it would have been a mistake, because John is John. Even pre-hunting John didn't have the rosy relationship with Mary that they like to remember. How long would it take for them to butt heads? Maybe over Mary still wanting to hunt, for example. Soooo many ways for it all to go wrong, in my opinion, and I don't think it would've taken very long either. Sure they are family, but a crazy dysfunctional one that they are lucky that Dean and Sam can get along as much as they do... throwing in John and Mary? Let's just say that I wouldn't want to live there. ; )

[Bergamot]

13 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

How long would there be a nice honeymoon before John became John again? Would John leave the bunker or would Sam? Would Dean hunt with John or Sam? Would Mary and John leave to be together and maybe call once in a while? I think part of what Dean realized was that he liked what he had, and it works for him. Having John back - even if it could happen the way he wanted - wasn't going to let Dean be the Dean he is now. Family dynamics don't work that way as far as I've experienced.

I think it would have been very interesting to see those family dynamics! The preternaturally calm, supportive, and understanding John we saw in this episode was obviously not the "real" John, as far as I'm concerned. He was a fake character created by the necessity of giving in to the actor's demands that John be shown as a wonderful father (which, I have to say, is one of the stupidest reasons ever for reshaping a complex character into something more sentimental and simplistic.)

But it might have been fascinating to see interactions with the real John, bringing back into their lives not just his positive qualities but his negative ones -- his impatience, bullheadedness, bad temper, rigidity, secretiveness, and obsessiveness. I would have loved to see John go on a hunt with his sons and see him try to bark out orders to them (which would be natural for him) and have him discover he is no longer the one in charge. And I don't see Dean trying to bend himself like a pretzel to please John anymore; he is no longer that person, and I think we saw that even in this episode, in the way he spoke to his father as an equal.

Having said that, I do not believe that any speculation about how their lives would change entered Dean's or Sam's head as they moved from their realization that the timeline was changing, to accepting that the wish had to be undone. They made a point of dismissing what would happen to them personally. When they are discussing the altered timeline versions of themselves, Sam says, "That's not the point! The point is, if all this is different, then what else changed?" The scene them immediately changes to show Zachariah and Castiel, to underscore those world-changing consequences, and then switches back to Dean and Sam, saying how are we going to tell Dad and Mom.

On 2/12/2019 at 5:45 PM, AwesomO4000 said:

He could check it off his bucket list and think "you know what, that was great, and I wouldn't say no to it continuing, but it wouldn't be worth giving up what I have..." Which in my opinion was the point of having Zach and Castiel. They were there to show what Dean would have to give up in order to have the original family all together. That and the knowledge they might cause harm to someone else who would have to save the world in their stead... but even if that weren't the case, I got the impression that Dean still wouldn't want to give up what he had.

I don't know, I was thinking about this and went back and re-watched, but I still do not think that Dean was saying this. I don't think he meant that even if he could have both his father and mother back, and have someone else save the world, that he would rather not have that life -- I think he meant that he has accepted that this is the life he was given, and that he is good with who he is.

Other than the John versus Mary choice, which was a biggie, but from which they obviously would lose either way, I think we were meant to see Dean and Sam as coming to the decision that the price of the pearl was too high because of the bigger repercussions in the supernatural world, not because of how it would change their lives personally. Although, as I said, it would be interesting to see what would happen regarding those issues.

Edited February 15, 2019 by Bergamot

[rue721]

Quote

I think we were meant to see Dean and Sam as coming to the decision that the price of the pearl was too high because of the bigger repercussions in the supernatural world, not because of how it would change their lives personally. Although, as I said, it would be interesting to see what would happen regarding those issues.

I agree with all of that!

I think part of the reason what was at stake globally (as opposed to personally) didn't come across as clearly as it should have, though, is that the NuTimeline version of 2019 wasn't really explored -- and didn't even necessarily make a lot of sense given the events of the first couple seasons of the show.

Wouldn't Sam have still been the YED's odds on favorite to win the Psychic Kids Contest, and so wouldn't the YED still have murdered Jessica in '06 in order to get Sam back in the hunt? And wouldn't Sam have then been murdered by Jake in '07? And wouldn't everything else have happened more or less the same way it did, OR wouldn't Dean have died in the face-off with YED '06 and Sam would then have stayed dead in '07?

