No doubt, last night's midseason finale triggered some very polarizing opinions about the episode and season eight in general. I started last week a season 8/Jeremy Carver appreciation thread, but I do realize we need to represent the other side as well. So here it is. What about Supernatural season 8 is making you bitter?
This is where all the "The writers are trashing Sam and/or Dean," "The writers are ruining this show," "I can't forgive this character for doing this or that character for doing that" comments belong. This is a free form rant zone. Have at it. This is also one of those rare zones where we will permit Sam vs. Dean. Just try to respect each other. That's all we ask.
Comments
Please understand, I am a Sam fan and what I am angry about is that Sam is being deliberately trashed by the writers. I can cut Sam plenty of slack, but if I DARE to criticize Dean I get jumped on and the writers have piled on having Dean state that Sam is a bad brother, is less trustworthy than Benny and that Sam has betrayed Dean over and over and Benny never has. What I am upset about is the complete and utter refusal by the writers to provide Sam with any understandable POV. We have seen him with Amelia, a character we never met before this season and did not have any feel for. We have not been shown Sam grieving for Dean. In EOMS we saw Dean grieving for Sam in his year without Sam, with Sam, he mentions Dean died, claims it wrecked him, but shows NO sign that this is true.
There are a thousand ways I can understand Sam and why he is acting the way he is, but the text is clear. Sam abandoned Dean. Sam is jealous of Benny and is disloyal by not taking Dean's word on Benny being safe. We are repeatedly TOLD and TOLD that Sam is in the wrong here and deserves the cruelty that Dean used to get him away from Benny. I can't fight the fact that canon has stated explicitly that Sam has no good reason for his actions. Subtext is well and good. Jared is doing his best with the material, but in the end Benny has been shown to be a good vampire and loyal to Dean. Cas has been shown to be manipulated by Naomi and not responsible if he hurts Dean. Sam has been given NOTHING to excuse his behavior.
I can only conclude that Carver and the writers want us to dislike Sam and since more than half the fandom already despises Sam that is not hard to do. They may be planning a bait and switch with a reveal that will redeem Sam, but if so they have waited too long and put too much effort into making Sam irredeemable. Anything they do from here on out will be classed as "excusing Sam and not holding him responsible for his actions" Dean will be portrayed as the poor betrayed brother who doesn't deserve the awful Sam as his brother. Dean will be seen as being sacrificed to making Sam a saint. The ill will that has been established by the first part of the season may be impossible to erase. And it sickens me.
Sam fans are not being harder on Sam than others, we simply see the writers as deciding to annihilate Sam's character and we have finally admitted that this is what the writers want.
It is obvious to me that those who love Sam are unwelcome to TPTB. They want Saint Dean and Saint Dean they will have, while Sam remains the abomination.
Quote:I am not sure, where you are seeing all this.
I seriously like Sam this season.
I seriously like the fact, that finally, they are stating, that no, Sam is not ok. That his sacrifice for the world and his brother actually WAS a sacrifice and not something, that goes poof with just a little bit of angel intervention.
I can so understand, where he is coming from and how he is reacting to Dean´s crap about Benny being the better brother.
had Dean not said this... Sam would most likely have been on his side concerning Benny.
And from Dean´s face? He knew it, as soon, as he had said it.
But you could see, how Dean, with that one statement again broke Sam´s resolve to just give Dean the benefit of doubt.
I love Dean, he was hilarious, he did, what he could in that episode, to do the right thing.
But by being petty and mean.. he not only hurt his brother (AGAIN!), but it all went down the drain.
And Sam? Sam was hurt. Was it right, to go after Benny, just because his brother was being a dick?
Dunno... Perhaps it wasn´t. But then, NOT doing things, because they are the sensible thing to do, makes us human.
And I love, that Sam is being portrait as human, wounded to the core, scared shitless and in need of help... but still trying to be the hero, he just is.
I didn´t like Sam in the second half of season 7.
He felt bland, one dimensional and boring.
This Sam?
Conflicted and struggling, but still fighting?
I love him. I really do.
I really can´t say I even remotely understand, where you are seeing all this.
Sam didn´t abandon Dean. Sam thought Dean was DEAD!
Only because Dean thinks, Sam abandoned him, doesn´t make it even remotely right.
I mean... Dean thought Gordon was an all around great guy ^^
Only because Dean was right, concerning Benny (and we still don´t know, if he truly was), doesn´t make Sam wrong.
Sam was very right in tailing Benny. He was very right in standing up for his brother and giving Dean the time to find out, what´s going on.
Going after Benny? Uh.. not so much.
But yes, I can understand why he did it.
Because that Benny = better brother comment?
Not good.
That´s not jealousy.
That´s worry.
That´s alot of anger.
That´s pain
They both have been petty, and really good at making bad choices.
And why?
Because they are brothers. Nobody can hurt the other like a Sam or Dean can.
And nobody is allowed to.
Dean making comments to Benny, how awesome a hunter his little brother is?
Loved it.
Sam shoving Martin against a wall, because he made a comment about Dean being a bad hunter?
Loved it.
THAT´s our boys. Both of them.
But Dean being mean and Sam reacting badly to it?
Yeah, sadly that´s them too.
For example, Sam actually lobs the first emotional punch in the episode when he says any hunter worth his salt would tail Benny. That's a shot at Dean. So Dean's low blow at Sam doesn't come out of the blue. The wasn't a case of Dean being mean and Sam just reacting--both boys are in the argument equally.
The issue with Sam is that he felt no need to tail Lenore, he felt no need to tail Amy and he felt no need to tail Kate. His need to tail Benny isn't tied to past characterizatio n, which leaves the argument in Southern Comfort where Sam threatened to be the one to kill Benny. He seems to have kept up that line of thought more than I thought he would.
Since I like Benny very much, I also have an issue with Sam making decisions on whether Benny lives or dies based on his feelings about Dean, as if Benny's life has no value. I sympathise with and understand why Sam feels so hurt that Dean would use his feelings about Amelia to save Benny. But I have a much harder time with Sam being willing to kill Benny to score against Dean because he's hurt Dean is close to Benny. That's not a reason to kill--and I'm not sure where this Sam has come from who thinks of vampires this way.
Also, on the question of Sam's thinking Dean was dead--to me that's poor writing unless they give us a little more on why he would think that. A flashback was needed to show Sam's frame of mind. Because Sam didn't assume that in Time After Time; he kept digging. And Dean disappeared with Cas, a formidable ally even when he's suffering. Why Sam would not need to know what happened is a good question not only by Dean but by me. It's so annoying to me that we've had flashback after flashback with Sam and Amelia and none to show Sam's process of accepting Dean's death, which would have been a process, as there was no body and no answers.
But I do agree it's interesting that Sam is putting this much effort into keeping an eye on Benny. Wonder if it's because Dean has really told him so little about him that he's got Ruby flashbacks of being manipulated by a monster? He's worried Dean's being used?
If I'm bitter about anything, it's that I definitely agree that they STILL need to give us a flashback to those first few months. They have not yet justified this "Sam didn't look " thing. It's not any Sam we've seen over the years - no matter how bad his own situation was, we've never seen Sam leave Dean without obsessively digging/trying to save him. If he didn't, the writers really do have to show how he got there.
(I'm still holding out hope that there's more to come on that. Silly me.)
I also don't get the impression Dean is withholding any information about Benny now--Sam could ask, but he won't because it's a sore topic now after the fight. I think the episode showed that Sam's tipping point on deciding to kill Benny was his hurt and anger at Dean's feeling Benny is his only relationship which has not betrayed him, and those feelings must have been festering for some time to drive Sam like that.
I'm with you on expecting to see how obsessive Sam didn't need to know what happened to his brother. Just give me a flashback on that, instead of husbands coming back from the dead.
Mind you, it sounds like I am not enjoying the season and overall I am! I loved the Purgatory stuff, I like the quest, I love Crowley. Castiel is being used well this year. I love Benny. It's just that Sam and Dean are the heart of the show for me, so Sam's story not resonating for me is a huge deal and piling more and more stuff on top of what doesn't work doesn't make it go away.
Quote:No one, to my knowledge, has jumped on you for criticizing Dean. Not on this site. And if they are doing that on other sites, why continue to go there? And why then bring that nonsense to this site, which is generally balanced and produces charitable discussion from all angles. This is what I do not understand.
Quote:Where has any of this been stated anywhere in canon?
Quote:That's a pretty broad over-generaliza tion. Again, if this is coming from comments made by others on other sites, why even read them? I know I don't. I consider a lot of it to be trolling by immature people who have nothing better to do with their time than troll, pick fights with others online, and complain.
I don't think the writers make either brother to be saint nor devil. Just human, with good days and bad days, right choices and wrong choices. And if we truly love Dean or Sam or both, as most of us claim we do, then we accept the brothers for who they are. Flaws and all.
Also, I feel like the writers are letting themselves be backed into making pretty significant character decisions by what they need to have happen rather than what the characters would do. I'm still not sure that Sam not looking for Dean isn't just a huge scale instance of that: it still feels more like something Carver needed for the Sam storyline he wanted than something that arose organically from how the character might be imagined. And I thought there was a smaller instance in last night's ep with the text message. To me, Dean planning that in advance and having it in reserve in case he needed it is the really disturbing aspect of it, yet I don't actually feel that that was an intended characterizatio n note. I thought the writers just realized that, practically speaking, it hadn't been something Dean could set up spur of the moment, so they went for advanced planning just to make it work.
Bottom line is that I just don't find the season very well done. I think they are juggling too many balls, timelines, different subsets of characters, even different genres, and it just isn't holding together. I don't think they are malicious or out to destroy anyone or anything -- honestly, I don't feel that there is that much direction, coherence, and intentionality in the characterizatio n one way or another! Some of the individual eps have set up interesting possibilities and dynamics, but to me there's no flow in the storyline as a whole.
That's my rant. I do have more positive and optimistic comments and takes as well, but this obviously isn't the thread for them.
Isn't that what we were missing in Season 6 and 7? Again I just don't understand any fan that is unhappy with Season 8--those fans that stuck with the show through 6 and 7. I could not disagree more with the comments above. But this is SPN so I agree to disagree :)
I feel I understand Dean and what happened to him. I understand Benny. I understand Castiel. I'm at a loss when it comes to Sam.
I couldn't agree more w/you that Sam not looking for Dean is not organic. It's just not something Sam would have done, and no effort, IMO, has been put into explaining Sam's decision to not look for Dean. Carver says he knows the viewers wouldn't like that but asks viewers to be patient. I can only have so much patience. I need a story to go w/my patience, and we haven't even gotten that.
Is it so hard to tell a simple, plain story for Sam? Is it so hard to give us his perspective?
The choice had to be made, make Dean look bad for resenting Sam's normal or make Sam look bad for not even looking for Dean. The choice was to make Sam look bad. That has been the go to scenario in season 4, 5 and 6. So why not trot it out again. It put the character of Sam in a horrible light and there has been no attempt to change that, I would say perception, but in this case I think we are supposed to believe that it is a simple fact.
Then the show didn't have the time to build up Sam and Amelia's relationship and do Purgatory AND do Kevin and the tablets AND do stand alone stories. So we see a first meeting where Amelia comes off as a bad vet. We see a second meeting where Amelia is still antagonistic and the next thing we know Sam and Amelia are in bed and then without showing us how they got there, Sam and Amelia are in love.
With Lisa we got an entire episode devoted to Dean thinking Ben was his. Then we got Dean dreaming about Lisa in DALDOM. Then we got Dean going to Lisa to say goodbye in PONR. Then the first 15 minutes of EOMS we saw Dean in the relationship with Lisa and Ben. We saw Dean's normal life with work and friends. We weren't catapulted into a relationship that had not previously existed. With Amelia we had to fill in way to many blanks to figure out how the heck Sam decided he loved her, or how she decided she love him. We are told they are both messes, but we aren't shown. We at least get the hint that Amelia was drinking heavily, but Sam was every bit as emotionally a mess as he was when he was hallucinating Lucifer, that is not at all.
Maybe they should have dropped the Heartache and Bitten and just done 2 straight flashback episodes, one for Dean in Purgatory and one for Sam and Amelia. Maybe they should have dropped the dog and had Sam run into Sarah from Provenance who married a guy who suddenly enlisted and went to Afghanistan and was reported dead. At least we would have had some feeling about Sarah, some connection with Sam so I could believe that he would just collapse into a relationship. Sarah and Sam shared their grief the first time they met, her losing her mother Sam losing Jess. Having them reconnect would have made this whole thing more palatable to me.
They really neglected the Sam side of the equation just to get the boys to the place where there can be a big blow out. Sadly to do that one of them had to be the bad guy and Sam was it again.
Wow percyowner. This didnt strike me at all but now that u mention it, it would have seemed so much more palatable and relatable to the Sam we know. Wish they had taken that route. I'm not impressed with Balaban's acting either. Maybe am being too quick to judge but JP and she dont seem to have any chemistry. It just is not working for me. On the other hand (like Dean) I was rooting for Sam and Sarah to hook up :)
The only thing I disagree with is that Sam is being made the bad guy here. I really dont see it that way. This season is all about perception. They (Sam, Dean, Cass & Benny) have done questianable things and they are all probably justified from their individual perspectives. No one is coming off as being completely right or completely wrong. I know Sam's sl is not a supernaturally driven one (for a change) but it is still relevant and I feel its given JP a lot of oppourtunity to show his emotional side (in acting).
So take heart and keep the faith.
I still would have major issues w/Sam not looking for Dean, but I, at least, would have been able to buy the relationhip. And since Carver seems primarily interested in promoting this relationship, I'd rather be interested than bored. Sam and Sarah are interesting. Sam and Amelia . . . not so much!
I read some of the very thoughtful, positive reviews and find that sometimes they contain a lot of assumptions, a lot of added subtext that is from speculated emotional motivation based on previous seasons not on what is actually being dramatized in the current episodes. I really think that those that are able to do that as they are watching are enjoying this season. I on the other hand can only see these questionable writing and resulting acting choices. I wish I could read a great review and be persuaded, but it just does not work that way.
I have noticed that some reviewers for example questioned inconsistent behavior and plot points earlier in the season and looked to them as clues for hidden subtext, but now that some of that subtext has been disproven by subsequent episodes, those same critics completely overlook their own earlier reservations instead of still seeing them for the inconsistencies they were. If everyone sees all these clues that we all think surely must mean something because they are so out of place in tone and behavior, but then they all turn out not to mean anything at all, does that not prove in and of itself some poor writing?
I generally did not care much for Season 7 by the way, but did not feel quite as upset about that as I do this year. Maybe because I expected so much from Carver and also because last year the plot and myth arc were a mess and pretty uninspired, but the relationships felt intact and not downright hostile. Somehow that makes it feel like there is more at stake.
I agree whole heartedly though that this story needs to be told in real time. I think we're there.
As for Sam, I love him this season. More then I ever have. Possibly because he's coming off as a grown man. He's got troubles and fears, but he's not going to take any crap for the choices he's made anymore. Loving him. I originally was worried as well as not looking for Dean, is a big deal, but then I think of what we know of purgatory. We know you can open the doors and let everything single out on an eclipse with virgin blood and the blood of a purgatory native. Even if Sam knew where to look that's a tough order to fill.
I think Dean is coming off worse this season, as he's always struggled with "big brotherness" or my way or the highway disease. I think the simple living in Purgatory made that much worse, but he's getting better. He's getting more human and ultimately Benny getting more vampy. I just don't see the bro vs. bro stuff others do. They are both kind of violent and emotional.
I understand but my confusion is:
1. WHY are people venting? Season 8 is light years ahead of Seasons 6 and 7. Our show is back to the episode to episode quality I have missed the past 2 years. Anyone that cannot see that, I just can't relate to.
2. There is ALWAYS A LOT of venting going on with SPN fans, in every forum, on every SPN site :) It's what makes the fans the best of any show I follow.
I agree with you about S8 and the last two years, there is so much to love about this season and some flaws but enjoying the heck out of it.
My one complaint about Season 8 is the Sam flashbacks. I did get a lot into the buzz that the flashbacks were all a dream, or some sort of not-reality. I was hoping Martin was brought in because Sam was at the mental hospital too, and Amelia would have been his doctor, or something like that. WHY was the lighting SO light last week in the flashbacks? I was somewhat let down that all of that seemed to be real, with Amelia's appearance at the end....but I STILL am hoping there is more to it that what seems to be real. I just don't think Sam would totally give up looking for Dean, that just does not feel right to me. IF there is more than meets the eye, they do need to reveal that soon.
I'm always curious to read both the positive and negative comments in the threads. I should have made clear I was not a fan of the "Season 8 Love" thread either. If you put all positive or negative comment eggs in one basket, it does not promote conversation or debate. Every comments would be "GOD I hate this and that," with no one countering that. I like hearing both sides, I don't think we need to separate anything here on WFB, both sides are always represented. That's just my $0.02, Alice is the boss :)
Then again, I don't know other fandoms' forums.
Personally I think there is some good things this season and aspects I havent liked .
I don't really care about the tablets. I've been over Crowley since S5 though Mark Sheppard is a great actor.
Sam's arc is simply horrible. I'll just leave it at that b/c my detailed opinion can be found elsewhere. Unfortunately, Sam's terrible arc is definitely impacting my enjoyment of the show.
All I ask for, and keep hoping for, is for the boys to show that they LOVE each other, and that each one KNOWS that they are LOVED by the other, and I want to SEE this myself on the TV screen.
Then, they can have all the friends they want and I'll be happy as a pig in shoes!
Not every minute of every episode of course, but please I want to hear and see this before the friggin' series ends!
For me, S4 was when I felt that the writers' desire for epic drama, and almost brotherly conflict, got in the way of good character development and portrayal for Sam and Dean. I still enjoy the performances the Js give in every episode and, on the whole, I've still found lots of stories to enjoy in every season, but I'm still hoping beyond hope that the brothers' relationship will get back to one where they comfort and love each other.
I'm glad you like subtlety, I can appreciate it too, except the show only does it for Sam. We've had two entire episodes dealing with the goodness and tragedy of Benny. We were immediately shown that Castiel is being manipulated and controlled by the new angels, because God Forbid! that anyone think badly of Cas EVER again. We have seen the sad plight of a teen aged werewolf. We have had a long discussion of how hard it is to be married to a serial killing 2,000 year old man. We have Dean going on and on about how Sam betrayed him and bringing back every hurt that he has ever felt and telling us repeatedly that Benny is better than Sam. We even get to see how hard it was for Dean in Purgatory. But Sam, Sam gets subtle or let's face it no investigation whatsoever. We know that Sam ran. We know that Sam says his world imploded, but Dear Lord, lets not allow us to see what Sam went through, Sam has to get subtle and unexplained. Sam has to look as though he doesn't care about Dean and his life is never shown. We don't see Sam mourn because that isn't subtle enough. We see Sam recovered enough to start a life with Amelia, but NOTHING about his suffering because Sam is less important than Benny and Cas and Kate and Aztec wife and Garth and really everybody this season. You want subtle, I want anvils, bigger than the ones Fred Jones created with his mind. I want Sam to speak and I want to see Sam's pain and what led him to his decisions.
Quote:This is the big issue for me. Season four decimated Sam's character and IMHO it has never recovered and frankly, the writers never even tried to redeem Sam. Oh they had him jump in the Cage, but to this day all posters talk about is how Sam didn't apologize to Dean enough and HOW DARE Sam even suggest that maybe Dean's actions in season four affected Sam and he reacted by going to Ruby. This season started by having Sam commit the greatest crime in the world of Supernatural, he didn't even look for Dean. No real reason why, the excuses he gave(I thought you were dead I was alone, I didn't have anyone) have been shown to be false as Garth and Martin and everybody under the sun keep showing up to prove that Sam had plenty of resources. And Dean and Sam have both come back from the dead so many times that assuming Dean was dead makes Sam an idiot, because they won't even show us WHY Sam thought Dean was dead.
Again, I have had enough subtle with Sam to last a lifetime. Let Dean get subtle or Cas or even Benny. I want the full scoop and the writers refusal to give it is ruining the show for me.
Also, I know many fans who felt that Dean's story didn't get enough attention in S4. We got bits and pieces, but they thought (and I did too, to an extent) that Hell should have had a more demonstrable effect on a character. In many ways I think Dean's post-Hell experience is comparable to Sam's-post-wall-break experience. Many fans felt like we got bits and pieces, but not enough. And I can appreciate that. I even agree, to an extent. But I'm not bitter about it.
Quote:Regarding the secondary and guest characters thing - where would the show be without them? I like Benny - good or evil, he's a great character on the show - that's just my opinion. I find him interesting and he's played by a talented actor. I like Castiel too, but I have frustrations because I think his character has been so stretched that he no longer fits in a believable way. I hated what S7 turned Cas into, and I don't think his character can recover from that in my eyes. If I could have traded Castiel with Bobby in S7 I would have. Regardless, I think having more characters for the boys to interact with is a thousand times better than how it was in S7, where it was just Sam and Dean riding around in a car depressed all the time because everybody was dead and they had no friends. More characters spices things up. Makes it interesting. And helps us see different facets of the brothers we wouldn't otherwise.
As for your desired "anvils" - okay. I get it. You want more than what you are getting. :) But at the same time should we discredit what we DO get, just because it isn't exactly what we might have wanted? Can you honestly say - speaking from a point of reason - that we've seen NOTHING that depicts Sam's suffering or explains his mindset?
Quote:As for Sam being less important than Benny and Cas and Kate and Garth and Aztec wife - these characters are not in every episode. Sam is. We see Garth maybe 2 episodes a season. And Cas in what, 2-3 out of 9? And Benny - he's just a part of the season, like it or not, but he doesn't have the same screentime as Sam. I'd say a large chunk of time has gone to Sam flashbacks - the problem is, some people aren't interested in those flashbacks because of what they entail. I can understand that. But it's not that Sam is less important.
Quote:Oh the posters. Ever hear the phrase "haters gonna hate"? If Sam jumping in the Pit to save the world wasn't enough to redeem him, then obviously nothing is going to be good enough for these posters. So why let them rile you? What matters is - do YOU think Sam jumping in the Pit was enough to redeem him of any S4 wrongs - or that he even had anything to redeem himself of?
I think jumping in the Pit was more than enough. I think anyone who thinks otherwise either doesn't get it or is being deliberately obtuse. All that to say - I think Sam's character "recovered" the moment he jumped in that Cage. And no one can convince me otherwise.