John going radio silent in '06 was the catalyst for Dean contacting Sam, but the YED was the one pulling the strings at that point. So even if John had disappeared in '03, I don't think Sam would have been off in law school and all that a few years later. And if Dean were still a hunter after '03, which he still was in the NuTimeline, I have trouble believing he wouldn't be on the YED case in '06 and involved with Sam's travails with the YED by then anyway.

ETA:

I think the show tried to raise the personal stakes for the Winchesters by having John be so nice. Like they wanted to make it unambiguously a good thing for him to be back, so it would be more heartbreaking when he had to go -- even though all of us actual human beings know that it wouldn't be an unambiguously good thing because that just doesn't make sense.

Also, I think that part of the reason for the John love-fest was that JDM had such a good experience going to an SPN con and getting a lot of love, and maybe Jensen wanted to reproduce/improve on that to try and tempt him into doing more with the show. I doubt that JDM was like, "John has to be lovely or I'm out!" because this is a man who happily plays Negan, the least lovely character possible. But I think that Jensen tempted him back and wants to keep making JDM's interactions with the show/fans as pleasant as possible so that it's easier and easier to tempt him some more. Personally, I doubt that JDM will ever be back on the show, but the cast does plenty of SPN-related stuff that isn't even on-set and I think Jensen would like JDM to join that crowd in general because the two of them are buddies. And hey, as long as there's life there's hope (and sometimes even after there's no life, in the case of this show) so it's not actually out of the question that JDM might even be back on screen as John. JMV.

Edited February 15, 2019 by rue721
Lots more to say, apparently.

[AwesomO4000]

7 hours ago, Bergamot said:

Other than the John versus Mary choice, which was a biggie, but from which they obviously would lose either way, I think we were meant to see Dean and Sam as coming to the decision that the price of the pearl was too high because of the bigger repercussions in the supernatural world, not because of how it would change their lives personally. Although, as I said, it would be interesting to see what would happen regarding those issues.

I actually agree with this - which is why I mentioned above that that aspect was very important and critical to Dean making the decision - so I may have hyperbolized some of what I was trying to get across which was mainly that, in my opinion, the reason I saw growth for Dean in this case - because Dean has always considered the consequences for others, so that alone wouldn't be growth - was because despite the sadness and tragedy of this situation, I think Dean was still in a better place now than he was in "What Is..." even though the situations were kind of similar.

Now Dean does think he has a family. Now he is good with what he's done and who he is. So unlike in "What Is..." where it was mostly just sadness for Dean for what he could have had*** and what he couldn't prevent, now Dean has something - a life he is good with, a "family," and a home and community to take its place, and I think - from what I saw in this episode anyway - that Dean knows that or at the very least, knows it more strongly (if he already had feelings in that direction.)

And for me, that was the difference and the growth for Dean. That and as another layer, despite the rosy picture we got of John - because I agree with you, this wasn't the "real" John or was at least one on his best behavior (as you could probably tell from my post that I didn't think this John would last) - I think Dean was kind of figuring that out too with his "I have a family" declaration and his not backing down with John. There was a different vibe there indicating to me that Dean wouldn't just go back to the way it used to be between them. I think Dean knew that maybe his dream to get the family back together like he used to have - he talked about it quite a bit in season 1 - wasn't going to work, because maybe it didn't really work as well as he thought that it did in the first place.

But I can also see why others might not have gotten that from the episode, because I don't think it was as overt as say this:

6 hours ago, rue721 said:

I think the show tried to raise the personal stakes for the Winchesters by having John be so nice. Like they wanted to make it unambiguously a good thing for him to be back, so it would be more heartbreaking when he had to go -- even though all of us actual human beings know that it wouldn't be an unambiguously good thing because that just doesn't make sense.

Because yeah, definitely to all of that.