Quote:I think this is missing the point. Because really - Garth? Sam never really had a relationship with him, and his perception was that he was pretty bumbling - which is pretty much true - Garth is a loveable hunter who tends to "stumble" onto the truth. Martin? He was still in the looney bin at the time. So that doesn't count. Sheriff Mills? She's not a hunter, and Sam wouldn't drag a civilian into that life. Other hunters? Many would likely still remember him as the one who started the Apocalypse. Everyone else was dead. And the point of it is - all those people? Sam wasn't close to any of them - not like he was with Dean and Bobby. So to me, it's a believable assertion.
Quote:Assuming Dean was dead does not make Sam an idiot, IMO, just because they've come back from the dead so many times. If anything, all it means Sam should've just waited around for the inevitable phone call because Dean would have eventually been plucked out of where-ever he was. Which...he was. As for showing us why Sam thought Dean was dead...well...h e did vanish in an explosion of Leviathan goo. And Crowley suggested as much.
Dean obviously still has issues with Sam but that's an ongoing issue/problem with Dean's character, not Sam's.
My Hubs, who is the youngest of four brothers, watches SPN and enjoys the show but he doesn't get involved in any of the -- lets say, detailed analysis that we fans do -- so his take on it is very interesting to me and I use it as a sounding board for moderation.
I asked him if he thought the show was painting Sam as 'wrong' and Dean as 'right.' He doesn't. He said basically that Dean is acting like the big brother. Hubs saw it as Dean thinking he's right -- whether he is or not remains to be seen. According to Hubs, Sam didn't do anything wrong. In fact, he thought the phone thing was a 'real dick move' and that Sam would be fully justified if he hauled off and clocked Dean one when he sees him again.
Hubs doesn't think Sam is an idiot. He thinks that the brother interaction is "so natural (a depiction of a younger and older brother), I don't even question it."
I'm with you on not liking Sam's s/l , Percy, but if Hub's take as a causual viewer is any indication, you don't have to worry that Show is FUBARing Sam. I dunno, it kinda made me feel better to talk to Hubs about it, so I thought I'd share.
It is really hard for an eldest to not do that. In our cases we live in three different countries now - and we get along with each other just fine
Sam has always known that he has to put up with Dean making decisions and being controlling because Dean literally can't help it. And anyway Sam is stubborn, Dean knows he can't win sometimes.
Brothers! Sheesh!
Dean tends toward being judgemental and 'my way or the highway' and his reason for trusting Benny is basically 'because I said so'. Its frustrating for Sam and frustrating for Dean. Its not really about being 'right' or 'wrong' on the particulars of a given situation.
Each has been deeply hurt by the other. Neither knows what to do about it. And every disagreement brings it all back up to the surface.
She hates Amelia and is not enjoying this season. In fact, she's only watched a couple of episodes. She's not as devoted as me so she's turned off the show. That said, she loves Bobby and Castiel, but doesn't care about KT or his mother. She doesn't think the "Sam doesn't look for Dean story" makes sense. Basically, she's not interested in watching a show w/the brothers constantly at odds.
A lot of people aren't liking the writing for Sam. You can find their comments on other boards, etc. Some people like the season. Some don't. I haven't found too many that are enjoying Sam's character assassination.
IMO, Sam was trashed in S4. That said, I think Kripke had him redeem himself, and I never started hating Sam b/c of his S4 actions. But those who never really liked him started hating him b/c of Season 4, and that has NEVER changed. There is a large number of viewers out there who hate Sam. That's just a fact. They may not frequent this site (or know how to temper their comments when posting on this site), but Sam hate exists. Those who view Sam as a selish person who has never loved Dean as much as Dean has loved him can view Carver's version of Sam as perpetuating that belief!
I love Sam. I hate his storyline AND the way he's being written. Unlike some, I can't get what I need for this story from a couple of lines of dialogue - "my world imploded" "I ran" "we're just two messed up people who found each other." That's fine and good, but I need to see evidence of that so I can get involved/invest ed in the story. Having Sam say these things but not showing them is not, IMO, helping Sam's story. The audience needs to sympathize w/Sam, esp. since - for this show - he did the unthinkable and inexcusable by NOT searching for Dean. For that reason, we desperately needs his POV. I sincerely hope Carver doesn't think Sam's time w/Amelia is accomplishing this b/c it isn't. I want to see how Sam's world imploded and what he felt. I want to know why he ran. I don't want to be told in vague terms what happened. Sam's story is weak. The actual storyline itself is weak, and the execution is weak!
At this point, all I see is a Sam who didn't bother to investigate his brother's disappearance. I see no real reason why he made this decision. That's still a mystery that may or may not be answered. For all I know, Carver feels he has provided a satisfactory answer, and for you, that may be the case; it isn't for me.
I see a Sam who seemed rather nonchalant about Dean's return. Could that reunion hug have been more unemotional and disconnected? You want me to believe that Sam thought Dean was dead, but then you direct such a unemotional, routine, bad hug btw the brothers. Okay . . . .
I see a Sam who seems rather inconvenienced by his "dead" brother's return. He doesn't seem happy that Dean's alive, and he doesn't want to hang around Dean. I see a Sam gently hinting that his resurrected brother should hunt alone or w/someone else b/c he'd rather not be bothered. What's that about? And I'm not trying to say Sam has to hunt if that's what Dean wants, but again, I just want a story. If Sam is going to be so miserable while hunting w/Dean, I'd rather not see him do it.
I see a Sam constantly daydreaming about a rather boring, uninteresting woman w/whom he had a very dispassionate, unengaging relationship.
I see a Sam who seems irrationally upset with his brother's vegetarian vampire friend. Mind you, this is the same guy who has consistently touted since S1 that not all monsters are evil and that he and his brother shouldn't just kill everything they see, so what exactly is his beef w/Benny? Why does Sam even care about Benny? It's not like Benny's in the backseat of the Impala or rolling w/them. If he were, I would understand Sam's obsession w/him. Sam met the guy once. Benny is not bothering them. It makes Sam seem petty and jealous, IMO. If there are other reasons such as some of the ones others have posted or speculated, I wish Carver would just have Sam state his problems w/Benny. Because I honestly don't see ANY reason why Sam should care this much about Benny. I just don't see it.
I see a guy who very rudely leaves a mentally unstable person in the woods w/no transportation or info on why he just got stranded. That was just straight rude, and I really don't believe Sam wouldn't say something to Martin. Sam is not a jerk so why have him act like one. I'm not saying the boys can don't jerky things b/c they can; I just think leaving Martin in the woods was OTT douchey!
I see a Sam who, again, after having already committed to hunting a few seasons back, suddenly and w/o explanation, hate hunting and wants a normal life. Why? Dean's "death?" Fine . . . explain it then! Write some dialogue for Sam. Give him a POV b/c he's sorely lacking it.
What's most important is I don't see Sam Winchester! He showed up in the episode when Cas returned, but he went away again. I don't know or understand this "Sam" that Carver has created. I don't think I like this "Sam" that Carved has created, but I can't even say that b/c I haven't been permitted into his headspace. I just want to see Sam again.
No matter how much Carver assassinates Sam, I will always love the real Sam Winchester, but I won't hesitate to complain about the hack job they're doing w/his character this year. Honestly, it's making the show very unenjoyable for me. I only watch out of habit and a genuine curiosity to see how the Winchester story ends. Maybe, Kripke can return for the last season of the show or give the showrunner some input.
You've made it very clear here and in many other threads that you don't like the Sam S/L storyline.
Your sister agrees, with you? Great. If she hasn't watched the whole season, then she's even more casual a viewer than my Hubs.
He's enjoying the season, it doesn't strike him that Sam is OOC, he's indifferent to the Amelia s/l (which I really dislike) and he's interested to see what happens next. He's kinda infuriating in a way. But he helps me temper my reactions and reminds me that my reading of the episode isn't the only way to 'see' it. This makes the show more enjoyable for me, even when I don't particularly care for something.
I will always love Sam Winchester too. I'm pretty sure I don't agree with your definition of the 'real Sam Winchester' though.
In my view, the "real Sam Winchester" would always look for his brother. Short of a mental breakdown, curse, or spell, I will never believe that Sam wouldn't have investigated Dean's disappearance as he as in the past.
So, unless that is retconned or adequately explained, I will always have a problem w/Carver and this season's version of Sam.
However, I can spin scenarios where Sam would not look for his brother -- but not having a place to start? Is not an adequate reason nor, to me, a believable one.
I guess the difference between us on this topic is that I can accept that he didn't look for Dean without feeling that the character has been ruined or maligned. I honestly do not believe that it is the intent of the writers to malign Sam or present him in an unsympathetic light.
My main problem with Sam's storyline is that its boring me. Its not telling me what I want to know about Sam and it skipped over the part I most wanted to see -- which was picking up exactly where S7 left off.
I also hate the fact that they hooked him up with Amelia. I also came to this show because of the brothers. If I wanted a show with a love interest, I can watch any other show presently on TV. I also find him having a serious relationship with a woman very very strange given his history with women. His relationship with Jess, Ruby, Madison all ended in disasters for the women (and the world in one case). He is aware of what happened to the women he slept with as soulless Sam and the fate that came to them. He also would have children that would still be part of the Cain/Abel bloodline. Why would he not run a thousand miles before bringing some of that to another woman or their children?
I also hate the face that when Dean went to hell, he hooked up with Ruby and now, when Dean goes to purgatory, he hooks up with another woman. Can't say I appreciate the pattern.
Also not liking that Cas keeps showing up again to save the day.
That said, I am still a fan of this show - I haven't liked all the seasons as much as others or all the shows as much as others but I'm in it until the end (which is hopefully not for a long time). I also appreciate having a venue to chat with other fans and a place to vent is nice too!
Whether we think that Sam not looking for Dean is OOC or not, it's certainly a departure for the character and looks unsympathetic on the surface. That's why I think we absolutely had to see the immediate aftermath of Dean's disappearance, and how Sam became convinced that Dean was dead. "You were gone and I ran" , "my world imploded and I ran", "you saved me", is all woefully inadequate.
I can't say that I was looking forward to a relationship story for Sam, but I was looking forward to him opening up to someone, so we could know what he thinks. However, we didn't get anything out of those flashbacks. The ONE time Amelia asked Sam if he wanted to talk about Dean, the scene ended before Sam started talking! We didn't see a love story, or even a story of two damaged people finding solace with each other in the wake of loss. What we were shown is a series of events telling us what happened: how they met, that they moved in together, that the husband is alive. There was very little dialogue between the two, no tenderness, no touching, not even a freaking love scene!
And then there's the Benny conflict, which IMO, has been tilted completely to Dean's perspective. We get this elaborate back story for the character and are shown exactly why Dean trusts him. Sam doesn't, but is given very little dialogue to explain himself. "He's a vampire", "You killed Amy", "Us trusting monsters hasn't ended well". That's about it, and again, completely insufficient. Sam required much better dialogue (why not talk about Ruby and how she tricked him?) to counter the extremely sympathetic way Benny has been portrayed.
I read somewhere a blogger's opinion where she felt that Dean is over explained and Sam is under explained, and I feel that way too. Sam doesn't get dialogue, he gets bullet points, 2-3 word answers that cannot possibly explain his thought processes or his issues. He's the one that has made the most questionable decisions over the years, and yet Sam is given the least character development. I don't understand why.
I'm mostly disappointed in the fact that JC said Sam and Dean would be more proactive this season and so far I haven't seen that, still seems like they're reacting to everything to me. I would have liked them to be more involved with the mythology instead of having that be the minor characters storyline.
I like Sam's arc this season, I like Amelia and I like the potential that Sam may have something outside of Dean for a a change. Do hope she sticks around for a long time and I hope Sam gets to add to his universe a bit more like Dean has. I so wanted him to get to keep Riot, maybe he should get his own car then he can have Riot along with him? But yeah hoping the Amelia thing works aout so that Sam has something to work towards when the hell gates are finally closed.
Dean's story started out more promising. He was more ruthless, he was twitchy, he looked on edge. What happened to that? After the second episode all of that disappeared and he seemed fine. Huh? Did purgatory change him at all?
Castiel, in the two episodes he's featured heavily in, has had more exploration than either of the brothers. We know why he stayed in purgatory, how he feels about heaven, and we know there is a mystery about the angels and him.
And then we have Benny. Before the season started the writers were talking about how Dean made this friend in Purgatory who was going to be a dark character who was going to keep us guessing. And then they devoted an entire episode to him and his story that made it clear that he is a good and sympathetic character. The only one who doesn't know that is Sam because Dean hasn't told him anything . So when Sam has trouble trusting Dean about Benny the audience already knows the outcome. What is the purpose of stacking the deck against Sam and his point of view like that?
It simply doesn't make sense to me that Sam and Dean wouldn't talk about these things. Dean told Sam in one episode that he wouldn't understand about Purgatory. Come on. How many times can the writers play that card? Of course he would understand. And he would understand about Benny if Dean talked to him about it. And Dean would understand about Amelia. Remember Lisa and Ben? I just think the conflict feels very manufactured and much less a true reflection of the characters we have gotten to know over the past 7 years.
Sam lost everything and ran. Sam left hunting because he has always wanted to. Sam had no idea where to look for Dean. Sam met a girl and fell in love. Sam thinks other people (Kevin) are not his responsibility and other hunters will take care of problems.
All of these, taken at face value make Sam seem selfish and a jerk.
Now, there could very well be real reasons for what Sam did. If the viewers were given these real reasons then we could understand Sam better. We would get why he made the choices he did.
Sadly, we've been given nothing. I think the flashbacks were suppose to do this, but they are poorly written with nearly zero exposition, and total zero tension. There is no evidence as to why Sam would want to even date Amelia.
(season five "Free to Be" Sam dated that girl because she insisted he did, but at least she didn't put him down first to try to get him to date her)
I think the writers may have waited too long to explain Sam.
Also Dean only ever said he was miserable without Sam, drinking and what not when Sam was in the cage. We never actually saw anything but him shacked up with Lisa and Ben moving on with his life, hanging out with his friend and I think there was a reference to him making a Halloween costume for Ben. We all took him on his word that he had been miserable, so why not Sam when he says his world imploded? I've seen more evidence of Sam being sad and lost without Dean than I saw Dean miserable without Sam while he was in the cage.
So perhaps all of the fault lies in how Amelia is portreyed. She is incredibly unlikable. She yells at Sam for hitting a dog. Have you seen how poor Kermit Texas is? I bet there are a lot of stray dogs. She would have been greatful he brought the dog to her right away, not angry that he accidently hit it! Like you can control for that?
Then she picks on his clothes? Really, that's all the writers can give us?
We never hear any deep conversations, never see her do something to redeem her earlier bitchiness, never see much affection either.
It's empty. Sam's story is empty and all that is left is this guy who seems like a jerk.
Look, I LOVED season 4 Sam. Why? Because he was decisive, and although woefully misguided, he thought he was doing everything for Dean. This character is flawed and that's beautiful. But his life is so empty now, his struggles are so banal.
The issue I have with Sam is that he didn't need to find out what happened to Dean. One possibility is that he died, but it's not the only one and given what the Winchesters have been through, not the most likely one. In Time After Time, Sam did not assume Dean was dead. He kept digging. Why not this time, especially as Dean disappeared with Castiel, so he has a pretty formidable ally with him?
If I knew why Sam didn't have to know what happened to Dean, the rest of the story would follow a lot more naturally. I don't see it as mature that Sam decided not to look; I see it as out of character without more information given. A flashback on this would have been very nice.
The issue I have with Sam is that he didn't need to find out what happened to Dean. One possibility is that he died, but it's not the only one and given what the Winchesters have been through, not the most likely one. In Time After Time, Sam did not assume Dean was dead. He kept digging. Why not this time, especially as Dean disappeared with Castiel, so he has a pretty formidable ally with him?
that's just it though. in time after time, sam witnessed dean running towards chronos and just vanishing. it wasn't an explosion. he simply disappeared before his eyes. there really was no reason for sam to think his brother had died.
in sotf, the goal was to kill dick roman. when dean stabbed dick roman in the neck the whole room began to tremble. there was an actual blast and both dean and cas disappeared, as well as dick roman. there was no reason for sam not to believe his brother in that blast, cas as well for that matter. the very fact that cas was gone too and neither came back, seemed to seal the deal for sam that he was utterly and truly alone. he'd lost everyone.
i'm of the belief that there is more sam story to tell. i have a feeling we'll get the truth when we come back from hellatus.
this last eppy seemed to be the set up for the big confrontation that the boys need to have. it's during this confrontation that i believe we'll find out what actually happened with sam that nite he left the lab til the moment he hit the dog.
there's two unaccounted for sam months....that' s a long time and i don't think he just spent that time driving.
jmo of course.
The rest I agree with in the sense that we were told Dean looked although never shown and I do think not having Sam look is a misjudgement but it fitted in with the story they wanted to tell and create the seeds of the discourse we see now between the brothers.
One of the issues I have with Sam's year is the accusation he allowed innocents to be harmed because he wasnt hunting and that is a gross unfair statement considering the same happened when Dean was not hunting .
I guess what I'm saying is innocent people dies when both gave up hunting, Sam isnt any more responsible for those deaths than Dean was. Its massively unfair to say he was. People have argued constantly that Dean is not responsible for everyone while arguing that Sam is/should be? Really?
I think Dean was surprised Sam decided not to hunt because he had a responsibility to Kevin Tran and he had no pre-existing relationship or promise to honour to interfere. He just drifted until he hit the dog.
Now frankly I'm with Sam on this. There are other hunters out there. The only big bad that Sam might have had a leg up on were the Leviathans, but there has been NO indication that they were a problem. There is a time when someone has done enough. Some of the first responders at the 911 site are probably eligible to retire now. Should they be guilted into not retiring because they have the most experience dealing with huge tragedies? I personally don't think so. At some point people have the right to decide that they have reached their limit. My only problem is the lame idea that Sam never looked for Dean. It may be that this is just what Carver wants and will never change, but it will always be OOC to me. But walking away after everything Sam has done and sacrificed to save the world is fine by me and Dean pulling the guilt trip of you must save the world doesn't impress me.
I think it makes sense that Dean would be astonished and not happily so that Sam would lump Kevin Tran in with the people he has no responsibility to, as he and Sam brought this 17 year old kid into the mess. I think Sam ended up thinking the same, so Dean and Sam aren't that far apart on that aspect of the guilt trip.
I think Dean's abandonment issues are in play with his issue with Sam leaving hunting as a whole, and that is his problem to sort out, not Sam's. But he also thinks Sam will change his mind on whether hunting is worth it for him. He's biding his time on the hunting. The underlying issue that keeps popping up with Dean is his feeling that by not looking for him, Sam left him for dead. That's where the guilt trip is. Dean was surprised Sam wasn't hunting, but he wasn't hurt until he asked Sam if he'd left hunting after he'd looked for him.
But that actually only proves, that Benny is NOT Dean´s brother.
Sam: I told you not to look for me.
Dean: "OF COURSE I looked for you!"
I also have a problem with what appears to be Sam did not look for Dean (I STILL have hope there is more to it, and he did look, or something), but there is no guilt trip here.
Plus, Sam screwed up. Now he is doing what he can to fix that. It accomplishes nothing for Dean to keep letting Sam know that he is LESS. I'm not saying it's not human, but to say that it isn't a guilt trip or that it is productive is something I just don't see.
I like all of your comments and we are both obviously passionate about SPN. I thought Dean was really hurt Sam did not look for him. If I factor in the fact Sam also quit hunting all together, then a "guilt trip" is accurate. I would also say Dean has been passive-aggress ive, which those two things are closely related. I don't think they were ready to have a conversation (or longer conversation) about how hurt Dean was. The first part of the season Dean was very PTSD and did not want to talk much at all. Neither did Sam. And these brother's history is not one to share and tell until things are on the verge of punches. I think needling Sam is very human nature. Productive, no, but human nature and consistent with these characters history. We start to see some improvement in "A Little Slice Of Kevin," but all that is out the window after "Citizen Fang." I don't feel this new fight is created just to cause drama. With the way things are a year after of being apart, and the quick revels of Sam's year off, they agian have a lot of stuff to work out. This on top of hunting and trying to close the gates of Hell........
I have had this same feeling at this point in the season several times and have been happily surprised (or at least relieved) by every season but last season. I loved most of S7 as individual episodes, but the season story arc and especially characters arcs fell flat for me. So I'm still a little reluctant to ooze praise, but I have lots of hope.
I still need more of Sam's POV (which I've heard we're getting) and a explanation for his behavior that makes me believe it. That makes me go "OH YES, that makes perfect sense" or even "OH NO, poor Sam, what he's gone through." Something that feels like Sammy. Then I will be shouting HALLELUJAH Jeremy Carver!
I'll wager there isnt actually more to tell regarding Sam's storyline, I think the Amelia storyline will basically be over in episode 10 (though I wouldnt put it past the writers to do a lame Lisa/Ben type pop up for her later in the season) and I think Sam will conced he was wrong and go back to just being hunter/reaserch guy.
I see Sam and Dean falling back into their old pattern by episode 11 once they just decide to deal with the bigger picture and stow their crap. Also expecting Dean to tell Sam that 'one of them should be happy' off course it wont mean much since Sam will have accepted hunting as his future again.
Quote:No, I don't want the series to be over. Millions of people are still enjoying it, and the fact that I'm not doesn't mean that a show should go off the air. There are hundreds of shows I don't watch and there are many that I did watch at one time and gave up on. I have no desire for any of those to be cancelled because others are enjoying them. That doesn't change the fact that I view the destruction of the relationship between Sam and Dean to have reached a place where I find it very hard to believe that it can realistically be repaired.
But I have seen portrayed this year is an extremely toxic relationship for BOTH brothers, which is what I said. Sam's personality is one that leaves Dean feeling insecure, unloved and constantly betrayed. You can say that this only started with Ruby, but it was there from season one, where Dean believed that Sam wanting a life that made him happy was abandoning Dean. Sam has hurt Dean and betrayed him, but he did everything he could to mitigate the damage and to save the world. Sam is independent and Dean has tremendous trouble with that. In order for Sam to be what Dean needs, he has to change who he is and that isn't fair. Dean really doesn't let go of hurts. Some people can't. But for Sam to have to live knowing that all his mistakes will never be forgiven isn't fair either. I know Dean has TRIED to forgive Sam, but that isn't his nature and I can't ask Dean to change who he is any more than I can ask Sam to.
Currently we have Sam hunting when he doesn't want to and Dean wanting to hunt with a brother he doesn't trust. That seems to be the least safe option available. For years I have argued with people who thought the show would be better if Sam were just written out. I still disagree, but season 8 and Carver has convinced me that Sam and Dean may love each other, but that their personalities are so divergent that they only make each other miserable and that they can not be happy relying on and constantly being in the presence of each other. Dean has FOUND better brothers in Benny and in Cas. Sam has no one else, but does not need to live a life with someone who is unable to forgive his failures. No one should live with that pressure.
Quote:I am not trying to convince you or anyone else, this is what I believe and we do disagree. Yes they have done wonderful things for each other and tried to prove themselves, but at this time, all Dean sees is the pain Sam has caused him. Frankly, I have very little idea what Sam sees with Dean because, yet again, Sam's thought process is very shrouded. We have seen Sam's actions, but had very little insight into why. There are those who believe that Sam doesn't trust in Benny because he is jealous and resentful that basically he is willing to murder an innocent vampire for petty reasons. To me, this is totally evil intent, others disagree. There are those, like me, who say Sam is trying to make certain Dean doesn't make the same mistake he did with Ruby. Who knows, Sam is silent on his feelings and all we have are Dean's beliefs being openly stated.
Both Sam and Dean are being passive/aggress ive. It's probably a response to being raised by John who was pretty much "it's my way or the highway". Sam fought openly with John, but as he has failed Dean he has become less confrontative and more passive/aggress ive. He hits at Dean with any hunter worth his salt would watch Benny and Dean hits back with all my relationships have gone to crap. That is not a healthy way to live, but they keep tiptoeing around each other, afraid or unwilling to be upfront with their grievances.
I have loved this show for a long time. The fact that I am still posting and arguing my points means I am still engaged enough that I have some faint hope that the story will move to a place where I can enjoy it. That in spite of my beliefs, the writers will pull this off and I will believe that Sam and Dean can build a healthy, strong relationship. When I stop making posts like this, when I start posting only to answer factual questions, or stop posting altogether, then I will have given up on Supernatural. I am trying to hold on and see if the writers plan will take the show and the relationships to a place that I will enjoy. Right now, this is an effort for me, but I am still holding on. If the story does not go in a way I like, I will leave, but that IN NO WAY means that I want the show cancelled, only that I no longer enjoy it.
ANd I must admit, I enjoy season 8. Yes, it´s painfull in times, but I see the road, they travel, I see that there IS a road... and it makes me just look forward to see, where it will take them.
I´m looking forward to the moment, they find each other again.
I agree with percysowner.I am just tired of waiting for Sam's POV.Just this once I thought we will get Sam's story first..but no even this time I have to wait for Sam's story.They can give whatever story they decide to Sam and Dean but I am just frustrated that Sam's story will be (maybe) told in the second half.I wanted to be sure not guessing whether Sam is jealous of Benny or It's because of his experience with Ruby or both...but I have to wait again..If the payoff is going to be not equal to the wait then it is going to be disappointing.
But Dean has been damaged in my eyes as well. If I'm exaggerating and somehow Dean discovers that Sam did do something to save Dean, or Sam did have a breakdown that prevented him from functioning and Dean says, "I finally understand and forgive and trust you," my reaction will be "Yeah, until the next time Sam disappoints you and then you will find another "better Brother" and bring back all of Sam's flaws,". Because Carver has convinced me that NOTHING that Sam can do will appease Dean and that Dean, at heart, is unable to let go of his grievances toward Sam. I never believed it before, but Carver has me believing it now and I don't know how to back away from what is established canon.
If jumping into the Cage to save the world, if risking insanity and death by facing his Cage memories to make sure Dean isn't alone isn't enough redemption in Dean's eyes to let go of Sam's wrongs, then nothing is and Sam might as well give up right now.
Quote:This is one of the things that doesn't ring emotionally true in all this. It isn't as if Hell is an abstraction to Dean. Wouldn't it be enough for Dean to resent Sam just for not looking? Did they really need to have him rake up the past?
As to Sam not being in a place where he can lead, I can make the same argument that Dean, who has just returned for a constant combat situation is also not in a frame of mind to lead. They should be in a place where they share leadership, but Dean isn't able to do that at this time.
Being cruel is being cruel. Also, if Benny is such a good friend and Dean is assuming that Sam hasn't already killed Benny, wouldn't it be better to get Benny with Dean and then make it clear to Sam that Sam will have to go through Dean to kill Benny? I trust you don't think that Sam would kill Dean or allow Martin to kill Dean just to get to Benny. Dean had options that didn't involve crushing Sam emotionally.
Disclaimer: I did not like Amy, I would have killed her. I really believe much of the backlash against her is because Jewel Staite was SO GOOD as Amy--but GOOD at being the sweet misunderstood monster. I didn't believe her as reformed. She was killing "bad people" but they were still people. It was for her son? Her son's life is not above those of "bad people." It's like she was Dexter...Anyway , Sam was in the middle of his wall/visions, so his mental state was way off. Comparing Amy and Benny in this situation is Apples and Oranges. BUT, if we have Apples and Apples, yes, I would support Sam tricking Dean to save Amy, if Amy was really good, as Benny is. And never did I say Benny was the only criteria to consider--Dean was saving Sam from Benny too--Dean knew if there was a confrontation, there was an excellent chance the result would be a dead Sam. Dean getting Sam out of town took any confrontation between S and B away, both would be safe from each other.
Point 2, I think having a "conversation" with Benny&Dean and Sam would have been a ticking bomb about to go off. Martin had just knocked Dean out earlier so he and Sam could kill Benny. Sam was in no mind to "hear" anything Dean would say about Benny. Dean is correct in saying Benny needs to get out and hide very very low. "Making it clear to Sam" was not going to happen that night. Voilence was a much clearer outcome of any three-way talk.
Point 3: If Dean did have options that did not "crush Sam" (I don't think he was crushed. Pissed yes, crushed no), hosting a three-way meeting with Benny and Sam was not one of them. I will say again, voilence would probably be the result of that meeting. And the ridiculous comment about Dean killing Sam or Sam allow Martin to kill Dean to get to Benny, I don't know where that came from, and don't understand it. It's so ridiculous I don't know how to answer it, other than to say if Dean has 1 bullet in a gun and has to kill Sam or Benny, Benny would be dead before Sam could blink. Dean would not even have to think about it.
I know right now with Benny he is the sympathetic vampire but Sam's statement to Dean 'your too close' was a fair one and Dean has told him the same .I didnt find Sam to be gung ho and illogical in his view and he certainly wasnt going to allow Martin to be either. The thing is if this had been another vampire would Sam of been seen has wrong , the killings were happening in and around Benny , the evidence didnt clear him and the suspicions were not out of place.
I understand Dean was determind to protect Benny and he came up with the text and used it when he needed to , and yes Sam was angry but seeing him at the end he had been hit in the face by a emotional wallop .
If Dean had not set out from the begining to keep Benny and Sam apart after all Sam is not unknown to accept good monsters and had told Sam this is the vampire that helped me and brought them together then relations prehaps would'nt of got this bad and now that seems impossible .
I was one who thought Amy should have been given a chance to prove that she would not kill again, but the show didn't go with that assumption, having Sam agree that Dean was right to kill her. The biggest argument was that she had killed recently and even though she had been abstinent for years, once she returned there were no second chances. Now we have a very similar situation with Benny and what we hear is "Martin deserved it". Sorry, but if you say Amy killing to save her family wasn't justification enough to let her live, then Benny killing to save his family isn't justification enough to live. Benny is fast and strong and could have incapacitated Martin. Then Liz calls the sheriff and tells him that Martin attacked her claiming "Roy" was some sort of monster, a vampire. Since the world believes the fictions about vampires, all Benny has to do is stroll into the sunlight for the sheriff and he's home clear. Once the sheriff discovers that Martin has been institutionaliz ed for mental issues, Benny is home free. He didn't have to kill Martin. The standards applied to Amy should be applied to Benny.
DEAN made the a monster gets cut a break until he kills someone, for any reason. He set them up, he gets to live by them. If Amy and the Rugaru and Kate are on permanent probation with the condition being "don't kill humans" then Benny's probation terms should be the same.
For example, if Amy had killed a man because she got jumped in a back alley by a murderous thug on the way home from work, Dean would not have thought that a reason to kill her. Amy killing humans for food, on the other hand, is an expression of her basic nature and Dean takes that as meaning she cannot control her need to hunt humans as prey.
Amy tried very hard to control her hunting, but eating carrion was not healthy for her or her son, which we saw as only recently hunted food would do to get him better. When push came to shove, she was a kitsune and humans were food. Dean's call was that push would inevitably come to shove again, because carrion would never be enough to keep Amy and her son healthy. So she would kill again.
With Benny, killing Martin was something Dean or Sam would also have done if they had been the ones to try rescuing Elizabeth and Martin was off the deep end and willing to hurt or kill her. Benny didn't kill Martin for food; it wasn't an expression of his vampire nature.
However, if Benny, having tasted blood again, does start hunting again, then Dean will have to kill him if he is going to stay true to his past decisions. Dean has warned Benny of this many times now.
You're correct that show has deliberately left the details of Martin's death ambiguous, and that may play out later. That doesn't change the fact that Martin orchestrated this situation--he was an active threat to Benny and Elizabeth. He held an innocent against her will, terrorized her, and used her as leverage in order to kill. Show has been pretty clear that this sort of behavior, using civilians without their knowledge and/or consent, is contemptible and has meted out death as punishment before.
I think you could almost draw parallels between Amy and Martin here. They both instigated the violence/death that lead to their own demise, they both thought nothing of using civilian strangers for their own means, and both were punished for their actions.
Benny has AT THE MOST, and only if we take his word for it, lived without killing people for one year before he was killed and however months since Dean brought him back, but hey! Dean likes him so he MUST be okay and Sam MUST NEVER doubt Dean's word.
It's the double standard I hate. And I am going to continue to hate it even as I realize that Dean always being right is the mindset of the writers and much of fandom.
Again, if Dean's crime was not trusting Sam's judgment, I'd say Sam's in the same boat now. Sam had caught Amy killing within hours of the act, so by that standard, yes, Benny's months of abstaining should seem more trustworthy. And no, it's not necessarily about Dean--it's about the fact that Sam was willing to give his 'friend' a pass while being ready to condemn Benny without the redhanded proof he had with Amy. Sam and Dean are both employing double standards. If it's wrong for Dean to do so, it's also wrong for Sam. But Dean did apologize for the way the Amy issue went down, and it doesn't seem to be acknowledged here. It was as much as an apology as Sam gave in 5.1, so I'm not sure why it's not considered adequate.
But if Sam has to kill Benny because he's killed and Sam had proof, I don't think Dean would really consider that wrong, and I'm not sure the audience would. Then again, people still argue Amy's right to live despite her being a murder, so maybe not. Judging stories, plots, characters, etc, based upon fandom's (perceived) wrong reactions seems like odd criteria to me, though. YMMV.
Those two have done things for each other and in the name of family, that are beyond bad here and there....
But that´s ok?
And a mother killing murderers and drug dealers so safe her child´s life (within the supernatural universe of course) is not forgivable? Because she was born "other"?
But Sam is other too...
I don´t say, Amy was a harmless soccer mom.
But the whole thing is alot more morally ambigious, than you seem to think.
And Dean didn´t kill her, because she was bad. He didn´t even call her a monster.
He was talking about "people" when talking to her. Not monsters.
And Dean was in no way in any stable place mentally.
He didn´t kill her, because she was a monster, he killed her, because he didn´t trust her.
Because he had huge problems trusting anyone "since Cas"
That´s it.
Dean and Sam both knew the reason why Amy did what she did. But did she have the right to decide who was worthy of living in human society and who wasn't? We saw one drug dealer and one man stumbling to his car, and to me, the last one is very iffy on whether that's justifiable. We didn't see the others at all. So all we have is some begging for their life that they were all totally bad and she'd never do it again. That's not the same as knowing Sam all his life, his personality, his history, etc. Amy was a threat, and as it turned out, Sam wasn't.
I don't think Dean gave Sam as pass because he was human and Amy wasn't (Sam has always been the one more likely to view himself as other). I think it was because he knew Sam was not a killer and wouldn't have done anything like this if he'd been in control. Amy was in control, and she knew what she was doing. There was nothing to find out with her.
I have to agree to disagree, because to me it isn't that morally ambiguous. Amy was a monster, and just because Dean didn't say monster doesn't mean that wasn't part of the reason. We didn't see Dean become a viligante killer gunning down regular murderers and whatnot. He killed a monster who was killing and whom they had no reason to trust wouldn't do so again.
Dean's issues may have played a hand, but that doesn't mean that Amy wasn't an unrepentant killer who should have answered for her crimes.
In the end Dean did what he did , he decided that neither Sam's judgement and the promise he made were applicable and killed Amy it cant be undone . Benny is in a different position and has had a far more sympathetic pov and storytelling it is naturally easy to look at him in that way.
And I would love to see that change acknowledged, by him acknowledging Amy and perhaps... yes.. it hadn´t been right
For Sam, not everything is about Dean, and for Dean, not everything is about Sam. Sometimes they take actions because they think it's the right thing to do. That's why they're heroes.
That's my point--if it's wrong for Dean to go behind Sam's back, it's equally wrong for Dean to do the same. You did it first is childish.
Again, if you're in vindictive mode, I can't join you. Sorry.
We know for a fact Amy killed innocent people the very day Sam caught her. We know no such thing about Benny. But my point stands--someone 's going to argue either way, so it's not much worth worrying about.
Then again whole problem would never have popped up in the first place if Amy had just killed Sam when they were kids, if she had killed him or let her mother kill him because they were trying to protect each other/their family from a hunter then they wouldnt have been doing anything wrong. It probably would have been better for Sam to have died then too but such was his luck he got to live.
Amy was not a character as drawn out as Benny. We know Benny is good, we didn't get the full picture of Amy.
You can't compare Amy killing and Benny killing: Amy was killing selfishly, she was taking the idea one above the many. She thought killing many was OK to save her (one) son. The needs of one do not outweigh the needs of many. If it was her son's time, it was his time. There was no justification for her to kill, no matter how bad you feel for her. Benny was defending a crazy man from killing a human.
I saw a recent episode of Walking Dead where a human character said something like this. "In trying to survive and stay away from the awful zombies, I forgot how awful humans can be to each other." Kind of makes sense in SPN world too, some of the humans are worse than any of the demons.
I just hope Benny never disappoints any of you and that view you have of him .
We don't know that he didn't kill those two people. We don't know that the other vampire was setting him up. We just know that Benny said so.
Benny's only actual deed that seems to be entirely selfless was when he was going to allow Martin to kill him... but it was Martin who ended up dead. So we (apparently) know that Benny will do anything for family (including killing creepy customers?) and apparently Benny is Elizabeth's grandfather. Though I will say that that is the first thing that he has said that is verifiable...
It isn't that I am convinced that Benny is a bad guy, I just don't think we have convincing evidence that he is a good guy.
And we have no evidence at all that he doesn't have ulterior motives for helping Dean, even if everything else he has said about himself is true.
We don't see him kill in Citizen Fang, but we also don't see Desmond kill. We are not even privy to exactly what happened with Martin. We do know when Sam asked if there were any casualties that Dean answered Martin was one and when Sam asked was it Benny, Dean said yes but Martin deserved it. That means that either it is true that Benny killed Martin and Liz told the truth or that Liz or someone else killed Martin and we do not have the whole story.
I was one who bought the Ruby is basically on the side of stopping the Apocalypse, and she was shown doing a lot more positive things for Sam and Dean than Benny has been. I'm holding off judging. I want Benny to be bad, but I am reluctantly admitting that yes, in fact, Benny is the best vampire ever to exist. He could have given lessons to Lenore and would have withstood Eve without breaking a sweat.
This has purposely been set up by the writers to be a similar situation as the Amy thing with a dash of the Ruby thing thrown in imo. The writers are trying to highlight how Dean has changed which means the situations have to be similar/the same.
Benny was defending a human life. Martin being "bad" is as irrelevant as it is in Amy's situation. Same point: Benny goes to court because he killed Martin. There isn't a jury in the country that would convict him. Martin was going to kill a human, and/or Benny too, Benny acted in self defense. Actually he would not even have charges brought up against him.
What would stop him, to kill her too, after you were dead?
If only to stop her to bring charges against you?
Could you have been sure enough of him not killing her, to take that risk?
Sam's mental state was off. I have watched that episode so many times, as it was so polarizing to the fans. In fact, his mental state was off most of last season. His visions were more or less everyday. Yes he could "control" what he knew was real and what was a vision, but his wall broke, and we know from Season 6 how bad the ramifications would be. Sam as we know ended up in the mental house before Cas removed the visions for good...We can't make statements about Amy enjoying the killing or say she didnt want to, because we did not know enought about her, as we have a fairly full picture of Benny and how he IS good. I think Amy deserved to die and was fooling everyone with her "poor me" routine, so agree to disagree on her.
"You're too close" is not the same with Amy and Benny. In fact these characters should not be compared. Benny is already been shown to be good. Sure Dean IS close, but we as viewers know Benny is good, Dean knows he is good, but Sam does not know enough about Benny to make an accurate call. So in this case, when saying "You're too close," Sam is actually wrong. Sam was right to think Benny was guilty, all signs pointed to that, but again the reality is Benny was not guilty. Sam had already made clear he was not going to be quick to accept Benny, so Dean was right to handle the situation the way he did. Having Sam and Benny together, with Dean there, to "talk things out" or something like that would not have been pretty.
In this episode the meeting would of been pointless of course but my point was it wasnt at first when Dean lied and kept Benny hidden . Sam didnt create this situation if Dean went that path then he cant expect Sam to just accept his word . Sam saying 'your too close' was fair regardless of wether Sam knows Benny inside out the fact is Dean is close to Benny and when the evidence did implicate Benny then that comment was fair. But I am not naive as to where Sam's pov stands in the show and where both Dean and Benny stand.
But clearly we are coming from different pov's here so we will have to agree to disagree
I like your comments, and do see where you are coming from, but:
You do remember Sam was institutionaliz ed because of his visions? And Amy was killed shortly after Sam SHOT AT Dean because of the visions. Sam was not in the right frame of mind, and Dean REALLY did not think Sammy was all there at the time.
As far as Amy is concerned, I am 100% stealing this from GERRY above, who explains how I feel better than I can myself. I agree wtih the below....
"For example, if Amy had killed a man because she got jumped in a back alley by a murderous thug on the way home from work, Dean would not have thought that a reason to kill her. Amy killing humans for food, on the other hand, is an expression of her basic nature and Dean takes that as meaning she cannot control her need to hunt humans as prey.
Amy tried very hard to control her hunting, but eating carrion was not healthy for her or her son, which we saw as only recently hunted food would do to get him better. When push came to shove, she was a kitsune and humans were food. Dean's call was that push would inevitably come to shove again, because carrion would never be enough to keep Amy and her son healthy. So she would kill again. "
"With Benny, killing Martin was something Dean or Sam would also have done if they had been the ones to try rescuing Elizabeth and Martin was off the deep end and willing to hurt or kill her. Benny didn't kill Martin for food; it wasn't an expression of his vampire nature. "
I agree to disagree :)
She didn't kill because she couldn't help it / it was in her nature. She killed to get something for her son. If she hadn't a sick son she would not have killed people for herself.
What she did was the equivalent of holding up a pharmacy and killing the clerk because she couldn't afford the drugs to make her son healthy. Since it is premeditated it is somewhat worse than simply following her nature.
She should have been handed over to human authorities, it wasn't up to a hunter to kill her.
However, because her son was eating brains, that is monster behavior. Skinwalkers torturing and killing people is a monsterous behavior, but stealing people's appearance is monster behavior. You can't separate one from the other, as it's all fruit from the poisoned tree, so to speak. Like a skinwalker, the authorities are ill-equipped, to say the least, to deal with someone like Amy. Hunters like the Winchesters have been making decisions like this in order to save future victims and to bring justice to past victims for the whole of the series. Why should Amy be different?
(as an aside it seems that all shapeshifters are psycopathic or at least crazy as part of their nature so I would suggest that everything they do is monster behaviour)
I guess it is at the heart of the show. When is a monster a person and when is a person a monster? What is the difference? And who gets to decide?
The reason I mention Amy is that if, because she is a kitsune and for whatever reason she kills someone it is ok for a hunter to kill her, then if Benny killed Martin - even in self-defence - he is fundamentally a monster and therefore a hunter is not only entitled, but obliged, to kill him.
And I really don't like that premise at all. It is too black and white (and scary).
So move back to 'for whatever reason' What's a good reason, or a bad reason? What should the punishment be? And again who gets to decide?
Sometimes what the hunters do they have to do for the good of the whole community, but sometimes it's ambiguous, as with Amy - not because she didn't need to be stopped or punished, she did - but because it possibly wasn't their decision to make.
And yes 'the human authorities can't control this creature' definitely comes down on the side of when a hunter should act. But (for example) Amy didn't seem to have much in the way of other powers?
This whole line of thought may be putting way too much weight on the shoulders of our little show - but they started it!
Contrast that with Amy. She didn't kill out of self-defense, defense of others from an active threat, or a sense of justice. She judged her son worth more than humans and acted. She showed no remorse for her victims or any sign that she wouldn't murder again if she felt justified. So I don't think it's accurate to say she was judged guilty because she killed for "whatever reason"--she murdered at least 4 strangers without conscience. She proved that she posed a danger to others given the right circumstances. I never felt like there was any ambiguity there, so her death wasn't an arbitrary decision based on 'because she was a monster' or 'because we felt like it.' She was a murderer who couldn't be trusted due to the obvious ease she had in stalking and killing humans she deemed unworthy.
So to me, the reason for the deaths very much factors into the judgment over whether a monster should live or die.
As for judgment, hunters can and do have to make judgments all the time for the overall good, as does society as a whole. If it's not a hunter's job to judge a monster, then whose is it, in terms of the show's universe? Since there is no monster jail, there aren't many ways that hunter can choose to deal with dangerous and/or murderous monsters, which Amy was. Human prison wouldn't have worked for her, because without access to cadavars Dean and Sam would have been condemning women prisoners to death or Amy to slow starvation. I can't see how that would be preferable.
And you're right we might be putting more thought into this than show did, given how the arc played out, but if we had to have the Amy plotline inflicted upon us I would have preferred that they had given it this much consideration.
The Amy story was a flop and I can't see it coming back. However, if it does I would want not being vindictive story. I hope Sam and Dean find her son, starving, alone and desperate. I hope Sam tells Dean that he is leaving with Amy's child to find a way to help the boy survive without killing people and that Dean should stay the frell away from both of them, because Dean has done enough damage. The Sam finds a nice Kitsune family who are running a funeral parlor, or being coroners and they agree to integrate Amy's child into a safe and non killing lifestyle. Then Sam tells Dean that he is not discussing it, that he will NEVER tell Dean where Amy's son is and that Dean can go pound sand.
Then I want Dean to find out that Benny had already turned Liz before Martin came to town and that Benny's instincts overtook his good intentions and led to 2 people and Martin being killed because Dean didn't take any precautions. Because vindictive is coming back and also the huge need I have for Sam to be 100% right for once in his life.