In my opinion, anyone who thought that if John was able to stay that they would just all of a sudden get along all hunky-dory - because this was supposed to be John from 2003, not an older and wiser John - is somewhat overly optimistic. I don't care how sorry Sam was for what happened before John died or how sorry John supposedly was for making their childhood a mess, they still are who they are... and now even more set in their ways since Sam has grown even more independent while John hasn't grown from where he was. I would be starting a betting pool as to how long it would take for John and Sam to get into a major fight. I think maybe the major difference would be that this time Dean would probably say "really? again" and tell them both to go f^ck themselves and wonder why he ever thought getting everyone back together was a good idea. Then John and Sam would feel badly and call a truce... for about a day (if that), because those two just shouldn't be living together for any extended amount of time, in my opinion.  ; )

*** Which helped set up what happened concerning the deal in the coming episodes.

[Casseiopeia]

I had a theory about John's dream at the end of the episode.  Supposedly it was to have meant something (I hope someone asks either JDM or Jensen at the next con).  I think the fact that John had a dream  in the past that he remembered about the future had a direct impact on the day of his death in the hospital and why he did what he did.  In 2003 I don't think that John had any idea why something evil was in Sam's nursery or why Mary had to die the way she did. So in the first few years afterwards he would chalk it up to a dream.  But everything was coming to a head in the Pilot which is why John took off.  He discovered what they were dealing with and that it concerned Sam specifically.  He was going to do everything possible to kill the demon even though he had an idea (dream) that he was going to die doing it.  When it looked like Dean was going to die John knew that if his sons (both of them) were going to survive he needed to make the deal and burden Dean with the task of saving/killing Sam.  Because he knew (dream) that in the future Dean succeeded in saving Sam and the world.

Yes? No? maybe....

[ahrtee]

8 minutes ago, Casseiopeia said:

I had a theory about John's dream at the end of the episode.  Supposedly it was to have meant something (I hope someone asks either JDM or Jensen at the next con).  I think the fact that John had a dream  in the past that he remembered about the future had a direct impact on the day of his death in the hospital and why he did what he did.  In 2003 I don't think that John had any idea why something evil was in Sam's nursery or why Mary had to die the way she did. So in the first few years afterwards he would chalk it up to a dream.  But everything was coming to a head in the Pilot which is why John took off.  He discovered what they were dealing with and that it concerned Sam specifically.  He was going to do everything possible to kill the demon even though he had an idea (dream) that he was going to die doing it.  When it looked like Dean was going to die John knew that if his sons (both of them) were going to survive he needed to make the deal and burden Dean with the task of saving/killing Sam.  Because he knew (dream) that in the future Dean succeeded in saving Sam and the world.

Yes? No? maybe....

My headcanon is that in IMTOD John remembered his dream, and remembered that he'd never apologized to Dean for (or even acknowledged)  how much he'd put on him as a child.  That's why he made his apology to Dean at that time.  At the same time, he told Sam he didn't want to fight any more.  But he had to get Sam out of the room so he could add his final burden on Dean (maybe knowing that Dean would save him because he'd seen the future) so he didn't get the chance to apologize to Sam, too.  So Dean got his apology in 2006 and Sam got his in 2019.  

Maybe.  If we're going to be kind.  

[SueB]

24 minutes ago, Casseiopeia said:

I had a theory about John's dream at the end of the episode.  Supposedly it was to have meant something (I hope someone asks either JDM or Jensen at the next con).  I think the fact that John had a dream  in the past that he remembered about the future had a direct impact on the day of his death in the hospital and why he did what he did.  In 2003 I don't think that John had any idea why something evil was in Sam's nursery or why Mary had to die the way she did. So in the first few years afterwards he would chalk it up to a dream.  But everything was coming to a head in the Pilot which is why John took off.  He discovered what they were dealing with and that it concerned Sam specifically.  He was going to do everything possible to kill the demon even though he had an idea (dream) that he was going to die doing it.  When it looked like Dean was going to die John knew that if his sons (both of them) were going to survive he needed to make the deal and burden Dean with the task of saving/killing Sam.  Because he knew (dream) that in the future Dean succeeded in saving Sam and the world.

Yes? No? maybe....