And yes, I know it will never happen. Dean will remain perfect and always make the right choices, Sam will remain the scapegoat.
Anyway, I can't see any plotline with Sam trying to help Amy's son, primarily because he never entered into the discussion. Sam was mad because Amy was his 'friend' and because dean went behind his back, but Amy's son never rated a mention. There's no sign that Sam gave or now gives him a thought. Anyway, if Amy's son isn't killing and has a reliable source of food, I don't see why Dean would try to argue with Sam.
I can't identify with your need to be vindictive, so I'll leave you to it. Again, though, the Dean is always right and Sam is always wrong idea is hyperbolic, but if that's what gets you through, enjoy.
Amy's son was eleven and left with no relatives. Yes Dean asked if he had somewhere to go, but on the off chance that Dean decided that if he didn't Dean would take him out the way he did Amy, I'm not surprised the kid said yes. Dean also asked if he had killed anyone and I'm going with the idea that Amy's son was smart enough to say no for survival's sake
Amy's son is young and alone and will get hungry. He can't get a job in a mortuary. He will probably end up in children's services and they have no idea how to feed a Kitsune. By killing Amy and not her son, Dean has left a child who has no other way to survive except killing. With Amy there was an extremely good chance she would impart her values of killing people isn't necessary to her son, now he can only go by instinct. Dean left in place someone who has every reason to kill more people than Amy ever did.
The most important thing is that Dean is the YED to Amy's son. He's not Azazel, in as much as he has no plan to use Amy's son in the future. Dean is the monster that came into the boy's home, murdered his mother and left him with nothing.
And before you ask, did I want Dean to kill him? He couldn't because doing so would have made his actions much harder if not impossible to defend. But as far as I know death by starvation is a really bad way to go, being abandoned with no support system is horrible for children. Dean set that situation up for Amy's child because in the end, Dean considered him a monster and not worthy of a first thought, let alone a second one. What he did to Amy's son was evil.
Just to clarify, my mother died (of a heart attack) when I was eleven on Christmas day while I watched. This time of year is NOT the time to get me into a discussion of how killing a mother in front of her child is a sparkly, wonderful thing that should just be brushed off or justified.
That's always going to be the problem with monsters who are obligate human-o-vores.
It's easier in the case of vamps, because donor blood is more easily accessible than dead brains, and if worse comes to worse, they can always drink animal blood.
We dont know wether her son would of got sick again at all there is no reason to believe he would, the other child comment again its all just conjecture . But anyway the issue in some respects wasnt the killing of Amy but how Dean acted.
That's a big problem, when there are situations where they'll need live flesh, situations where they may not have access to even dead flesh, etc. If they could supplement with animal tissue, maybe she could've lived. But they can't. They're not a monster that is well-suited to surviving among humans, in that way. And so in a world that is dominated by their sole prey source, the predator is probably going to die out, because the prey aren't going to suffer themselves to be picked off whenever the predator has need. It's just not in our nature.
Amy wasn´t a case of right or wrong.
Or, as Dean stated:
"I went with my gut. I didn´t trust her. I have had trouble trusting anyone, since Cas."
This wasn´t even really about Amy.
That was about an irrational need to remove a potential threat for a weakened Sam.
The conversation, Dean has with Amy is very telling. Something isn´t right with Dean here and it has alot to do with Cas.
Look, how he isn´t calling her a monster. He´s talking about people, humans.
DEAN:
I know. I know. But people... They are who they are. No matter how hard you try, you are what you are. You will kill again.
AMY:
I won't. I swear.
DEAN:
Trust me, I'm an expert. Maybe in a year, maybe ten. But eventually, the other shoe will drop. It always does.
In a way it was just cold blooded murder. Amy had no way of defending herself. And it´s a mirror of the Benny storyline.
Benny is Amy coming back to bite Dean in the ass.
Complete, with the distrust from Deans brother and everything.
In The Mentalist, Sam said, Dean did the right thing. But Sam was weakened, distracted and battling hallucinations.
He hasn´t let that one go. Not by a long shot. And he´s right not to.
In Southern Comfort, Dean said, he never betrayed Sam, but that´s frankly not true... and I´m sure Dean knows it. Only the sepctre doesn´t care and Dean doesn´t remember anything he said.
Going behind Sam´s back, after telling him, he trusts him and his judgement and implies, he will let her live?
I really want to see Dean apologize for that one.
Maybe he was right, maybe she would have killed again, after all, Sam found her, when she was stalking her next victim, but he had no right to do that.
Not without seeing, if she would kill again. Oh wait, it wouldn´t have mattered. As he said, it didn´t matter, ten years, or 20... she would kill again. He was convinced of it, just because, he didn´t trust her.
And contrary to Benny, Amy was pretty much a civilian, she was so no match for Dean, it was painful.
But in SC Dean said, people could change. And call it wishful thinking, perhaps, looking back, he sees, what he has done and acknowledges it.
We don't tend to judge monsters as completely defenseless, and I doubt Amy's victims would classify her as such. She was overmatched, but then we could say that about some of the other monsters Dean and Sam have killed. She wasn't a civilian--she was a monster who murdered people. Being caught unaware doesn't change that. Killing monsters that seem overmatched doesn't make Sam and Dean murderers when they remove a threat that is killing humans.
Dean was wrong to go behind Sam's back. But since I've been told re: S4 that specific apologies aren't necessary for the boys' actions, I don't think Dean should be expected to give more of an apology/explana tion than he already has. It seems that if he does change his mindset, some will just see Dean as a hypocrite, so there's not really a way to win there, is there? Plus, if Benny turns bad it will just reinforce Dean's mindset that all monsters eventually go bad and we'll end up right back where we started. I can't see a gain there storywise.
I dont expect Benny to turn out wrong and havent from the begining I dont think the writers have gone out of their way to have this character look sympathetic to then pull the rug out from underneath him or the audience but having said that the fact is Sam is presented in a way where it isnt hard to conclude he is wrong and will be wrong.
The Benny factor for Dean can prove to be positive but it will not be for Sam .
Do I believe it's hyperbolic that Dean is always right? not really because the show does come very close to that ideal.
I have to agree with Leah here. I don't wish for Sam's death any more than I wish for Dean's, so I'm afraid I don't understand where you're coming from. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree on this front.
She had one chance. Sam knew she was a monster the fateful afternoon he spent with her as a teenager. He behaved aggressively in face of that, but decided to spare her because of her actions against her mother. So she did have a chance, and she did kill using it.
I think that people are holding Amy up as a person with rights and whatnot, so that means she has to face the responsibility for her actions likea person. But if she's not human and has a feeding pattern that is inherently deadly to humans, like vampires, she has to be held to a higher standard.
I don't think anyone could argue that Amy's son deserved to see her die. I don't understand why Benny has to be tied to Amy so tightly, honestly. Just because Sam sees them as equivalent doesn't necessarily make them so, especially in terms of their views of human life. Benny chose to reject taking human lives, and Amy rationalized her killings and feels no remorse for them. I don't think I'll see them as similar until show has Benny murder humans in the present time, just as Amy did. Obviously, mileage varies.
Benny has murdered in past that is enough for him to be killed.Just because someone killed when they were 29 does not mean they will not face justice when they are 60.If Amy was not given a chance to proove her statement why should Benny be? Because Dean trusts him? Sam's trust was not enough then and Dean's is not enough now.If Sam was suffering from hellucinations Dean has PTSD however unconvincingly they have shown it in both the cases.
I will tell you my thoughts exactly.I don't want Benny to be good.If the one time Sam is distrustful of a monster and it turns out to be good and is allowed to live, I am going to be livid.And if Sam's character is sacrificed for that then well livid to the power of infinity.
Amy murderered without remorse with her chance (even if it took time for that to occur) and that is why she had to die. Benny has murdered in the past, but chose to stop out of respect for the girl he loved and because she helped him start viewing humanity as valuable again (by what we know now). Lenore also took this path, and Sam fervently believed she shouldn't die and helped convinced Dean of that. That's the difference between Amy and Benny. Sam's view really doesn't enter into it for Dean, as I'm sure for Sam Dean doesn't enter into his decision making about Benny, of course, as they both termed that the other was too close to make the right call. That's not even subtext in canon--it's outright text.
If you don't want Benny to be good, that's fine. Everybody's got a right for the story to go the way they'd prefer. I don't see it as really being related to Sam or Dean being right or wrong, as it's Benny's choice what he does. Show has taken the time to establish him as an independent character, so to me, his actions will reflect his right- or wrongness, not the Winchesters. Mileage varies, naturally.
I never meant to insult you. If you took my comments that way, I apologize. I do respect your comments and passion for SPN. Insult is a word I never want to be associated with. Going forward I will check myslef before I wreck myself. :)
I didn't censor your comment as you noticed. All I did was remind you to be respectful. Your opinion is valid. Just try to approach disagreement with a more constructive tone. Thank you.
I never want to be associated with the word insult, so going forward I will be very aware of my tone before I click SEND on a response. I apologized to anonymousN, and also anyone else here in the very BEST Supernatural website, that took my comments as mean or any other negative way.
Granted, i don´t have a great-granddaug hter.
Only a little brother.
But I would never risk his life on the assumption, some crazy guy, who threatened and injured him, would just let him go, because all he wanted, was my death, because of what I am.
I wouldn´t risk his life at all. Period.
Someone threatens him like that, I would just nuke them.
All we need to do now, is decide, is Benny more like you, or more like me
Who was eating the human parts is immaterial--Amy was the murderer, not the child. Sam made the same judgment when Amy and he were children--he chose to let Amy go after she killed her mother, the actual murderer. He chose to give a child a chance, just as Dean did. What the child does with that choice is up to him, just as it was up to Amy. If the Winchesters or some other hunter catches him killing, I'm sure he will be killed the same as Amy was when it was discovered he used his chance to kill people.
I really don't know what they serve at juvie, but I think it's fairly certain that pituitary glands are not part of their daily offerings.
Yes, Amy's child has a hard road ahead--just as Amy did after she killed her primary food source in her mother and ended up on her own. We are to believe that she managed without killing anyone until her son took ill. Amy had a chance and apparently was able to live clean until that point, so why is it unfair to assume that her son could do the same?
As for jail and juvie--you don't have to convince me. i never advocated for the jailing of either Amy or her child. I didn't think turning Amy over to the human authorities was a viable option as an adult, nor did I think it when Amy was a child. Therefore, it isn't a viable option for her child either. So in that, we agree, it seems.
I would not be "one sided " If Dean sees all the cases individually.bu t he does not IMO.I don't know about open minded but it is simply not fair.He does not respect Sam's decisions but expects the same from Sam.If Sam does not he is wrong.This is where I go "no, just no".
He wants Sam to trust him but is reluctant to trust Sam enough to meet Benny.The more Dean blames Sam the more I don't feel for Dean.
For the record - I had no issues w/Dean killing Amy and thought he should have killed the kid too. I di think it was wrong of Dean to lie to Sam and deceive him, but that's another story.
I wanted to make a (n amateurish) comment about the philosophy of killing monsters. I realised very quickly that Law and Order: Monsters wasn't really what I was going for.
But your discussion is interesting
To those folks who are saying that Jared should be killed off or quit so that he could go to another show where he will "happy or "appreciated"- what?? By all accounts Jared loves making this show. Loves his co-stars. Loves his crew. I have never even heard a whisper about any unhappiness on his part. Why, if you love Jared, would you want him to leave all that just because YOU are unhappy with the show? These are your issues, not Jared's. How could anyone presume to know what is best for his career? This show is one of the best EVER, I am sure he appreciates that and is proud to be a part of it.
There is also the reality that BOTH Jensen and Jared want more down time. That means shooting them in separate parts of the episodes more than in the past. With Carver having Dean's betrayal issues resurface and Sam's need for normalcy resurface, we can't even have an equal partnership dividing the duties of a hunt and coming together to decide on a course of action. This conflict has torn at the basic belief that the brothers have had for each other in the past IMHO. So at some point the show has to "pick a story" to get the focus and frankly, Dean is more popular than Sam and Jensen is more popular than Jared. So, although I do not want Sam written out, Sam is the one more likely to have a diminished role in the mythology and more importantly in the POV. I REALLY don't want to see Sam having to be wrong, wrong, wrong yet again. I simply thing that at this time Sam is being written as disposable especially as Dean gathers "better" brothers and allies.
I know Sam will not be written out. Jared seems to be happy and he has a family to support and a steady job in a field that has a 95% unemployment rate. I want him to stay on as long as he feels it is in his best interest. I'm simply expressing the fact that as it stands at the end of episode 9, I don't see a way to reunite the brothers that I can believe in. So FOR ME, all I see is a resolution that accentuates the fact that Sam is wrong and not truly needed.
My feelings are that Robert Singer had a huge say in how S8 should pan out, and Sam is put on the back burner, while Dean is front and center, even his flashbacks are more gripping and palpable from a neutral POV!
The way Sam's story is written and directed is just not convincing to me. I don't know what it should do with my feelings, should I trust what I see, is there more than meet the eye? Is Sam happy or not? How can Sam even be happy again after all? Is he faking normal? Does he really want out? Why does he want out? What reason gave Sam why he didn't look for Dean? I missed it or it was hinted, I have no idea, but Sam said to Dean "I said why I didn't look for you" in 1 of the episodes (don't know which one)!
I don't see Sam in a good place in the show. From the moment I heard JC takes over SPN I was very happy (of course remembering his strong episodes), and hoped for equality regarding the brothers. I even watched his version of "Being Human" (a few episodes) and found equal POV first and was happy, I thought this seems like a good foreshadowing! But later I found that I missed something and it was when the werewolf was brought to the fight scene by his friend he lived together (the vampire risked the life of his room mate, I thought wow, their relationship is actually good, but they risk the other without personal fallout, its like I shouldn't feel sorry for the werewolf [like I shouldn't feel sorry for Sam in SPN] I missed that there was no backlash at the vampire for risking the werewolfs life...and this is practically what is important to me when I watch SPN with the brothers "once" so unique bond)
I even wrote letters to all of the responsible of the show that for me the relationship/dy namÃc between Sam and Dean is the core/heart of show. I wanted for tptb to bring that back. I asked if Dean does regret to ever have thrown the amulet away, I asked for the rock music and the impala, the 2 brothers on the road. What I got is indeed the relationship in the center but they are drifting away from each other, Dean has almost countless better brothers/buddie s and they behave like little children, not adult men! Both of them. I can't feel their bond anymore, to much anger, hurt, disappointment, resentment, betrayals in the open! From the past I should know how Sam would react and now I don't...giving me the details of Sam's year like this is unsatisfying and puts Sam in a bad light..not Dean although I think Dean is acting like a (includ a word of your own). And now I hear about a love triangle in SPN, and it is about Sam, Amelia and Don I only can think WTF is this? If someone here is in a love triangle it is certainly Dean with his two BFF! They can't do that to Sam Winchester. A love triangle? Hell NO!
Now I think that Eric Kripke did indeed know his protagonist Sam the best, and even in the darkest hours of Sam Winchester I could feel him, know him and escort him on his way in the darkness and out of the darkness...In retrospective I give Sera Gamble a positive shoutout about S6 and PARTS of S7. She still managed to give me something about the brothers where I saw them...caring. Dean more out of responsibility (his place in the family) and Sam because of his love for his brother (6.22.. this was the last tribute to Sam Winchester from EK himself). Since JC took over I am not sure what he is up to, I have no trust right now only a little hope is left that it will be all explained in a way that I am able to go with!
And what I miss the most is a solid Sam POV! I don't know how I can relate to him, I don't know if his FB's are what they showed us, I didn't know if they were even real (Amelia) till episode 9 I really don't know what to make of Sam's story. I think all of the issues around Sam are culminating in the lack of Sam's POV, in the lack of a sympathetic approach of Sam's time in this past year. I don't know if I should really root for Sam and Amelia or if I should say what's that? Is this a story about Amelia Richardson meeting a weird man, who doesn't fit in normal but wants it desperately...
I find it universe-like OOC for Sam to leave Martin alone in the middle of a hunt. I find it OOC for Sam to hunt Benny down out of need to proof that Dean is wrong! And JC plays with our perception I don't like. He shows us viewers Bennys story, heartbreaking, and we would cheer to let him live. Then comes Sam and tracks him down behind Dean's back. He orders Martin who is just out of the asylum to do this. This is really horrible for me as a viewer, it is a set up for me to see Sam fail ....again After all his atonment for him trusting Ruby. The stone is rolling, the train left the station, Benny might end up killing people and how would we as (normal) viewers see it? Sam's fault! Benny is extraordinary different to Ruby, we see his history, we see how he feels, how he cares, for his family, for Dean, there is nothing I can say speaks against him. Only Sam might think, Benny is bad news!
I don't think we get a repeat of Ruby regarding Benny. Even if it would turn out that he has a hidden agenda, (I don't believe it), this time it would be Dean with the trusting a monster not Sam. He would finally understand Sam better when he trusted Ruby! But we already saw that Ruby and Benny are different plots!
Why are people bitter and nonetheless still watch the show? Because they love (d) the relationship of the brothers, acted by Jared and Jensen, and they are caring for the brothers! But I am hugely disappointed especially with the kind of Sam's story is told...or is NOT told.
I am SO fed up with mystery Sam and mainPOV Dean. I hoped for a difference in story telling regarding the brothers. And sadly I know people who love the show, stopped already watching. One friend of mine (via internet) said after the last episode aired "I am done". She loves the brothers but leans towards Sam!
Things like Sam said for example "You had Benny" sounds really weird and immature to me. And I also don't get why Dean has not forgiven Sam since I thought that this was the case in the episode at Rufus grave! And Dean repeating the "better brother" thing does hurt a lot, from the mainPOV character it is automatically a death blow to the character of Sam. That's it! If Sam's POV would have been in the open from the start and he did look for Dean and found out he is dead, then...then it would be okay if he thought "Dean is in heaven and I try to move on". Laying out a solid story for Sam and then letting Dean be the mysterious one, we wouldn't know where he stands now..and Sam trying to bring him back from the brink!
Now it seems that Dean is tired of Sam, although he said he would like to drive with him and hunting, but the rest of all this episodes is weariness and lashing out...at Sam... and Sam didn't look for Dean and we don't know why..or...I don't know why. Maybe you all know why... I am not! They give us only some sentences of Sam like "I lost my brother..Dean" or "You saved me" or "My world imploded and I ran" or his sad looks! GREAT! No not great ...to little explained, I would like to see it with my eyes, showing me Sam's story and getting more than just a few sentences. Then I have to make it up by my own, because RS said "Sam is the more sensitive!" or JC says "It's about perception" or "Sam's story is a human story"
I think Sam's story is lacking something huge and important, especially that Sam the human, the person gets interaction with people who appreciate him and if this girlfriend storyline is all of Sam's story I want it actually that it feels real and I can count on it and I understand why Sam is at this point and how Sam came from point A in S7E23 in the lab to point C in S8E1 hitting the dog! I want to know what he thought what happened with his brother and why he didn't look for Dean. It's the same lack of acknowedging Sam's part of the story as in S4. But in S4 I could feel the brothers caring and connection, I could feel Sam!
Sorry, this is long and maybe not easy to read because of my reasons and because of my english! I hope my points came across and nobody feels offended! I wanted to explain, why I still post although I am so disappointed, its that a little hope is left, and that I am to much attached and my connection into the brothers relationship IS Sam (although the riddle wrapped inside an enigma wrapped around a taco), I am so much attached that I retired already a lot from twitter, I can't say much positive things right now and it is what it is! This is not like any other show I just stop watching because I am bored, I am attached because of their history....the brothers history! Sometimes I would like to rip it out of my heart but I still can't....
My second problem is that he's bringing back the angel / demon crap. I've hated the angels since they came on in season 4 because to me they've changed the show from being about the brothers and the famil business to being about the angels and demons. This has made the Winchester brothers support characters in their own show. Additionally, how can humans even fight against these supernatural beings who are so powerful? I would much rather he returned the show to what it was before. I've pretty much lost interest in SPN due to this.
I agree to the angels, they killed the real family story...and now theangels are brought back. To much powers, I don't know what to believe or not, its not that I can be sure about anybody, not even Sam and Dean. The angels brought a difference to SPN, it took to much focus from the brothers and wonder oh wonder, people COMPLAINED about Sam's powers but are impressed with the angel powers. Why is this? The relationship is indeed more in the backseat alone because of the angels in SPN! The demons were more personal for me and the core of the show was still palpable! IMO!
Then add the fact that Dean had absolutely no qualms about doing what every Angel and demon has done to Sam: Manipulate his emotions and use his love for others against him.
Dean has also lost the people he loved so him being able to and thinking nothing off using Sams lossess against him ..... its an intolerable act of cruelty....one especially heinous becasue Dean supposedly cares about Sam.
Its one think when an enemy does it: You almost expect it....but when an ally,,,when family does it...
Its betrayal.
I hope to God the writers actually have the courage to let Sam tell Dean eactly that.
I hope Sam NEVER trusts Dean with anything personal again. Instead the writers show Samm a little compassion and respect and allow him to delvelop a REAL friendship with someone he can actually trust.
I can't support this 'reloationship' if the writers continue to put Dean on a pedestal and think he can't/doesn't do anything wrong.
Id love it if Sam told Dean how much he hurt him, that he forgives but if they continue to hunt together it will be a working relationship only. They will be hunting partners only. as it oertains to the closing of the Gates of Hell.
Then Sam gets his own car, picks up Riot and he hunts on his own....or he opens up his own bookstore...or he gets a job as a traveleing handyman. Or he and Garth become hunting partners for non mytharc jobs.
I actually agree that what Dean did was a betrayal of Sam but he didn't do it to hurt Sam IMO. Right or wrong he did what he felt was right at the time. The WAY he did it was awful.
I think they both, thru the years, have done things that foster mistrust. I disagree that Sam should never trust Dean again. I WANT them to work at trust again. I don't think it is completely beyond repair as others do.
I do not think Dean is on a pedestal. He has been made to look bad many times. Just review the comments.
I actually agree that what Dean did was a betrayal of Sam but he didn't do it to hurt Sam IMO. Right or wrong he did what he felt was right at the time. The WAY he did it was awful.
The fact that Dean didn't do it to hurt Sam and yet it never crossed his minbd that what he was doing could and WOULD hurt Sam makes it a thousand times worse. Especially with their personal history.
In Sympathy for the Devil Dean told Sam he was the ONE person he counted on to have his back. The one person he trusted. And Sam betrayed that trust. He BROKE that trust.
Well...Dean was the ONE person Sam counted on, the one person he trusted and Dean not only broke that trust and bond but he stomped it to peices and then metaphorically spit in Sam's face.
I do think the writers put Dean oba pedastal...and preferential threatment....b y giving him adn only him the POV...especiall y in the pivotall first half of the season.. BY making sure he is the ONLY one who get (best) friends who are given difinetive whole episodes to show how woinderful and pure and sympathetic they are., Especially when they do it BEFORE Sam gets ANY difinitive insight. By making sure Sam is isolated and friendless adn then trotting out the tired 'he internalizes' trope. Its the writers responsibility to open an internalizing charecotr to the audience. they could have had a charector speak from the other side to tell Sam to talk to someone.
And yes I think the show would exist if what i propsed happened...only difference is Sam would actually have a charector that orbits around him that doesn't fall over themselves to be Deans buddy. And mostly I want Sam tio have a relationship other then Dean...cause honestly? I think Sam having someone else to interact with; be friends with a recurring charecotr like Dean has with Castiel and Benny then I think it could only enhance his relationshio with Dean...if and when they work things out to their mutual benifit,
Right now Sma and Dean are on the outs. Dean has any number of people he can talk too. Castiel...benny ....he can summon Ellen, Jo or Bobby ...they all have rushed from the other side to advise Dean..or talk to a random chick bartender as he is want to do.
Sam? Has literally no one he can talk to...and he ALWAYS haas to work things out alone and we dont even get the benifit of seeing it. That is unless some random demon, Angel or Dean is telling Sam why he is doing something, feels a certain way or thinks something.
Then there is the way his deep relationships have turned out. Jess died in a fire pinned to a ceiling. Madison was a werewolf and Sam had to kill her, Ruby was playing and betraying him and he and Dean killed her. He finds out that he's been followed by demons all his life and many of his "friends" were really simply possessed by demons. Heck, even his meeting Jess was arranged by a demon.
His father tells him he is so worthless that if he doesn't go into the family business then he can walk out and never come back. Later his father orders a hit on Sam if he steps out of line.
Of the people they have known for the same amount of time, Bobby admits he likes Dean better, Ellen comes back from the grave to encourage Dean without a word for Sam. Mary says "sorry [about selling you out] and buggers off. When Krissy calls for help for her father Sam answers and Dean doesn't. Sam finds Krissy's dad, offers himself to the monster so that her dad won't die and then Krissy thanks ONLY Dean. Only Jodie actually seems to like Sam for Sam
Of course there is Dean's unending support:
From Skin
Quote:Simon says Dean under a truth spell
Quote:From Metamorphisis
Quote:Quote:Quote:
Plus all of Dean's lovely comments on how much better a vampire is than Sam.
Wow, now that I've looked at it, I can't IMAGINE why Sam would have trouble trying to cultivate friends. He's has do much luck in that area all his life.
Dean has self esteem issues, but he is an extrovert and finds approaching and working with strangers to be easier than Sam does.
The writers have been making Sam Dean's scapegoat for seven going on eight seasons and I for one am sick of it.
Seasons 1-3 was fairly even with both brothers being involved in the SL and both having a POV. That was the show I fell in love with. What is going on now isn't even an imitation of what the show was. Now Sam is just a plot point to advance Dean's story. Not something I'm interested in watching.
Unfortunately, this is the bitterness thread, so yeah, many of us that are posting are complaining. And YES, most of the people who are truly unhappy with this season are those who think Sam is being thrown under the bus.
Quote:When I first heard that JC was taking over I was happy. He had shown some great insight into Sam in Mystery Spot, one of the few truly Sam centric episodes after season 2. Then I heard that Sam never looked for Dean and I began to get worried. I was determined to stick with the show to the end of the season to let Carver get the story where he wanted it. Unlike some other viewers, I didn't think he had that much repair to do from the Gamble years. I really liked season six and I certainly enjoyed season seven more than this one. At least I could recognize Sam in season seven.
I am completely aware that EVERYONE views shows through their own prism. I'm not saying your opinion is wrong and mine is right. I am saying that I have not seen ANY interest in a Sam POV this season. In fact, I have seen less interest in Sam than I have in a long time. To ME, this season has been fairly consistent in making Sam the "bad guy". Benny is male and hot, so he will most likely get the "Dean is so wonderful that any supernatural being will become good" treatment, the way Cas did. Poor Ruby was just a female and fandom does not react well to females who may have a romantic or sexual interest in Sam or Dean. So that pretty well means Sam is going to have to eat his words, grovel before Dean's superior judgement and lick Benny's boots for having EVER doubted him, even though up until now, a monster killing a hunter for any reason has been a death sentence for the monster.
The writers have spent NINE episodes with Dean repeatedly telling Sam what a crap brother and crap person he is. The only thing we see from Sam is a poorly received romance with Amelia, and a dog. By this time the idea that, yet again, Sam is deficient and bad has been cemented. Benny could murder a town full of people and Dean and fans would say, "If Sam hadn't had Martin check on him, poor loyal Benny would never have killed anyone. It's all Sam's fault.".
In other threads on this board I have seen people remark that they are surprised that Sam fans are so critical of this storyline, while Dean fans are liking it for the first time. Of course this is happening! Certain fans have been calling Sam a bad brother, selfish, cowardly (because he runs away all the time, something I dispute), a bad person for years. And now the writers have validated that. Of course the people who don't like Sam are enjoying him more, they can now hate him and know that the writers intend them to. While Sam fans like me are saying, "No, this isn't really Sam." and having no support from the writers. This is a grand year for anyone who hates Sam and loves Dean and wants Dean to find better brothers than Sam. Heck, the writers have been kind enough to give Dean Benny the better brother and to recement the brotherhood between Dean and Cas (because they shared Purgatory), while leaving Sam as the lesser brother. At this point I expect Dean to tell Sam that ADAM was a better brother, just so Sam doesn't get a swelled head and think he is worth anything.
I thought season four was bad and five only slightly better, but this season is physically PAINFUL for me. I'm holding on in the (probably vain) hope that Sam will get some kind of sympathetic edit or at least a POV that doesn't include getting hunters killed, and Dean being cheered for tormenting Sam mentally, but I am not optimistic.
And frankly, the descriptions of the next episode are totally not helpful.
SPOILERS!!
[spoiler]The adventures of Dean and Cas with a side of the Days of Sam's lives is not what I signed up for.[/spoiler]
So as of now, no I am very unhappy.
Post cage I had hoped we would not travel down this path again and hearing Dean bring those resentments back up , declare Benny is a better brother than you have ever been was not only sad to see but uncomfortable as well.
We all know the writers will give some sort of panacea to the brother's relationship but I wonder wether it has gone too far this time ?.
The last episode I watched, Sam shot Dean. He didn´t only try to, he pulled the trigger. Thrice.
This Episode, Sam will ditch Dean and let him go on a hunt alone, because he wants to go after their father, who explicitly stated, hee wanted the boys out of his hunt, because it´s too dangerous.
And in the next episode, Sam will raise hell and high water, to safe his dying brother's life. No matter the cost.
In my world... They´re not even half as bad right now, as they have been before at several points over the seasons.
They´re just pissed at each other... which is kinda a normal state for them :)
Sam's expressed purpose in hunting again was to find his father and kill the YED. That was not what Dean was doing at that point which is what Sam left to do. Also, when did John tell the boys that it was too dangerous? Maybe I'm just not remembering it right but can't recall him telling them that. He did tell Missouri. Sorry if I'm wrong about that.
Not sure what the last one is. Faith? If so, what do you find wrong with that in reference to my post?
It´s just, they have been fallen out with each other so often and gone through so much pain....
The simple fact, that they have some problems with each other right now, because they have to find a way together again, after their extremely different last year...
Dunno... it barely gets a shrug from me.
Btw. John told Dean, in the phonecall in the beginning.
They've disagreed and fought, but it's always been out of a sense of love. respect and/or caring for the other... Trying to get the other to see their side.
This season it seems all the petty things of the past are coming back. Things they've moved on from and earned forgiveness for. Neither is looking very much like the brother of past seasons here.
Even when at their lowest points (look at the infamous phone call in Lucifer Rising - Dean reached out, and Sam needed to hear a message of forgiveness/und erstanding from him. Damn interfering angels and demons!).... They've both always wanted - and tried for - a bond with the other. This year... until Citizen Fang, where they both tried for a minute, until it all came crashing back down... It's just not been there. imo
It may not "get a shrug" from your perspective, and that's fine. But from mine, the fighting seems contrived, petty, and uncaring... And that's never been characteristics either brother before.
While I'm trying to remain much more positive, I am also afraid that the writers are taking it much too far this year to ever satisfactorily recover. I hope they can pull the rabbit out of the hat and do it.
Yes, Sam shot Dean in Asylum, but I never believed Sam didn't care about Dean. He was simply upset w/Dean (and had been for a long time) for blindly following John's orders. It's b/c Sam respected Dean as a hunter and a man that he thought Dean should be making his own decisions instead of just doing whatever John wanted. Asylum highlighted that Sam was probably always upset w/Dean for never questioning John or taking a stand against him. Even in Sam's accusation that Dean is a pathetic, it's more about Dean not being his "own man" than thinking Dean is actually a pathetic individual. Again, I think Sam had a lot of respect for Dean's intelligence and skills so it was baffling to him why Dean always just "took orders" from John. Sam thought Dean was intelligent and skilled enough to make his own decisions, etc.
In Skin, the shapeshifter voiced some of Dean's concerns re: Sam, John, and Dean's own importance to them, but again, I never felt like Dean was holding things against Sam or that Dean didn't trust Sam. That episode mostly highlighted Dean's low self-esteem issues and how he felt everyone was always going to leave him. I do think Dean resented Sam for leaving for college, but over the course of the season, I feel a lot of those issues were resolved. In Scarecrow, Dean admits to being proud of Sam for standing up against John and even says he wishes he could do the same. Basically, Dean wishes he could risk John's approval (and love) like Sam does, but he can't.
There was a love and a bond underlying all those early season issues. Now, it's different. T
Simply put, back then, I never got the sense that the brothers didn't like each other. This season, I have no idea why they're together. JC has managed the impossible for me - he's made me NOT CARE if Sam and Dean separate. In fact, given the story he's told, I think it would be best for Dean and Sam to go their separate ways since they clearly do not want to be together.
Sam shows little interest in Dean's "resurrection" from the dead and actively doesn't want to hunt. Dean has NO faith or trust in Sam, doesn't think Sam is a good brother, and believes a vampire is a better brother to him than Sam has EVER been yet he still wants Sam by his side. Why? Why does Sam stay? Why does Dean keep Sam w/him? Southern Comfort showed that Dean has never really and truly forgiven Sam for anything. He actually resents Sam for going to college (something most 18-yr. olds do) and for being soulless (something of which Sam had NO control). Sam didn't bother to investigate Dean's disappearance at all and seemed inconvenienced by Dean's return. Why? Why did JC go this horrible route w/the boys?
The writers can't keep picking at this relationship and chipping away at everything that made it special AND think it remains credible for these two GROWN men to be together. If Sam hates hunting so much and wants Amelia, then he needs to leave. If Dean distrusts Sam, resents Sam for every bad choice Sam has made, and thinks Sam is a horrible brother, then he needs to let Sam go. It's not believable anymore. JC has destroyed the bond, and I doubt he'll address all the issues he created for the sole purpose of conflict to make the relationship believable!
What most bugs me is that Sam and Dean were in a good place (with each other) in the second half of S6 and S7. None of this was necessary. None of it was natural and organic to the characters. JC had Sam behave in a OOC way by not looking for Dean so the boys would be in conflict. Why? What purpose does that serve? It certainly hasn't made the show more enjoyable to me. In fact, it has ruined the show. In case JC wasn't aware, the boys were in conflict for 3 1/2 seasons (4-6). There was no need to do it again, IMO.
In season one, I didn't give a hoot and a holler what John wanted. He hadn't talked to Sam IN FOUR YEARS. And John didn't want them out of the hunt because it was too dangerous, he wanted them to keep hunting things that were just as dangerous so he could keep his obsession for finding the YED all to himself. Good Lord, he was sending the boys up against a GOD and AN ENTIRE TOWN protecting that god. The YED was good, but certainly not more dangerous than a god and 30-40 followers. Plus, Meg had already picked up Sam's scent, he was in the hunt for the YED, except he was the hunted and John wasn't protecting him from that.
In season one, the boys had been separated for 2-4 years. They were learning about the men they had become during that time and learning to appreciate each others strengths and reevaluate each others weaknesses. They weren't passive/aggress ively sniping at each other about previous failures. And they weren't manipulating each other by using phoney phone calls to get away from each other. They weren't lying to each other about vampire friends or demon girlfriends. And they weren't bringing up past sins that had already been forgiven.
In season eight, Dean is the poor betrayed brother who, for no reason I can see, wants Sam to be by his side forever, even though he believes that Sam has lied to him ever since he got into the car in season one, who will never forgive Sam for Ruby even though Sam suffered torture for 180 years to avert the end of the world and make amends, and who is willing to use Sam's worst fears, that a woman he cares about is in danger to manipulate him. Sam is hunting because he feels responsible for dropping the ball on Kevin and Dean and because he wants to close the gates of Hell and Dean is dinging him for wanting to leave hunting.
In season eight we have been given a Sam who didn't look for Dean, which many of us see as OOC and whose POV about Dean and hunting have never been shown. All we have seen is how he related to Amelia during the year Dean was missing, which has not been linked to the brotherly relationship nor has it shown why Sam suddenly broke pattern and simply dropped out.
Season eight has years of resentment coming to a boil. Season one had two different men coming to an understanding. The feel and actions are totally different for me.
We see this show through different prisms. I see the boys as so far apart and with so much anger, especially from Dean, that I don't see how they can reconcile and have both be happy. I don't want Sam to totally fold to Dean's desires, but what else is there? Sam doesn't want to hunt. Dean wants Sam by his side hunting until they both get killed by monsters and if by some chance Dean is actually killed, he has made it clear that he won't accept Sam finding a life where he no longer throws himself at monsters and hopes to get out alive. Considering the structure of the show is two brothers on the road hunting, Dean gets to win and Sam gets to give up all his dreams, knowing that Dean considers Sam to unworthy and less than a vampire or an angel that destroyed Sam's mind. And that sucks.
So let's look at The Mentalists. Sam walks off and they don't see each other for a week. Mid-episode we get this conversation.
Quote:So one week after Sam finds out that Dean has been lying to him for months, Dean tells Sam to just get the heck over it, because Dean thinks it's time. But two years later, our time, and FOUR years later in show time Dean is STILL hanging on to being mad at Sam, because apparently Dean gets to feel mad and betrayed as long as he wants, but Sam, he's supposed to snap out of things on Dean's timetable.
And at the end of The Mentalists. This is after Sam has admitted that Dean may have been right to kill Amy.
Quote:Dean doesn't apologize for lying to Sam, instead we are treated to how bad DEAN felt about lying to Sam. Never mind that Dean knew Sam had trouble telling truth from reality and that Dean had promised to be the stone so that Sam could figure out what was real. The only thing that mattered was how Dean was affected by all this. Add this to Ellen reaching out from beyond the grave to reassure a NOT hallucinating Dean that he had it so much worse and should tell someone AND the museum guide making sure Dean knew that the caretakers like Dean are so much MORE IMPORTANT than the other person in the relationship.
I do know that the show doesn't work unless the boys are working together and traveling together. But in order for this to happen, it's looking like Sam is going to have to just forgive Dean for this latest stunt, because Dean will say, hey it's been 24 hours, time to get over it, not because Sam will be given the time to process when he wants to forgive. And Sam will go back knowing that Dean has not and never will forgive him for his transgressions and that whenever Dean needs to yank Sam's chains Dean will bring them up. It's not a health situation and IRL I would want the boys to split because as of now, I can't see how it becomes healthy. For TV, Sam will accept whatever apology Dean has to offer, fandom will accuse Dean of groveling for even daring to say that he ever made a mistake, and if he did he did it because he believed it was right so he shouldn't apologize and things will go back to Dean calling the shots.
Look at John. For Dean he was the perfect father and hunter. He held onto that through most of seasons 1-3. He did admit it was awful that John put having to kill Sam on him, but he pretty much still loved John. And what finally makes him talk against John is finding out about Adam. It's never clear if his anger was because Dean had always pictured John as being faithful to Mary, or if it was because when John found out he had a son he did (what I think) was the right thing. John kept Adam out of hunting and tried to visit him and give him some kind of father figure once or twice a year. But in that episode, Sam states that he understands John and tries to train "Adam" to protect himself. Dean says that Sam is like John. Sam takes it as a compliment and Dean makes it abundantly clear that it isn't a compliment. Suddenly John was a bad person and a bad father and Dean really doesn't waver on that. When they go back in time in TSRTS Dean interacts mostly with Mary, while Sam makes peace with and forgives John in advance. It is not until Dean decides that John was unworthy that Bobby suddenly is presented as a surrogate father to the boys. Sam seems to NOT see Bobby as a father figure. He loves Bobby but the level of family is less between Bobby and Sam than between Bobby and Dean.
Even though Dean still loved and wanted to be Sam in season one he could NOT let go of the fact that Sam wanted to go to college at all and that Sam wanted to stay with Jess and have a different life. Heck, all the way through season five Dean is telling Sam that Sam leaving for college was the worst day of Dean's life. Not when Mary died, not when John died, not when Sam died, not when Dean went to Hell, Sam going to school was the worst thing ever. The second worst was when Sam was so unhappy that he ran away.
I see Dean as an emotional hoarder. He packs away love, hate, good, bad and never ever lets go of any of them. Dean held onto his love for Cassie for years, even though he only knew her 1-2 months. He held onto the dream of Lisa and Ben all through the Apocalypse and beyond. He held onto the dream of finding John and Sam dropping out of college so he could have the life he led when Sam was a kid. His most intense and longest relationship is with Sam and he swings between Sam is good and Sam is a betrayer for much of the series. So his not having forgiven Sam for Ruby and even for college is in character for me. Dean was able to pack away the negatives of Sam leaving him for college until the Ruby betrayal, when he unpacked all those little and big resentments. After Sam's swan dive and resurrection helped Dean put most of the resentments back in the box and then they came out again with Soulless!Sam's actions. Then Dean was able to overlook his unpacked baggage with a fragile and resouled Sam. After Purgatory, Dean found out Sam didn't look for him and IMHO, it's like he looked around, saw all of that baggage that he had been ignoring and latched onto it again, because again Sam had moved into betrayer land.
Benny hasn't had time to do things that Dean will be hurt or angered by. They fought side by side in Purgatory saving each others lives. So Dean is holding onto Benny the good companion just as hard as he is holding onto Sam the betrayer. He has told Benny to keep his nose clean, but he has exhibited ambivalence about what to do about Benny when talking to Sam. It is a reflection of how he felt about Sam after John (Dean's perfect father) told him that at some point Dean might have to kill Sam (Dean's beloved brother). He promised John he would kill Sam, but he did everything in his power to not do it including refusing to see or at least acknowledge the evil that Sam did while possessed.
Dean has been portrayed as seeing things as black or white since season one. Then it was all monsters are evil. He moved toward seeing gray as the years past, but that characteristic was pretty hardwired into his psyche. Now, he is giving some monsters the benefit of the doubt, but his black and white views are shifting over to Sam.
Both Sam and Dean are damaged, complicated men. Sam's mistakes have been epic and they have hurt Dean and the world. I would like to think they could find a balance so that they can rebuild their relationship, but as of now, I'm having trouble seeing a path in that direction. I hope the writers have a better view than I do.
My thoughts on Sam and college is that Dean was always afraid to lose the person he shared the most with since childhood. I think that the night Sam left was tramatic for all concerned, especially Dean, who could only see his little brother leaving, maybe forever. It probably WAS the worst moment, that is what he has always feared the most. He hasn't always expressed that in the most positive way. I also think when Sam ran away, it was on Dean's watch and there was hell to pay by his dad on top of Sam disappearing. Not a good time for Dean indeed. We all saw how John reacted to Dean not watching and protecting Sam at all costs.
Dean's initial reaction to the Adam situation was hurt and some jealousy IMO due to the tough life his dad forced on them. Finding out he took his secret son out to baseball games had to sting hugely. I do think he tried to push past that to help "Adam". I always thought his comments to Sam about being like their dad was about the stubborness and singlemindednes s they both possess.
I'm not saying my thoughts are right, just how I saw it at the time. By the way, percy, I LOVE that last paragraph.
Its not fair to Sam or his fans. That Sam is not seen as his own person...but only how he affects Dean.
I think this isd why I NEED Sam to have his own friends outside of Dean...and certainly not Deans hand me down friends. HIS OWN, Friends that the writers take the same time and effort cultivating the relationship as they do Dean's friends. Adn not the crappy disjointed story telling with Sam and Ameila.
I think the only way there can be a balence is Sam has ONE true friend on this show (outside Dean). ONE friend he can talk to, go to, laugh with. Open up to and feel safe opening up to. And KNOW this friend isn't going to suddnly spring every past transgression in his face on a yearly basis. Or use his knowledge of Sam to manipulate or control him.
I need to see this BEFORE the series ends...cause I want hat the Dean fans are getting with Castiel and Benny. I want to spend time in Sam and his friends relatuionship.. .i want to root for it. I want to see some great scenes between them.
Personally, while I hope Sam and Deans relatinship can be fixed I honestly dont see it happening simply because Carver has explicetly stated that "No one is more a fan of Dean and Castiel then he is." And has never said one thing about Sam
Carver will never adn I dont think he can ever do right by Sam...as a person...as a hunter. he isn't invested in Sam. And he isn't invested in Sam's relationships. The minimal murky work done for Sam and the overwealming clear, detailed landscape for Dean and Castiel is evidence.
I know they invented the Dean POV early in the series as a storytelling device because Sam was the problem -- the mystery to be unraveled -- and they presented the story to us through the eyes of a concerned and apprehensive brother. I'm not sure when this technique became a crutch, though, because it persisted even after the revelations were complete. Gamble relied on inventing new problems for Sam, such as the soullessness and the wall, to keep the dynamic going, but it became a bit threadbare, because the revealed destiny had raised the stakes so high for the characters that the story really demanded a Sam POV be added in processing the fallout. Now that Carver has ostensibly switched things up and awarded Sam the human story, we see just how poorly it works, because after all this time keeping their distance, the writers now truly have difficulty getting inside the head of the character. Sam has a storyline that seems to have been developed in opposition to the story they want to do for Dean: they need Sam's apparent disloyalty to trigger the issues Dean has with black-or-white thinking, especially in the wake of his trip to Purgatory. It doesn't feel organic to Sam, however. It has a weak basis, it's weakly told, and it's alienating. Perhaps it's not only the over reliance on the Dean POV as a storytelling device -- perhaps they also don't readily identify with the intelligent introvert. That problem would hardly be unique on TV. Scriptwriters seem to love the nerdy characters when it comes to advancing the plot, but they don't always understand or trust them in general.