I TOTALLY buy this as a neatly fitting retcon.  I literally JUST watched "In My Time of Dying" with my hubby this weekend (he's started the series and we are just in S2 on a Netflix binge -- and yes, I popped in the disc for the right music for the last 3 episodes of S1 because OBVIOUSLY).  While rewatching EP 2.1 it was like "WOW!" - this idea really really fits.  In the retcon world, John KNEW that dream was real and he didn't understand that (for sure) until Dean lay dying.  In this retcon he remembered Sammy saying 'hospital floor'.  Now IF this retcon were actually true (because of course, it just 'fits' but not 100%), it kind of makes him an ass for sending Sam out to get the coffee -- as Sam's biggest regret was not saying goodbye. BUT, in John Winchester logic, all the good the boys do was 100% more important than Sam and Dean's pain.  Because he's John Winchester.  And 'ya know, that's character consitent.  

So, as retcons goes -- it's pretty damn good.  Doesn't fit perfectly but close enough and not inconsistent in characterization.  

@ahrtee jinx!  We posted at the same time. 

Edited February 17, 2019 by SueB
note to @ahrtee

[Aeryn13]

I`d much rather he genuinely wanted to put Dean first this one time and he genuinely wanted to apologize to him before he did as the reason for John`s actions in IMTOD, not because "future dream" scenario. That IMO takes away from one of the best episodes the show has ever had. And I`m not talking about Lebanon.    

If IMTOD remains intact as is, the generic non-event that was whatever interaction Dean and John had in Lebanon is easier to take.  

Edited February 17, 2019 by Aeryn13

[rue721]

From John's perspective, though, 2019 is chock full of such improbable wish-fulfillment that I can't imagine him buying it as anything other than a fantasy. First of all, Mary is resurrected?! I think that would overshadow everything else for him. But then there are other improbable wish-fulfillment things like Sam becoming a hunter after all (and being happy about it), Dean being able to save Sam after all (and not having to kill him), the three of them coming together to kill Yellow Eyes even after John's death, the whole family now living in John's long-lost "deadbeat" father's bunker (so I guess his father didn't willfully abandon John and his mother after all), etc. Sam and Dean literally have an angel watching over them. They're on a first-name basis with God, whose sister is performing miracles for them! They're even still kicking in middle age despite having the most dangerous job imaginable. I mean, from our perspective as the audience, it more-or-less makes sense. But from John's perspective it just would have to seem so hokey and like it's just all his wildest, most self-indulgent dreams come to life. For John, I think it would seem just way too good to be true. How could he responsibly do anything other than write it off?

Edited February 17, 2019 by rue721

[SueB]

7 minutes ago, rue721 said:

From John's perspective, though, 2019 is chock full of such improbable wish-fulfillment that I can't imagine him buying it as anything other than a fantasy. First of all, Mary is resurrected?! I think that would overshadow everything else for him. But then there are other improbable wish-fulfillment things like Sam becoming a hunter after all (and being happy about it), Dean being able to save Sam after all (and not having to kill him), the three of them coming together to kill Yellow Eyes even after John's death, the whole family now living in John's long-lost "deadbeat" father's bunker (so I guess his father didn't willfully abandon John and his mother after all), etc. Sam and Dean literally have an angel watching over them. They're on a first-name basis with God, whose sister is performing miracles for them! They're even still kicking in middle age despite having the most dangerous job imaginable. I mean, from our perspective as the audience, it more-or-less makes sense. But from John's perspective it just would have to seem so hokey and like it's just all his wildest, most self-indulgent dreams come to life. For John, I think it would seem just way too good to be true. How could he responsibly do anything other than write it off?

excellent point.  John's not likely to take concrete action on the basis of that dream.  It might cause him to think about some things ... as dreams often do in real life ... but concrete action is iffy. 