I allso do not like the jared getting off the show too it getting hard to hear too he does this show for his fans and thats it and I say HIS FANS! not the ones that say they love him and then go online and bash sam for this and that.The ones who truly care about sam and like the dean/jensen fans care about him thats all I am saying hear. Why in gods name can't we love them both I know that sam and dean F-up all the time but I kind of try to like them both but its hard too.
Dean told us that Purgatory was a constant pure fight and we got to see that when he met Benny. He said Cas was gone and then we got to see not only what Dean believed happened but what actually happened. We saw the incidents and the context that led to Dean's trusting Benny and to his initial PTSD. The first few minutes after Cas left aren't what shaped Dean into the man who came back, the time with Benny, fighting to find Cas, fighting with Benny and Cas, agreeing to take Benny out of Purgatory because he trusted him, having Cas left behind in Purgatory have all been shown.
Sam's mindset, why he was so panicked about hitting the dog, why he spent time rebuilding the Impala, when he ditched his phones have not been shown. We have been shown where Sam ended up, with Amelia, but not the incidents that got him there. All we have is how Dean has interpreted the limited information that he has on what Sam did. And Dean, as nappi has pointed out, ignored one of Sam's answers completely and when Sam said he had found something he never had before, refused to ask or find out what that was exactly, so we don't know either.
Perhaps other things happened in Purgatory that shaped Dean in ways we don't know yet, and if that is true I would want to see that. But right now Dean's character is consistent with a hunter who finds himself alone and surrounded by monsters, makes a weapon and starts fighting. Sam OTOH made massive life changes and we don't see what led to them at all. More Purgatory would probably be exciting. Sam after Dean disappeared would be explanation and it is an explanation that I really need to see.
i will admit that the first half of this season has been a bit of a disappointment to me. i will admit that i don't like feeling this way. i'm tired of being angry at dean and i'm tired of being confused in regards to sam and amelia. which is a puzzle in and of itself.
so i got to thinking, which is what i do to find the silver lining in the gray cloud, and i got to thinking about perception again. then i came to this conclusion and it got me feeling a little better. and i thought if i can feel a bit better, then maybe some others can feel better too. so here goes:
i was considering sam's fbs. not one of sam's fbs illustrated that he was in love with this girl. they pretty much just explained, at least to me, why he chose her. this is what i got from his memories.
1. amelia is a female version of dean.
2. amelia and sam shared the same story.
3. he's not in love with her. he's in love with normal and safe. amelia is just a representation of normal and safe. imo, that's how he percieves her. because there hasn't been a single moment of love shared between these two people. sam said he didn't want to give this up...he never said anything about not wanting to give her up.
it's my opinion that amelia, whether real or all in his head, equals safe and normal. sam's story has nothing to do with love. it has everything to do with escape. in essence when dean died, sam broke, much like i believe dean broke as well in purgatory.
even if the cw description of the next eppy is correct and sam has to choose between hunting with dean or being with amelia(spoiler)
in reality, for me, basically his choice is actually this:
stay with ameila (who is dean in a skirt) and live safe and normal.
stay with the real dean and hunt.
i really believe now that for sam, amelia and dean are the same, it's just the lifestyle he has to choose.
i'm not saying sam believes amelia is dean in actual body. i'm saying amelia is a female version of dean, so being with her is like being with his brother, only with her, he's safe and he feels normal.
it's all based on his perception. the question for sam will be, does he want the real dean, or the fake one. i think we all know that sam will always choose the real deal over imitation....bu t i just think that this time, we as the audience are meant to see that it was a bit of a tough call for sam. kind of reminds me of avsc when sam was adverse to having xmas because he knew it was dean's last, but in the end he gave dean the xmas he wanted so badly. sam always craved safe and normal, since he was a kid....but inevitably choosing dean over what he's always wanted just shows how much sam really does love and need his brother.
i could read dean the same way. his perception of what he deems as loyal. i think dean is living in a fantasy world right now. he honestly believes benny is the only one who hasn't let him down. i feel that this is something he needs to believe because dean went against every instinct in his bones and accepted a monster's friendship in order to survive purgatory. dean, to this day, can't bring himself to admit that he's being shined. if you really think about it, dean broke in purgatory much like he broke in hell. in hell dean broke when he tortured his first soul. in purgatory he broke when he befriended a monster. we all know from canon that dean doesn't want to be alone.
i believe all his displaced anger at sam along with dean not telling the truth about benny, is keeping sam at a distance emotionally. i believe if sam and dean actually talk, then sam will ask dean all the questions regarding benny that dean should've asked but didn't. sam will ,in essence, shatter dean's perception about benny, that perception being that he's really a nice guy after all. :blink: when sam starts asking the questions like why did benny pick dean in the first place, how did he know about the loophole, who are "they"? it's dean who's going to have to hear the answers and i don't think he's going to like what he hears. dean is going to get let down by benny in a big way, of that i am sure in my soul, and i think deep down he knows it, he just doesn't want to admit.
so as i now look at it:
dean's perception this season is that of illusion.
sam's perception this season is of escape.
but only sam and dean together can shatter ea. one of these perceptions and make ea. other see the truth because they are ea. others touchstones. the truth being that sam and dean love and need ea. other, plain and simple. they are family and together is where they belong. this means that they will make mistakes with ea. other, they may let ea. other down, they will face danger together, they will fight evil together.. they are and always will be brothers together...the good with the bad, the happy with the sad. ;)
looking at show from this perspective has literally put a smile on this girls face. and i like smiling again. so i'm sticking with it. ;)
I’m going to move this to here because it is off the topic. It doesn’t quite belong in this thread as it’s not bitterness, but it probably doesn’t belong in any thread. I'll be quoting your post, as the post was not originally put into this thread.
Quote: First things first, there was no hostility or sarcasm in my post. I asked a question. You choose to answer it. I didn’t reply to your post therefore I did not even ask it of you. I used your quote because it was applicable and it was in the comments of the article being replied to, not because I expected you to answer it. I said ‘Could someone....’. I did not say ‘Ginger, could you.....’.
Therefore, with all due respect, your labeling of my post in such a way is on you, and I'm not sure what made you decide to do so. However, should you decide to reply to an open question in one of my posts in the future it would be great if it could be without the unfounded allegations. Thanks.
Quote: I don’t think Sam sees himself as a victim, and he is now well aware of the mistrust between them. What is there to feel victim about here? He made a choice to go back hunting, for a specific purpose. He’s made it abundantly clear that once the gates of hell are closed then he’s out. He hasn’t pulled any ‘Woe is me’. There is distance between Sam and Dean but it is the fault of both Sam and Dean.
Quote: Sam hasn’t been angry with Dean since the premiere. He’s been exasperated with him but no more or less than he has been since season one. The first time Sam got angry with Dean was in 8.05, when Dean inexplicably took off. He's angry with him now, but he wasn't earlier on in the season.
Sam didn’t even know about the burned phone until the last 90 seconds of 8.09 so when do you think he should have questioned the need for it?
Add to that, if Dean doesn’t trust Sam then what role does Dean play in that? Dean said he prepared the burn phone in advance, what had Sam done at that early stage to warrant Dean’s mistrust? I imagine the mistrust (this season at least) stems from the ‘You didn’t look for me scenario’. However, hypothetical situation; if Sam got Dean out of Purgatory by means of making a deal with an angel or demon, would Dean have reason to trust him then? Does Dean not trust Sam because Sam doesn’t trust him on Benny? If that’s the case, what will make him trust Sam? Should he just follow all Dean’s decisions, regardless of whether or not he agrees with them or wholeheartedly trust Benny just because Dean does?
The presence of Benny had already drawn Dean into a very dangerous situation at that stage. Sam has never even spoken to Benny. Perhaps if he could speak to him, get a feel for him, then he might, but trusting Benny blindly, and solely on the word a guy who says that he’s different, and has been acting different since Purgatory, would be crazy.
Quote: All Sam did re Castiels return was sit opposite him and say ‘I can’t believe it, you’re actually here.’ There was no hug, nothing. I’m sure he glad that he was back, but more so than he was with Dean? Not to me. With the Sam and Dean reunion, Sam would already have been somewhat numb because of the Amelia situation so the the surprise and shock at seeing Dean, added with being flattened, soaked, salted and slashed would have tempered the initial reaction of delight but for me, Sam was definitely glad to see Dean.
In relation to Lenore, there were no human kills in the area where Lenore and her vampire pack were living; just cattle kills. The Winchesters had already killed some of their pack and they did not retaliate. Lenore, even while being tortured, still managed to say no to human blood. Sam and Dean saw this, they both believed she should be trusted and they acted accordingly. (And in this situation, Dean didn’t agree with it based on Sam’s word. He saw Lenore refuse the blood. And in that scene, did Gordon say that he knew Lenore and her nest were not killing humans?)
In relation to Kate, I believe she should have been killed. A new werewolf that had already tasted flesh? Yeah, I’m sure she managed to live clean!
I also don’t feel that Sam showed contempt for Dean. He showed wariness of Benny and doesn’t believe that Dean would do the deed if the need arose. Dean as much as confirmed that for him “If Benny slips up and some other hunter turns his lights out then so be itâ€. Martin rang Sam looking to get back in the game. I don’t think Sam could have sent him after a wendigo or invited him into the Impala to hunt with them. He asked him to keep an eye on Benny. He didn’t ask him to kill him. Should he have ignored a vampire hanging lose just because his brother believed he was different? Add to that, when Benny was living in the area there were vampire kills, so there is a very good chance that Sam was right in not trusting Benny.
Sam did not 'allow' Martin to coldcock Dean; he was just as surprised as Dean was. I think he was turning away from them when Martin struck Dean. He was also well pissed with Martin for doing so. However, should Sam have stayed with Dean while there was the possibility that Benny was off killing someone else? Sam did what he felt he had to do in order to save lives (hence the handcuffing). Dean did what he felt he had to do in order to save either Sam or Dean’s life (hence the phone). (Though there is a third option. Sam could have found Benny, listened to him and, whether right or wrong, believed him). They both did what they had to do in order to get the job that they needed to do; done.
In relation to Martin being unhinged, what evidence is there of that? Yeah, he was jumpy but he’s a hunter, and a hunter fresh back in the game. However, in relation to his actions with Elizabeth, while it was a lowlife thing to do, if it was proven that Benny was the killer, would we be looking it as a heinous thing or as a necessary thing? From Martin’s point of view, Benny was back on the road, free to set up camp wherever he wanted, and kill whomever he wanted, and he’d be hard to track down again. Would Martin have been justified in wounding and traumatising a person if it saved multiple lives?
Hunters have pushed the boundaries of what we would call acceptable in order to get the results for a long, long time. Martin did exactly the same thing as Tim and Reggie did in Free to Be You and Me. They used Lindsey to get to Sam. Sam and Dean did the same thing in ‘Something Wicked’ where they used Michael to get the striga. (I'm aware he consented but they still used a civilian to do what they needed to do.) Are they all unhinged?
And finally, part of the reason Sam went with Martin was because he believed that Benny was too close to it but said unhinged hunter had a believable story. He saw Benny turn down a path, heard screams, and came across a fresh vampire kill. The victim was someone who had been eyeing up Benny’s great granddaughter earlier in the day. When Dean came across Benny he had the blood of the second victim on his hands. Dean came back from Benny’s with nothing more than the word of a vampire (who was facing a death sentence) that he didn’t do it. Dean didn’t give, or get, any proof of Benny’s innocence.
And Sam’s ‘personal’ reasons were that he believed Amelia was in danger, not for something pithy.
Quote:There is zero evidence to support that theory. On the contrary, Martin was surprised to learn that Dean even knew Benny (“The Benny you know? Sam, what? Why do I get the distinct impression that your brother is vouching for a vampire.â€) Dean was actually the one who told Martin that he had history with Benny so there is absolutely nothing to suggest that Sam told Martin about Dean’s relationship with Benny or his time in Purgatory.
Apart from the fact that there's a chance that this potential deathmatch would not involve Benny and Dean (but some other hunter) I gotta say, I find this to be a strange interpretation of what friendship should be and if this is how Dean sees friendship now then Sam (and Benny, Castiel and Garth) should just head for the hills and never look back.
Are you really saying that if Benny breaks Dean’s trust then one of them (presumably Benny as Dean is a lead) will be killed by the other?? No second chances, no trying to understand, no empathy, no looking for reasons; just one strike and you’re dead? Who decides when that trust is broken, and who decided what that trust entails? If Benny kills but doesn’t feed then has he broken Dean’s trust? What if he breaks into a hospital and steals blood that would have been used in a transfusion to save someone’s life? What if he kills someone who is attacking him and feeds because it will save him from going looking for blood later on?
What happens if Dean breaks someone’s trust, will that go to a deathmatch as well?
Ginger, I don’t think that Dean shares that definition of friendshihp. Benny did' mess up', he did kill. However, he had a reason for doing so. (Everyone has a reason for doing what they do.) It’s also quite possible that he fed from Martin. However, it didn't turn into a deathmatch. On the contrary, Dean defended Benny to Sam and said that Martin 'had it coming'.
i happen to think benny has been lying to dean from the start. i think martin was dead on about benny. it's my belief that benny has been using dean to help him kill specific vamps benny seems to know by name.
i think the story about the girl being his great grandaughter was a load of crap. a sob story so dean wouldn't be suspicious. i noticed that the killings of humans didn't start until dean told benny that sam put a tail on him. it's my opinion that benny killed those two people to frame desmond. i think benny moved back to his hometown because he heard desmond was nesting there and was there to kill him. only martin kind of spoiled that plan so benny had to alter it. he killed those humans and then told dean he was being framed. well, sorry but i never saw desmond kill anyone, so it's just as likely benny actually did the killing.
benny let the girl live so she can tell dean what martin did. i think in actuality, benny used the girl, not martin. martin was just a nuisance benny wanted to get rid of.
his plan obviously worked, because dean bought it hook line and sinker.
only sam ain't buying it and i think sam is right on the money.
jmo of course...benny has let dean down, dean just can't bring himself to see it yet.
Your scenario would actually save this season for me. People said it would be a redo if Benny turns out to be another Ruby to the brothers (with a different background of course because ...like so much people already stated, here and even Jensen himself) Dean's biggest trait is loyality. Of course he has a different history and a different score and I don't think Benny wants to release Lucifer again...hopeful ly. So Dean gave his loyality to Benny... not seeing straight because of his history in purgatory.
I think its not a redo because it would be about Dean trusting someone over his own brother and falling deeply on his nose. I may think that this is the only way...the only...to open dean's eyes and to make Dean stop with his attitude towards Sam.
It wouldn't be a redo because this time its Dean who screwed their trust and believed in someone else to be a better brother for him than Sam. I would be interested to see how Sam reacts to this scenario.
Right now I see more that JC created a not natural rift between Sam and Dean. I can't follow the brothers personal traits anymore and I am hugely disappointed in their reactions to each other. For me the biggest rift was created in S4 and it ended with Swan Song when Sam was gone. Nobody from the writers, producers dare to delve really into that relationship and nobody is really able to show their brotherly relationship like Eric Kripke could. Sadly the writers cling to Dean's relationships with others and create this unnatural feeling drama again ...why... I don't know.
So to ease out their inbalance, this would be for me the only acceptable scenario, Benny is letting Dean hugely down, and their has to be a dangerous scenario, something will happen, something bad, and it will change Dean's perception of things (the cult word here)
Maybe...maybe what JC said that Dean does something bad, was this, how he views Sam and how he treats him. Problem is everytime the main POV on Dean for me!
Also Benny is liked by viewers (like Castiel once was), and he got incredible sympathetic insight, although they didn't show all of Bennys scenes, some was not showed so it could still happen what you desribed.
For me it wouldn't be a redo because this is about Dean and it would be actually a master plan from JC and it would save this season for me!!!
So my concern is Benny was supposed to be Dean's lesson about trusting someone over his brother, but they may switch and keep him around and good. Why not throw Sam under the bus one more time by making Benny the better brother and Sam the schlump who didn't even look for Dean?
Ellen was a great addition! I think it was wrong to kill her off. If this show is really about family they need to keep older people involved to the Winchesters! Female or male....doesn't matter to me!
I want to add the fact that those male characters are also tied pretty much to Dean and I would like for Sam a male friend outside of the brothers interaction. It actually is needed IMO because Sam gets almost no emotional insight with Dean, yeah I know its the same old same old problem here! If the show would actually show us why Sam can't connect to people anymore (because of his hell cage memories and damaged soul) I would know and it would be more satisfying for me! I could live with that, although it would also mean that Dean would have to interact with his sibling more onscreen about personal issues and I am unsure this will ever happen again!
I miss Ellen. She added a lot to the show.
I hadn't heard that the CW thought she was too old to be sexy. Is that a rumor or was it said in an article or interview? Just curious.
But when I really think of it ... Sam has a history he can barely share with someone without people thinking "is this guy crazy?"
Sam,s history ? I am not really sure how much that matters now and even if it did how much Jeremy Carver would use it in Sam,s characterizatio n as he seems to not count it has important . What we will get is Sam back in hunting at some point stuck to that passenger sit in that car and no futher forward with Sam than we have been for a long time.
There is so much that could have been done with the character but none of the writers or showrunners seem interested in doing so.
The Amelia story has been underwritten, but it could have had heft if they had allowed Sam to talk to Amelia about what watching everyone he ever loved die meant to him.
I really hate that we have had more exploration of Benny and Cas than we have had of Sam this season. It frustrates me to no end.
SPN has never done well with long term love interests for the boys.
Madison was great, I loved her, but hey, she was supposed to die.
Lisa was extremely boring and bland, though she had some great things to say. Might have been the actress .. dunno...
BUT the problem is also the reception of female love interests for the boys by the fandom.
Let´s be honest here: many many fans are insanely jealous of the women who get to share Sam or Dean´s life for a while.
On the other hand, male characters, who are friends are watched with interest and welcomed with open arms :(
Would Amelia have been a guy, Sam crashed with, lets say a returning soldier with a love for old cars, who helped him fix the Impala... reaction might have been the polar opposide.
And I adore Sam but even I have struggled with his connection to Amelia.
She and Sam both were acting so far outside the normal "polite" norm.. it just fit.
He was scared and jittery and freaked and all kinds of not ok, while she just didn´t bother with politeness or patience..
But at some point, it just lost steam and became indrecibly boring -.-
She was an interesting character in the beginning and she became a doormat.
Sadly this is as common an occurence on TV as it is in writing and now I want to launch a rant about the depiction of female characters in modern pop culture
And frankly Sam is now involved with a married woman there isnt just her that is part of this now.
There are several rational reasons people disliked Bela, Ruby, Lisa, or Amelia.
Bela was a rotten person with no soul, and the boys did not behave like themselves in her presence. For instance, after all the crap she pulled, why would Dean ever disclose his location to her? How in the world did she steal that hand from Dean when he put it in his inside jacket pocket? She shot Sam, and tried to murder the boys on several occasions. How would this endear her to the audience? Plus, the boys are heroic, good guys. She was a bottom feeder with no heart. I was never surprised that she wasn't well-received.
I loved KC's Ruby so I had no problem with Ruby in the third season. GP's Ruby was just bad. Total departure from KC's portrayal and not in a good or believable way, IMO. Plus, I, personally, never believed Sam would ever hang with Ruby again after S3 no matter how sad and depressed he was so I could never buy into the Sam/Ruby relationship in S4.
Kripke's desire to suddenly make Lisa the girl of Dean's dreams was sudden and unbelievable to me. I never bought into their relationship and don't feel she was presented well in S6. she was like a Stepford wife in some instances and then nagging in others. Why was Dean hiding that he was hunting something in EOMS? She knew he was a hunter when she invited him - a virtual stranger - into her home. Why would he have to apologize for that? I had many problems with Lisa's crappy characterizatio n. I think Dean is quite attractive but she just allowed him to move into her home. She barely knew him. Then, she's okay with him coming and going as he pleases. She had just seemingly uprooted her life for him but then he leaves. She was way too accommodating. She was "unreal" to me. I'm not sure why they forced Dean into that relationship.
Amelia. I feel I've stated my problems with her but she's just not likable to me. I don't hate Amelia but I don't care about her either. Her relationship with Sam has been sorely under-developed , IMO. It doesn't help that she and JP have ZERO chemistry with each other. I get NOTHING from their few, brief scenes.
Anyway, I don't think women have a problem with female characters because we're jealous. People loved Pamela, Ellen, Missouri, and Jodi. The writing has not been good, IMO, for female characters who are meant to be longterm love interests. That's why S3 Ruby worked, IMO, and S4's version didn't. That's why Lisa was fine in S3 but then "off" in S6.
These writers aren't capable of longterm romance. JC isn't any better than Sera or Eric.
And, boy did you hit the nail on the head with your last sentence.
So why did they go there? Makes no sense. They should have stayed with the original concept of the show, ie: hunting monsters and helping humans. IMO Carver should have returned the show to that instead of more angel crap. It was boring in the past and will be in the future. Each year my interest in SPN has decreased since they were brought on board. I'm contemplating whether I want to continue to watch. Especially given they way the brothers are being written.
Now.....Absolutely yes to what you said about Bella. And To this day I wish Lauren Cohn had played Ruby like she was origianlly supposed to. She really had the gravitas and subtly that neither Katie or gen had for such an important charector.
I think part of the problem, for me, is they really don't introduce women all that well on SPN in seasons 1 and 2, especially if they could be a possible love interest.
Jo, who I did come to really like, might as well had a flashing neon sign that said love interest. While Ellen had one that said mother figure. So the women are reduce to stereotypes. And the show doesn't feel organic. But she was fantastic in BUaBS, unfortunately that was the last time we saw her until she died.
I liked both incarnations of Ruby. The change in style seemed very realistic to me. The first Ruby tried to appeal to the warrior side of Sam. Make him in take his role by appealing to that rational, logical side of Sam. She was very in-your-face and short on sympathy. But Dean was always there to counter act the effects of her arguments. So she tried to manipulate Dean, but that didn't work either.
After Dean died, I think she tried that same approach again with that first woman she was riding, but Sam was haven't any of it. So she came back in a guilt-free version and changed her tactics. Sam was lost and alone, so she was softer, supportive and seductive. Comforting him, even as she told him how amazing he was, how powerful. How he could save the world and revenge Dean.
Kick ass character. Seriously one of my favorites. In a love to hate kind of way. But a great character and NOT one dimensional, like so many women of the first couple seasons.
I thought Lisa was fine. I always saw her as a port in the storm though. Someone who fit the life Dean craved with a kid who could have been his son. I'm sure he came to love her, but as a viewer I wasn't really invested in their relationship.
Amelia- I don't hate her, though she is cranky and unappealing, but the biggest problem is that I find their relationship dull as dirt and I'm really hoping that their was some sort of supernatural manipulation to spice things up.
I've loved well-written female characters in Supernatural but the love-interest women are never well-written so I've never really liked them. Even Lisa, who was possibly the best attempt at some sort of love interest, was not very convincing in terms of her just falling out of the big plot-hole in the sky one day and being described as the love of Dean's life.
An example of the inability to write convincing love-interestes is Jo: as soon as Jo was no longer Dean's intended love-interest, the writers started making her a really interesting character and I was really upset when they killed her. The same thing applies to the character of Ruby - I thought S3 Ruby was so much better than S4 Ruby because she was complex and interesting. That all changed in S4 when she became a love interest (of sorts) and I was totally miffed by the change in characterisatio n and in the not so great portrayal by the actress.
To be honest, the main reason I don't want long-term love interests for the Winchesters is because that sort of thing tends to absorb the writers and take over the focus of a show. I'm watching Supernatural for the brothers' intense, dysfunctional relationship and the "hunting things and saving people" aspect and I don't really want the focus going off those and onto Winchester girlfriends. I have no problems with the brothers having hook-ups or short-term flings, that doesn't detract from the plots and it makes more sense given their Hunter lifestyle and their dysfunctional emotional lives.
Sam relayed the message to the Trans
Which is a pity. Because I am really enjoying everything else about the season. Purgatory-kicka ss. Tablets-love them this year. Evil CIA Angels-Hell's yeah. Love to hate Crowley-or possible just love him at times. Kevin great. Really like the mom. That's the problem EVERYONE has a better storyline this year than Sam. Dean -survivor of Purgatory-fanta stic. Cas- tortured soul being forced to do things abhorrent to him with no memory of them. (he bleed a freakin' tear- so poignant and kinda cool). And Benny is completely sympathetic and likable. Samandriel was short-lived, but the sweetest most adorable angel ever.
While Sam has spent way to much time in a soap opera plot. I wouldn't mind so much if we were getting info on Sam. Getting inside his head. But we've learned almost no new info about a character that has lived mostly in his head for the last 4 seasons. No, most of the time we spent learning about Amelia-the crankiest and most boring character ever on the show. But even if she and Sam had the most amazing relationship ever, I'm not really interested in getting that invested in it, because we KNOW it is not going to last. It's the nature of the show. Although I suppose at least it could have been someone we hope he can reunite with at the end of the series. But I find her extremely unappealing, so not hoping that.
Perhaps it's actually it deliberate and there is method to their madness, I pray there is, I have not completely lost hope. But it is difficult not to compare this to the Dean/Lisa storyline. Lisa was tough, but likable. She supported Dean and we saw her comfort him and fear for his safety. And I haven't counted minutes but I think all of this was done with WAY less screen time. Plus we saw Dean in pain, drinking heavily, and in a amazing, brief montage saw his whole year pass and it was bittersweet and poignant. He was struggling to move on but having limited success. He was reminded of his brother every moment of everyday. All the secondary characters have had a closer relationship to Dean than Sam, so we've always had more insights into what was going on with him. But this from what we've seen has been completely squandered with the Sam/Amelia plot. We've learned of HER pain and heard HER story but nothing from Sam. I keep hoping this is deliberate but we need a payoff soon.
But unless they genuinely want to explore Sam then every sl they give him will be a dead end before it starts. Amelia was a poor attempt to give Sam some sort of 'normal' and human story while ignoring Sam's history.
So, to my 2 main issues that I just can't ignore anymore and they are just the breaking point with some longer-term issues that I've been having about the show for quite a while now.)
1/ I was really hyped for this ep way back late last year when Jared revealed at a con they were filming an ep taking place at a Ren Faire and that BOTH of them would be in costume. Hooray, I thought, finally we get to see Sam in something other than his normal hunting clothes or a suit. We've had eps where Dean has gotten to dress up in some really amazing outfits (the Western gear in Frontierland and the 40's outfit in Time After Time are my favourites, complete with long, slow full body pans by a very loving camera) and I've really appreciated them and seeing how great Jensen looks. So, great I thought, finally Sam (& Jared) will get equal share of the spotlight in this regard.
Fast forward to this past week and spoiler clips and pics start showing up online and they are all of Dean in costume (and looking mighty damn fine, BTW) . They have me thinking... WOW, if I'm drooling this much over Dean then I'm going to need buckets when pics of Sam in costume appear.
I throw my previous rock-hard spoiler-phobia out the window and click on every single preview/pic or vid link in order to see how magnificent Sam is gonna look in the medieval garb. Finally a preview/promo clip is released that shows Sam in costume, all of about 5 seconds worth, enough for a couple of screencaps to be taken. Showing Sam/Jared in tight leather leggings, shirt & cape with his longish hair in a ponytail. ;D And hey, it's still a lot less than all the pics we got of Dean, but for the most part I'm satisfied and, once again, I'm all hyped up for the ep, only to be majorly disappointed that what was in that last preview clip was pretty much ALL we get to see of Sam in costume. Right at the end of the ep in a couple of shots that probably lasted no longer than about 20 seconds. So after seeing Dean in costume for at least half the ep, all we get of Sam is 1 or 2 almost blink-and-you'l l-miss-'em- shots lasting less than a minute.
Now I get that as a result of giving up on being with Amelia and his dream of a normal/safe/hap py life, Sam is majorly depressed and was clearly just focussing on the hunt aspect of the case as a way of dealing with things, they still could have had Sam in costume for a lot longer than the tiny little snippet we got at the end without removing/rewrit ing the really great last couple of scenes, Sam saying the fun will help both of them & the speech/battle charge.
As a result, I have gone back to my previous anti-spoiler stance as I can't handle getting my hopes up by something I read or hear or see, only to have them smashed when the ep arrives and things don't turn out the way I'd thought/hoped/p rayed they would.
2/ My other issue (and this one goes back at least a few seasons-- hope this is ok or is this thread only for season 8?) is that, once again, Dean is given a scene where he gets to discuss feelings/emotio ns/reasons why he did something (in this case, Dean and Charlie talking about the fake text he sent Sam at the end of 809). Sam very rarely gets to interact on such an emotional level with a secondary character like Dean has on multiple occassions (Gordon back in season 2's Bloodlust, all the convos he's had with Bobby, all the 1-on-1 scenes with Cas, heck Dean even has had more interaction with Meg than Sam has in the last few seasons. I'm still surprised that Meg possessing Sam back in season 2 -- such a huge character moment/ plot point for Sam-- has never even been mentioned in any Meg ep since-- so it almost seems to me that Meg's initial very strong connection to Sam (and Sam alone) has been totally erased from memory) The last one I can think of is Sam talking to Young John in season 5's Song Remains The Same. I'd thought we were going to get one in 99 Problems btn Sam and Paul (the bartender) but that took place offscreen) Even in Season 6 and the re-introduction of Samuel Campbell as part of the SoulessSam focus storyline, Dean got to have way more in-depth conversations and interactions with Samuel, than Sam did. It seems like Dean has always got someone he can talk to/confide in whereas Sam seems only to have Dean and when the boys are at odds and not speaking, then Sam has no-one. And that I think is what makes me saddest most of all.
I think I'm almost at the point where if something happened and Jared was no longer able to be on the show, I don't think I would continue watching, especially if it became the Dean & Cas show. I love Jensen and Dean, but I know in my heart, that I keep watching because of my absolute love for and obsession with Jared and Sam which no doubt accounts for my bias towards Sam.
I'm really hoping that something happens in the second half of this season that restores my faith that both actors & co-leads and both characters are equally important in the minds of the showrunner, writers etc (because I'm really not feeling that at the moment and haven't for some time) and that we get some really good Sam-focussed eps like the many heavily Dean-centric eps we gotten in the past (What Is (s2), The Beginning (s4) & The End (s5)). Hell, giving Sam a friend that is not shared by Dean would be a good start. Will we ever get one where Dean/Jensen is only in 1 or 2 scene leaving Jared to carry the ep? I doubt it otherwise it would have happened by now. Maybe then I'll be able to come back to this ep with a much more positive attitude and love it like I really want to.
But right now (and having spoiled myself a little for next week) all I can think is that I really, really hope that Dean doesn't get all the interaction, and most of the scenes and dialogue with a new but very important up-coming character that in all respects does have an equal starting relationship with both brothers. I do know that I'm not going to get my hopes up again and maybe the episode will leave me pleasantly surprised and feeling the love once again.
I do still love SPN, I will always love SPN, I just don't know if I like it all that much, Jared & Sam aside, right now.
The awful part about Amelia is she could have been that character for Sam, but none of the FBs focused on Sam. He mostly just sat around, listening to her feelings. I would have loved to hear from Sam how his world imploded. It would have been even better if we'd gotten some scenes of Sam immediately after Dean's disappearance. Oh well.
Anyway, I do agree w/your 2nd point. And it's not that I disagree w/your 1st point, but the costume thing has never been an issue for me. I know it bothers others though. My sister is a casual viewer, and she mentions it. Haha! To me, it seems "in character" for Sam to not get all dressed up.
Edlund only cares to write for Castiel and Singer thinks having the mytharc in the first 5 seasons is all Sam needs, a POV isn't important. I have no idea what Carver thinks. If he thinks the fb's were great then he apparently doesn't care about Sam either beacause they were from Amelia's POV and not Sam's. He said he's going to mature the boys this season but all he's done was make them fight. For what purpose I haven't a clue.
I personally know a few Sam fans who aren't watching this season. They watched the first couple of epis and saw the direction Carver chose and decided they couldn't handle it. I'm trying to make it to the end of s8 but not sure if I will.
I have had everything from loathsome to selfish and you could go on with Sam this season . Sam made Dean give up Benny and isnt that a awfully big sacrifice on Dean's part when actually no it wasnt I accept it was a tough decision but not a 'sacrifice' and in all honesty Benny was never the issue this was never about Benny with Dean , this was about Dean getting what he wanted from day 1 Sam in hunting recommitted and riding by his side and yet I have been told I am supposed to feel sorry for Dean why? for getting what he craved all along.
The problem is and it comes back to is Sam pov , Sam being rounded out as a character by interacting and talking about Sam to others so we the audience do not have the room to interpret his actions in a negative way that it is crystal clear , how he feels , why he feels and how it will influence him going forward.
I am glad in a sense this week the boys did have some fun but it wasnt until the last minute and it was boring to see Sam walking around in that big overcoat I was thinking take it off lol.
I suppose I want to see what balance we get now moving forward within the brothers relationship if any at all.
I root for both boys equally, and watching Torn and Frayed, I applauded Sam when he called Dean on the devastating emotional consequences of the text, (I really don't think that Dean had made the Jessica connection until that point, remember he was in purgatory where 'the end justifying the means' meant survival). I applauded the writers for showing Sam who, unable to have 'fun' because of his devastating loss, gets into costume to support his brother whom he loves beyond measure. I LOVE that the writers had enough sensitivity and took care to substantiate Sam's loss. That was so indicative of Sam, to me, internalising instead of acting out (like Dean does). Until that point I hadn’t realised that I had just assumed Sam would snap out of it. I will concede, however, that it WAS through Dean that Sam received affirmation, something I think Samcentric fans have issues with. In other words, if Dean sanctions Sam's emotions, then all is ok with SPN.
Sam not trusting Benny is an issue that Sam DOES have. We have not been given a reasonable explanation for it yet, just like we don't really have a reasonable explanation for Dean keeping Benny a secret. This is not a debate that Sam or Deancentric fans can resolve until the boys communicate.
I think the fandom is articulating divisive thoughts because the writers have deliberately and ingeniously (and perhaps disingenuously) guided our emotions to this end. All this heated debate amongst the fandom must be having them rubbing their hands with glee.
I have alot of views with Dean in his relations to Sam that I do not talk about here I do not expect my thoughts to be everybody's because some are coming from a different angle and with different set of ideas and loyalties.
This is not directed at you, kaz1. It's just an observation from having read posts on other boards.
I LOVE these discussions, am new to all of this and am at serious risk of SPN becoming an obsession. So please keep these observations coming as it helps me catch up
Bottom line- I am coming back in awhile and I hope you do too. You do not have to interact with me. That's fine. I would like everyone to love these characters and the show as much as I do but that is never, ever going to happen and it would be really boring here if it did.
Leah
I will be back, although I am going to try to avoid issues which get me worked up. You do not have to interact with me either, but I have no problem interacting with you. I am going to work on keeping my temper and my emotions in check.
I am truly, truly sorry for hurting or insulting you in any way. I was wrong.
Percysowner
Dean is the one with daddy issues now so it seems more logical that it be mainly his pov in episode 12. Dean ususally also has the most interaction with family memebers and guest stars alike.
13 seems monster of the week centric, dont see them shifting away from a Dean POV for that.
'Trial and Error' is myth heavy which indicates a Dean heavy episode, most people have concluded that Dean will be the one carrying out the tasks Kevin learns about from the tablet. So again Dean POV.
We have Cas stuff coming up later in the season, mythology stuff including the other 2 tasks, Benny is still in the picture, Charlie will be returning, then theres Garth and Kevin. All these characters predominately interact with Dean so switching from a Dean POV to a Sam one would be pointless and illogical.
And with the return of everyone you mentioned and the fact that they all interact more with Dean, then Sam is going to be pushed even further into the background.
he talked about Cas's storyline being very tightly linked to the tablet storyline. We will see more of how Niomi's affect on Cas and how he struggles to deal with it.
Charlie will be back, they like the dynamic she brings to the show.
They are currently breaking storylines for the end of the season and have discussed bringing Amelia back as they really liked her and what she brought in terms of Sam's storyline but as of yet she hasnt been included and Robert Singer isnt sure if she will or will not be brought back at all at some point. (if they've been paying attention to fan reaction it is doubtful we will see Amelia again).
Based on all the spoilers I've read it does indeed seem like Sam doesnt have much going on in the second half of the season but at least feel safe in the knowledge that Jared's contract means he at least has to appear in every episode.
With Sam at first he didn't want to talk about it because he had no soul and so the part that suffered wasn't on earth. When the wall broke we got the big "Don't look at it, it was too HORRIBLE to remember" and so Sam took on the memories without us ever seeing them. We do see Sam flashing back to meat hooks in Meet the New Boss and we see halLucifer attacking Sam's sense of reality. Dean comes in, tells Sam that Sam can tell reality from hallucinations by pushing his hand and that solves that. No disturbed sleep, no excess drinking. Heck, when Becky kidnaps him there is Sam give absolutely no indication that being restrained or trapped has ANY psychological effect. When we finally return to Sam's hallucinations we see one shot of Sam surrounded by fire at the end of Repo Man. In the next few episodes, Sam doesn't tell Dean what he is hallucinating or how it affects him. He doesn't break down and tell anyone what happened in the Cage. We see HaLucifer again, but if he is anything to go by Sam spent his entire time being snarked at by Lucifer, nothing more. We don't see sleep deprivation until Sam almost falls asleep driving the car in episode 16 and when he is hospitalized in episode 17. This is in contrast to Dean in season four where Sam talks about Dean not sleeping, we see Dean sitting on the floor after a night of no sleep and we see Dean drinking to fall asleep. Maybe I'm forgetting something but I don't remember Sam mentioning torture or torture being mentioned except in the few episodes that had Mark Pelligrino which consisted of four whole episodes. Finally Cas bops in and takes away the hallucinations. Once they have been removed from Sam we can finally see how upsetting they were because CAS gets to act crazy and insane.
Now perhaps for you giving Cas the reaction instead of the person it actually happened to is satisfactory. But not to me. Dean basically was shown struggling with PTSD for 4 seasons with increasing depression and substance dependence. Sam came out with an itchy palm and never once talked to anyone about what happened to him. Even when he was in the hospital they didn't permit him to talk to a psychiatrist. Yeah, the psychiatrist would have believed that everything in the Cage was hallucination, but at least we would have finally gotten a look at Sam.
So what you considered an adequate exploration I consider to be rushed, and non-existent.
In truth, I find it extremely insulting to me as a Sam & Jared fan for you to suggest that I should just be content with any little scrap of Sam TPTB deign to give us for the sole intent of honouring a clause that may or may not be in Jared's contract.
If that is the case, then I would prefer the writers write him out of the show or kill him off and free up Jared to pursue other roles, because I consider the current situation to be a waste of Jared's talent. He deserves to be treated so much better than this and so do his fans.
I don't just want Jared to appear in every episode being way, way back in the background and not saying more than two words with no meaningful interaction with other characters and guest stars.
I want him to have a major and equal role in the show, like he used to have before all the storylines and secondary character interaction became so Dean-centric.
I want to see him be the sole focus of an ep like we've gotten on numerous occassions with Dean (What Is And What Should Be, In The Beginning, The End, etc).
I want to see an ep where Dean is in the first and last scene with Sam /Jared carrying the ep.
I want to see a story about Sam told through his POV and not through Dean's. I want Sam to have characters that become his friends that he can bond with and talk to and confide in.
I think for me te only way I can be happy with this show and Sams story anymore is if Sam gets his own unique friend. I dont know why the writers are so against Sam having hsi own friend.
Please don't misunderstand. I would love to see more Sam POV and would love to see him have friends or people he can talk to and relate to besides Dean. That I agree with. But when people wish for Jared to be forced off the show because of their own disappointments , that is not taking Jared's wishes into account at all.
It just doesn't seem logical IMO to have one of the main characters sidelined. Perhaps Jared has asked for more time off to be with family? Not sure, but will read Percy's suggested article and get back. Enjoy the ep tonight
And if we don't at least get more about what Sam went though before he met Amelia, I going to be out right pissed.
But I'm holding out hope that they haven't shown us this yet, because it links in to the season's storyline.
Not that John's and Dean's isn't, but I'd say there pretty equal in this regard.
As you said, I do believe Dean's feelings re: John may be more complicated than Sam's at this point. Dean used to revere John, but I think a lot of that ended around S3. I had forgotten about the episode where Dean shot himself or his alter. I do think Sam's feelings re: John are less complicated at this point though they never really addressed the idea that John was prepared to KILL Sam. I'm sure Sam felt something about that, but we'll never know.
SPN will always be from Dean's POV with Sam being a support charcter. If, after getting a new showrunner, it hasn't changed my belief is that it won't.
Sorry to be a downer but that's just the way it is on SPN.
This article is just depressing. How in the world is Amelia valuable to Sam? How does she present some huge complication? Last I checked, she was shacked up w/her ex-husband/curr ent husband/whateve r! They never tried to develop Amelia, so why even consider bringing her back!
Why not focus on Sam? Is it so hard to write a story about Sam? One that gives him a POV and some substance?
And I agree w/the girl, Marie's, comments. I need Sam to emotionally connect with SOMEONE . . . anyone on this show. I'm so sick of him just being there, not doing or saying anything of substance!
If that happens, I think I will actually turn off the show!
Sadly, I've lost all hope re: Sam when it comes to this show. Clearly, fan fiction is the only place where I'll get any good Sam stories or POV.
JMO of course.
RS just sounds terribly out of touch about the Sam-Amelia storyline. Not everyone dislikes Amelia, but an awful lot of us found very little point in the relationship she had with Sam. Ending it was actually the best part, because it got Sam back on track in the main storyline. Adulterous relationships are sordid and offputting anyway.
I also thought it was nuts for Singer to proclaim Dean and Benny's friendship genuine and rob the situation of its mystery. It also means they've probably decided to have Sam be wrong again, and Benny will overcome all his conflicts and be true-blue, and Sam's suspicions were not the product of a hard-earned life lesson but just because he couldn't get over being fooled by Ruby. If this weren't so dismal, it would be amusing in its predictability.
JMO of course.
And as you said, he sort of ended any mystery w/r/t Benny. I'm not sure why he did that.
And please tell me what story you see for Sam because all I see is a badly written romance from the POV of Amelia. We haven't gotten any insight into how Sam feels at all. Only lip service. He can say he loves her but I didn't see or feel it.
Jo1027, what I think would make the Amelia storyline have worked better (and I PRAY she does not return) is if we had a scene with Sam telling Dean
“Dean, when you and Cas disappeared when Dick Roman died, Kevin was taken by Crowley, I was BROKEN. Broken to where I could not even look for the most important person in my life.â€
THAT is IMO is what is missing from Season 8, I don’t think we have been given a good enough explanation why Sam didn’t look for even 1 day! Didn’t even log onto ‘Search The Web’ once! With this lack of an acceptable excuse for Sam’s break from hunting, then throwing him into a love story without said acceptable excuse, is why I think the Amelia story did not totally work. I see their story as they found each other when both were broken. They helped fix each other to then face their reality again (well, not Amelia, she chose Sam in the end, but Sam would not have been in for the long haul with Amelia IMO). Theirs was a “tragic love story†with more tragic and less love. Did Sam love Amelia? Yes, he did. Always will for what she did for him at that time in his life. Soul mates? Not so much. I was taken aback at how much the final Amelia scene affected me, her opening the door to the empty room. Sam moved on, it will hurt for a bit, but he will get over it. Amelia has a different set of hurt to deal with, but as a viewer I hope we have seen the last of her in that beautifully shot scene of the empty room. I felt for her, so to have that reaction I realized overall I liked their story better as a whole than the sum of its parts. TPTB need to leave it at that.
Reading all the complaints about Sam so far in S8, maybe the upset viewers would have liked his story better if we DID get a better explanation as to why he quit? All the talk of Sam’s POV, etc., remember when Dick Roman was killed, in the timeline of the series, it was not all that long after Sam’s wall broke, and Sam was just over the Lucifer hallucinations. He was pretty beat up, and then lost Dean in a poof? I could see him wanting to hide as far away from the world as he could. Maybe the wrong choice for a hero and hunter, but he’s human after all. Until he hits a dog and the hero kicks in…….It takes time to get his “Sammy†back, so you are right, he is not yet the same Sam we’ve seen in the past (not the same Dean either, it was quite a year apart).
The quote from ciar:
“Also, I didn’t like the new Sam who seemed cold and distant towards his brother when said brother returned from Purgatory. I also didn’t like the Sam who we didn’t see trying to find out what happened to his brother. Early S8 Sam Winchester is like a weird Pod Person and I hope he’s gone for good!â€
Agree—see above. We deserve a better explanation as to why Sam quit. Half way through the season we better get it sooner rather than later. If we don’t get one at all, it will be too bad in what otherwise is (IMO) such a strong season.