[Casseiopeia]

33 minutes ago, rue721 said:

From John's perspective, though, 2019 is chock full of such improbable wish-fulfillment that I can't imagine him buying it as anything other than a fantasy. First of all, Mary is resurrected?! I think that would overshadow everything else for him. But then there are other improbable wish-fulfillment things like Sam becoming a hunter after all (and being happy about it), Dean being able to save Sam after all (and not having to kill him), the three of them coming together to kill Yellow Eyes even after John's death, the whole family now living in John's long-lost "deadbeat" father's bunker (so I guess his father didn't willfully abandon John and his mother after all), etc. Sam and Dean literally have an angel watching over them. They're on a first-name basis with God, whose sister is performing miracles for them! They're even still kicking in middle age despite having the most dangerous job imaginable. I mean, from our perspective as the audience, it more-or-less makes sense. But from John's perspective it just would have to seem so hokey and like it's just all his wildest, most self-indulgent dreams come to life. For John, I think it would seem just way too good to be true. How could he responsibly do anything other than write it off?

My thought was that in 2005 John would start to see parts of his dream becoming reality, finding out that a yellow eyed demon actually was responsible for example. That is a pretty specific detail.  And the closer he got to hitting the hospital room floor the more he would realize that the very vivid dream was possibly real.  Dream or no dream he still would have traded his soul for Dean's life but in sending Sam out of the room and telling Dean to save/kill his brother he helped set in motion all the events for the next 13 years.  Probably saving his sons lives.  

[Katy M]

7 minutes ago, Casseiopeia said:

My thought was that in 2005 John would start to see parts of his dream becoming reality, finding out that a yellow eyed demon actually was responsible for example. That is a pretty specific detail.  And the closer he got to hitting the hospital room floor the more he would realize that the very vivid dream was possibly real.  Dream or no dream he still would have traded his soul for Dean's life but in sending Sam out of the room and telling Dean to save/kill his brother he helped set in motion all the events for the next 13 years.  Probably saving his sons lives.  

He said he had a weird dream.  Doesn't have to mean it was the episode. But, even so, we don't know when he found out it was a yellow eyed demon. What John knew and when he knew it is one of the biggest mysteries of the show.

[Casseiopeia]

4 hours ago, Katy M said:

He said he had a weird dream.  Doesn't have to mean it was the episode. But, even so, we don't know when he found out it was a yellow eyed demon. What John knew and when he knew it is one of the biggest mysteries of the show.

When John called the boys in Scarecrow he said...

SAM: You’re after it, aren’t you? The thing that killed Mom.

JOHN: Yeah. It’s a demon, Sam.

SAM: A demon? You know for sure?

DEAN: A demon? What’s he saying?

JOHN: I do.

The implication I always got from that conversation was that John had just recently (like just before the Pilot when he went "missing") discovered what had attacked Sam and Mary.  Anyway that bit of conversation always stood out to me.  

[ahrtee]

6 minutes ago, Casseiopeia said:

When John called the boys in Scarecrow he said...

SAM: You’re after it, aren’t you? The thing that killed Mom.

JOHN: Yeah. It’s a demon, Sam.

SAM: A demon? You know for sure?

DEAN: A demon? What’s he saying?

JOHN: I do.

The implication I always got from that conversation was that John had just recently (like just before the Pilot when he went "missing") discovered what had attacked Sam and Mary.  Anyway that bit of conversation always stood out to me.  

I thought the implication was that the YED had suddenly become active again after 20+ years of nothing, and that's when John decided to take off to lead him away from the boys.  (Wasn't there some dialog about that somewhere in season 1?)  

In Salvation, he said: 

JOHN: Look I wish I had more answers, I do. I've always been one step behind it. Look, I've never gotten there in time to save....
JOHN looks down, unhappy. 
DEAN: All right so how do we find it..before it hits again.
JOHN: There's signs. It took me a while to see the pattern but it's there in the days before these fires signs crop up in an area. Cattle deaths, temperature fluctations, electrical storms. And then I went back and checked...and...

And in ELAC they gave Ash "about a year's worth" of their dad's stuff to look through.  

There was also this, from IMTOD:

DEMON: You know the truth, right? About Sammy? And the other children?
JOHN: Yeah. I've known for a while. 
DEMON: But Sam doesn't, does he? You've been playing dumb. 

So we really don't know how long he'd known but just hadn't told the boys.  

So maybe the "dream" gave him some clues to look for and that's when he started hunting the YED specifically, but didn't pick up the trail until 2005 just before the pilot.