In relation to Amelia, what you said was what would have worked better meaning it didn't work for you all that much either. It didn't work at all for me because I didn't learn anything about Sam except that he stopped hunting, got a dog and a girl. Why did Sam stop hunting? We don't know and I have to wonder if we ever will. It would've made sense if we had been allowed to see Sam directly after Dean went to purgatory but we didn't so how can we even know what if any grief he experienced. This is my problem with the show, we never get to see how things that happen to Sam impact Sam. Until we do, I'm going to continue to be bitter.
“In relation to Amelia, what you said was what would have worked better meaning it didn't work for you all that much either.â€
I said it was not my favorite story, but I liked the overall story more than the sum of its parts. It did work for me, as it is right now, if we never see Amelia again. The best part of their story was the ending—not because I was cheering when Amelia saw the empty room, but because I felt for her, and Sam. Done. Over. If the story is revisited, I think my feelings would change.
I totally agree with your comments “It didn't work at all for me because I didn't learn anything about Sam except that he stopped hunting, got a dog and a girl…†To comment again overall it DID work for ME, but I agree we did not get an acceptable answer as to WHY Sam quit. But remember the boys were not really communicating for the first part of the season, and in LARP they have started to move back towards each other, so maybe they are ready to have those conversations (I sure hope so, if I was Dean I would still be hurt my brother never looked for me unless he had a better excuse than a girl).
“My comment to the broomstick thing would be that there are a great many episodes of SPN where Sam's dialog is pretty much that of a broomstick.â€
No comment, I’ve never spoken to a broomstick ? But I still disagree. I do agree with your thoughts about Sam and being in the cage, and his wall breaking, etc. stories. I blame Sere Gamble for missing that boat. Sam’s wall falling was suppose to be a massively horrible event…..but all that happened is Sam limped his way into watch Cas claim himself God….and there was a lot of missed opportunity in exploring the Lucifer hallucinations further too. I think had Carver taken over in Season 6, we may not have these complaints.
By season seven there were rumors flying that some of Gamble's show running responsibilitie s had been shifted to Robert Singer. I'm pretty sure he was also co-show runner in season six. Gamble was the public face of the show, but Singer had a lot of influence. The EW interview about the Henry revelation and where they go from there was entitled Supernatural's Boss gives interview. I was expecting an interview with Carver, but the interviewee was Robert Singer. I'm wondering how much influence he has had these last few seasons and if the missteps can be totally laid at Gamble's door. Carver has only written one script this year and Singer is the one talking about the future. It is possible that both Gamble and Carver ignored important story beats for Sam, but the one constant over the seasons is Robert Singer.
This is all just conjecture, but I did feel that Gamble got a bit of a bad deal during her time.
I do think there were too many stories in S6, but most of them had great potential. The Campbells were misused and then killed off too quickly. Samuel was pretty much ruined. But I liked the idea of the Campbells and learning more about Mary's side of the family.
The MOA plot was the start of the overarching angle that really has NOTHING to do w/the main characters. As someone else pointed out, Sam and Dean could have been replaced w/Jo Blow Hunter and Jane Huntress for all the importance they held to the resolution of the MOA plot.
Then, there was Castiel's arc, which seemed really tacked on to me, but that's JMO.
In all, I enjoyed S6. I liked it better than S7, and so far, it is much better, IMO, than S8.
I didn't love the depressed Dean last year, but except for how at times he seemed distant from Sam, I understood it. They'd been through a lot, it made sense for his character.
But this Sam thing has become a huge issue for me. So if they don't correct it at all (and that is beginning to look like the case) the entire first half of the season is a loss for me.
I also agree that Gamble got a hard time that wasn't deserved. I enjoyed S6 and S7 because I felt they moved the SPN stories back towards the type of stories I enjoyed in S1-3. Once I had an explanation for Sam's weird behaviour in S6, I thought the idea was really intriguing as it gave us another lens through which to view the character of Sam Winchester and to see what made him tick. I wish that Soulless!Sam had been kept for the entirety of S6.
S7 was a bit light on Winchester character exploration and a bit too heavy on Leviathan hunting. I prefer my SPN when Sam and Dean (and their lives) are the central focus of the plots and so while I enjoyed most of S7 I didn't think it was as good as it could have been. I also wanted to see more of Dean and Sam dealing with Sam's hallucinations more, I felt that storyline wasn't properly explored or developed. Sam's wall coming down had been flagged as being a dreadful thing but then the subsequent plots didn't demonstrate that sufficiently :(
I, too, think that SG took more of the blame than she deserved. RS was equally to blame and none fell on him from most of the fandom.
I thought SS was RS's idea, But I'm not certain about that.
So, I'm gonna be bitchier and quote the hell out of all the "lovely bits" that made me pissed to the nth degree.
Apologies upfront for rant (and excessive use of quotation marks). And this is just my (exasperated) opinion. No personal insult intended.
RS: "Well, look, we make this stuff up as we go along."
No shit. I think this one particularly makes it evident that they've been pulling shit out of thin air for quite some time. Atleast Kripke had the brains to admit this AFTERWARDS. But I do think that he had most of the his story worked out, in one way or another. Since season 6, I've felt that they've had minimal to no goal in mind and have just been doing stuff that sounded cool.
RS:"Sometimes early on we don’t exactly know where it ends, we just know where we’re going but not how we finish it."
Again, sounds very thought out and confidence inspiring [/ end sarcasm]. But what I'd like to hear is how they have this strong, new vision. And then follow through it! Not this arbitrary coin toss and plots that go nowhere.
RS:"...we don’t make arbitrary left turns just for the sake of "that would be a good story beat,""
AHHAHAHHAHHAHHAAAA! That is all.
RS:"Really, whatever the plot of the week is, ultimately it comes down to "how are the brothers feeling about it, how does it affect their relationship, what’s underneath the surface of the story?" "
Uh huh. Could've fooled me. He's been singing this same tune since the beginning (of show) but ever since Kripke dropped out, I've been less and less impressed by the way they have handled this particular "vision".
RS:"You guys are always so ahead of us."
Honestly? She didn't put out anything that any normal fan wouldn't have thought out before. I'm kinda scared by all the things that they apparently haven't even thougt about. I'm not expecting them to think about every single detail to match As Time Goes By (hee!) but these questions aren't really that far fetched. If they introduce "something new and exciting" they 'should' think about what it means in the long run and not how "cool" it is now. Atleast in the case that they plan to revisit it later.
re: Sam
RS: "I thought it [Amelia] opened up a side of Sam that was really interesting."
Really? And what side was that?`That he wanted out of hunting? That he wanted normal? That he had something he never had?? Okay, at this point, I'd be much happier if the interviewed person be ANYONE other than R.S. because this is depressing the hell out of me... Has he seen the show??! This "human" story of Sams, wasn't something new, or interesting. Just my opinion but still. I didn't learn anything about Sam that I allready didn't know. What WAS new but not so exciting, was that the Sam I did see, seemed to have little to none feelings regarding his own brother who used to be the world to him. But all it took was one exploding Dick and all that love and loyalty went out the window.
RS:"We think she’s a really valuable character. We liked her a lot and certainly it creates a good complication in Sam’s life."
Again, I don't see it. What complication? She asked him to choose and stay gone if he left. He left. She went back to her husband. End of story. Is he really gonna go back to her at some point? That seems like a shitty thing to do...
RS:"I think ... it’s [Sams reason to hunt] really revenge motivated. "
Wow. Again, something exciting and new! Sam is motivated by revenge to hunt! I never saw that coming. ![/sarcasm] Except, I didn't because I thought Sam had ditched the revenge train in season 5 when he discovered all the "good" it had brought him. I 'thought' he had come to terms of hunting and it being important. But I guess that's not so exciting...
RS:"I think still, he in the back of his mind thinks there’s a normal life out there for him. In a way, Dean’s onboard with that. He’d like to see [Sam] happy but they have this one thing to do. Now, television being television, they’ll have something else "one thing to do" down the line. "
Yeah. That doesn't sound depressing as hell, at all. He wants out, but something always comes along and he never gets there. Terrific. I'd like them to end the show with both boys going out guns blazing, because they are fighting the good fight and are together... not because they had no other choice.
re:Dean
RS:"He’s probably much more internal than Sam in a way. I think that when they get into these emotional areas the catalyst is more Sam. "
Deans the internal one??!! Again, what show is he.. never mind. So, Sams the extrovert. That's why we have such a "clear view" of where his head is at.
RS:"Dean is always in defense of dad."
AHHAHAHHHHAHAAA! Yes he is, IN SEASON 1! Glad to see you're up to speed...
RS:"I would hope whenever we bring the curtain down that Dean would find some peace, and probably if I have anything to say about it he will. "
Yeah. Dean should find some peace. While Sam keeps on hunting when there's always "one thing to do".
re: brothers
RS:"I don’t think it’s shaky [boys latest truce] . "
Okay.
RS:"It’s a new conflict. I won’t tell you any more than that but as always, there’s always something going on between them."
What's with this goddamn CONFLICT, every single time?! When will they (TPTB) understand that we won't stop watching if they get along for more than one episode?! They don't have to butt heads every week! Relationships do have good times, every once in a while. Or are they just having a blast from every friday to wednesday and all the shit comes down on thursdays? Well aint' that just my luck...
"But are we completely done with the flashbacks for both Dean and Sam?"
RS: Yeah.
Me: Great. Perfect. All questions answered then. Great. I feel so happy now. Everything makes sense. Finally.
Yeah, you're right, it's coming... [/end sarcams]
I get you're clever and making points with sarcasm, but some of your language is offensive. I'm guessing you've never been a writer on a television series. I've read tons of interviews with writers and showrunners, and most make comments like "we make this stuff up as we go." Maybe RS was being sarcastic. He advised they start and map out the entire season, sometimes not knowing where it will end, but have a general idea. Whatever TPTB's process is in Season 8, it's working. I have no other comments on your interpretation of RS's interview, other than to comment there are lots of fans who do not agree with your Season 8 feelings and comments. Agree to disagree. I would also suggest using some less colorful language to make a point.
I do apologise. This was written in the wrong mood. Usually I just mull it over and not post. In this case, I def. should have done that. This was quite extreme I agree.
This is the Bitterness -thread and I felt like I had to vent a "bit". But I could have done it much better.
And Alice, feel free to edit or delete this if you feel it is insulting. I didn't have my filter on, so I understand that it sounds harsh.
I should make an account so that I could edit stuff myself when I post, don't bother the mods...
Sorry for the swearing aswell.
I really couldn't stomach a Winchester baby brought about in that way
Quote:Sometimes, unfortunately, plot elements of SPN have very much come across as the writers making shite up as they go along, however, they make a LOT of episodes and on the whole the good seems to be more in effect than the bad. But it’s not at all reassuring to hear showrunners saying things like that, I remember when Stargate SG1 and Stargate Atlantis’ original showrunners took a back seat and handed things over to a writing team that had no clue - there were lots of interviews (like this one) in which it came across that the new showrunners didn’t have the same understanding or emotional connection to the characters that the original showrunner had. It was around about that time that the characters and plots all started going downhill. I hope this won’t happen with SPN.
As for the arbitrary plot turns that he thinks they don’t make? I join you in your sarcastic laughter!!!!!
Quote:I agree with your assessment of the ball being dropped on this important part of the SPN world. I’m having to find more and more of my assessment or portrayal of the Winchesters’ feelings about things from other fans or from fanfic.
Quote:For the love of Chuck, please tell me that there is someone in the SPN production office I can officially contact to BEG for no more Amelia (or Sam trying to find normal). That plotline was boring, soap opera nonsense and very much NOT what I want from Supernatural in terms of story
Also, I didn’t like the new Sam who seemed cold and distant towards his brother when said brother returned from Purgatory. I also didn’t like the Sam who we didn’t see trying to find out what happened to his brother. Early S8 Sam Winchester is like a weird Pod Person and I hope he’s gone for good!
Quote:I’m starting to think that RS has only got room for Season 1 characterisations of Sam and Dean in his brain because he doesn’t seem to see the character development that’s happened with the brothers over the years. I too want to see something less depressing and something less domestic. I’m watching SPN for the “hunting things, saving people†not Sam angsting over whether or not he can have a girlfriend.
Quote:Dean was more internal at the beginning of SPN but Dean’s got a bit better at telling Sam how he feels about things. Sam used to be the brother who was happier to discuss his feelings with Dean and who tried to get Dean to open up to him BUT nowadays Sam is much more reluctant to discuss his feelings than he used to be and he doesn’t really give the viewers much of an idea of what’s going on in his noggin anymore.
Quote:Dean is not always in defence of John, the brothers have both changed their views on this issue a lot and I’m going to be charitable and put that down to mixed feelings on a complex issue rather than inconsistent writing.
Oh noes, I do not want to see RS’ version of Dean and Sam’s ending. I would not enjoy that at all. I either want them going out in a blaze of glory or them going back to good old S1 style hunting without epic Heaven v Hell interference.
Quote:WHY must the writers always think conflict between Sam and Dean is what sells this show to the audience?!?!?!? ! It’s boring and lazy and contrived drama and it does the show + actors a disservice. A large part of the show’s attraction for a large part of the audience is the brothers’ bond and keeping that strong. I think when showrunners start forcing conflict into shows it’s because they’re bored or out of ideas.
Not my excessive rant which was waaayyy over the top.
But thanks Ciar, you made more sense than I did :)
THIS! IMO a retcon back to S1 was the worst possible way to go. People are the sum of ALL their experiences so why are they ignoring the things that have happened in S2 to S7? Makes absolutely no sense to me.
Carver is really lacking in many areas, IMO. I don't think I'll ever move past his OOC path for Sam this year or fully understand why he didn't want Sam to search for Dean. It goes against the very fabric of the freakin' show!
Your rant was on the money, Supernarttu, so rant away!
Quote:Ciar, that sums up how I feel about the show. This show existed very well w/o crazy conflict for THREE years. There is no need for all this unnecessary drama and conflict btw the parties.
Sam...his history by Carvers own words is too complicated to understand so they will ignore it. Whihc means they will ignore all Sam's charecterizatio n....everything he has gone through...every thing that has made Sam...Sam.
In Singers interview he said Sam dreams of being happy but wont get it. But Dean...if its the last think he does Singer will make sure Dean gets to have happy before show ends.
Does Sam have ONE person he can confide in? Talk to? Thinks of Family? HAs scenes where he has emotinally rich, scenes...scens that dont have to do with imparting exposition about the monster of the week? Does he have a best friend? Does he have someone he thinks of as a brother? Someone outside of Dean?
Sam was written to not look for Dean at all because Carver didn't want Sam anywhere near saving Dean. Couldn't introduce Benny...the better brother then Sam ever was... if Sam had a hand in saving Dean...if they actually showed Sam ...allowed sam to be shown as broken at Deans death... they could never introduce Benny as the poor, sad little vampire who loves and respects Dean so much and is the greatest brother nd friend ever.
They wouldn't have written Ameila as such a horrible, rotten charecotr. Wouldn't have hired an actress with so little chemistry with Jared. WOuldn't have written this 'romance' where fans were so divided as to what this ship actually means too Sam.
There wouldn't have been 10 episodes with the boys at each others throats over something that was so out of charector for Sam.
They would have shown Sam immediatley after Dean disappeared...b ut they couln't allow anyone to feel sympathy or emoathy for Sam. They wouldn't be able to push the Benny is the better brother story if they showed Sams loss and grief.
We got 2 episoides of benny te perfect woobie vampire and no insight into Sam.
I'm so frustrated and heartsick..And I'm sorry I'm all over the map with my thoughts.
I was so happy when I read that you enjoyed ATGB ep and I agree it defo showed Sam in a more engaging role, ie having more to say, being part of the action and generally just having more presence. Also this and the ep before demonstrated an attempt at getting the boys relationship back on track, which to be honest, I am the most happiest about (more than any other problems that the fans have voiced) as I was beginning to despair that they had gone so far at changing the dynamic of the relationship as not to be able to repair/restore it even if the intent was to mature the characters.
Quote:Quote:Quote: ... You seem to be suggesting that the writers producers directors etc are being unfair only to Sam's character which is exactly the point. He is a character and they really do have artistic license to write him any which way, but to suggest that they want to degrade (my word not yours) him is unfathomable to me. Why deliberately write badly for a character that is well loved and that is the bread and butter of the show, to me this is just committing artistic suicide. Why would they do that when it is there job and reflects badly on them if they screw up. Looking back a few seasons and I could have said exactly the same about Dean. For years he was written as an ineffectual, depressed alcoholic, (who was rescued by Sam on numerous occasions), yet to date this has been addressed and he is back on track. I don't think anyone believed back then they were throwing Dean under a bus (at least I don't think so
Just an aside and I am not sure if you are going to agree with this but if you look at earlier eps at the interaction btwn J & J as actors, there seems to be far more of a magnetic connection than the current eps and I don't think it is solely down to the writing and directing. Neither J nor J were married back then, and probably had far less external commitments than they currently have. I sometimes get the feeling that they are just worn out and tired after years of playing the same characters. So I really do believe that they have asked for a little more time off to recharge and spend time with family. However, if this is the case, then they should come clean and be honest with the fans who have defo noticed that something is up. What do you think?
I think the writers/carver. ..etc cetra are very carefully doing everything they can to make Sam look bad and unlikable by making everyone else more likable, more sympathetic. How are they doing this? BY making their POV favored charector say how much better they are then Sam.....they write extremely sympathetic in your face episodes devoted to show how sympathetic and aweseome they are. They write scenes showing Dean having lovely scenes sharing feelings, thoughts and caring between Dean and the other charector...Castiel...benny...Charlie.
Then show Dean unwilling, unable to have a simple conversation with Sam...instead pitting the two in a vapid, pointless conflict. And then Have the favored Charector tell the unfavored one how much he disapponts him, how much he has betrayed him.. How Dean can't trust Sam.
Can you honestly tell me after the first ten episodes if Dean really adn truely trusts Sam? And why?
If either or both J's are worn out from playing the same charector all they have to do is NOT continue signing for more seasons. Although I can't commment on the connection between the J's......its hard to comment when they have had incessent never ending conflict for the last 4 years. Neither charector has had a chance to breath. Honestly? I think keeping up that level of emotional conflict for so long has got to be EXHAUSTING. And I think thast why both J's have mentioned wanting to interact with other actors.
Who the heck would want to do all angst and conflict ALL the time? Espcially when the conflict makes utterly no sense story wise or charector wise. If the fans are tired of the conflict I can imagine how the actors feel.
I really can't see the logic in the writers/Carver trying to deliberately destroy one of the lead characters in the show. The continued success of the show hinges on the involvement of both of them. I am not sure why they have chosen to write Sam as they have. Maybe they thought the whole Amelia fiasco would go over better then it did. Maybe they thought the fans would be more understanding over his early choices after Dean disappeared. I was. Of course I am looking at this from a different end of the telescope but I thought Dean was also written very unsympathetical ly this year. Spectre? Text? "Dean's a douchebag" "Dean's a dick" "Dean doesn't love, respect, or want his brother around". Remenber those comments? My point is, you have a legitimate beef. But I don't agree with the conclusion that the writers and Carver have conspired to destroy the character. It makes no sense.
They're trying something that they thought would work. Unfortunately, for a lot of us, it's just not. And the "course correct" can not simply be to decide to ignore what isn't being well received. They've done that often enough on this show, and it never goes over well. They have to deal with the mess they've created this time.
ok, lala2. I told myself I wasn't going to get into this again, but you keep bringing up the Damsel in Distress comment.
To me... when I first posted in agreement with whoever mentioned it (Kelly? maybe?) it's not about what Sam did or didn't do to get out of it.
It's not solely about this episode.
It's about the entire season. It's about, for me, how the writers choose to remove Sam from any chance of heroic action.
Not only was Sam supposedly "unable" to do anything about finding/rescuin g Dean... he left Kevin. Abandoned a kid to Crowley. On top of that, look at the number of times he has been written as ineffectual in a fight. The number of times he has been knocked out, choked, held back, sent to do something else, or otherwise removed from the picture so that Dean and Dean alone is saving the day.
First 2 episodes, I don't even remember...
Heartache - Sam's knocked out. Bitten - Not really about either brother. Blood Brother - Sam's left at the motel. Southern Comfort - Sam does research while Dean stops the MotW, and then takes a beating from possessed Dean for his past actions. Hunteri Heroici - Sam talks to Mike Farrell's character while Dean takes on the bad guy. Citizen Fang - Sam's sent on a wild goose chase to "save" Amelia. LARP - Sam again does research, then, in the midst of battle with the bad guy, is grabbed by a suit of armour and simply held out of the battle.
Hell. Even in Torn and Frayed, where they were supposedly getting back to being equals, Sam was being choked by a demon so Dean could run up and save his ass again.
Finally. This episode.... Sam gets himself captured, so Dean can save the day again.
Next episode (SPOILER!) we've already seen pictures of Sam huddled down on the stairs with Protective Big Brother hovering over him. Yay.
It's not about Sam and what he should/shouldn' t have done ... it's about the writers deciding Sam is suddenly unable to be helpful in a battle so that Dean is the hero. If Sam started waving a kerchief and blowing kisses at him at the end of every episode, I wouldn't be at all surprised.
(sorry. Sarcasm. Yes, I'm bitter. This should probably be on the other thread, but it's in response to lala2)
Don't get me wrong. I am NOT anti-Dean. Dean is a hero, no question. The writers have simply forgotten that Sam himself is every bit the hero that Dean is. That's why I see him as a DiD this season.
End of Rant. Enough said.
Now, does this make it less annoying to a fan of that particular character? No, of course not--Dean's moments of suddenly losing all abilities (continued in S7 under the depression label) was fairly frustrating to me as well. Still, it's a matter of perception--som e fans had no problem with Dean's rustiness and others frequently taking on the final action sequence role, just like some won't have a problem now. It's all about how you view things. Now, there really should be a way to right both the boys as heroic. But it's all a matter of what you view as heroic.
In this case, I think show isn't trying to remove Sam from the heroic role as much as they're hitting the reset button back to S1, where Sam was strangled/knock ed out/in need of rescuing fairly often. I think resetting to S1 has its good points, but some of the characterizatio n/action distribution is problematic. They've both come a long way since those days, and going back isn't always going to work. This may be one of those times for some.
I also think it further illustrates the problem with the sudden Sam is the brains/Dean is the brawn generalization being voiced. Sam isn't just smart--he's also strong and a great hunter. Dean isn't just a great hunter--he's pragmatic and clever in an outside the box way. I hope that going forward they don't try to shoehorn Sam and Dean into those respective boxes. I'm not sure they will, because Dean was allowed to come up with a plan in this episode, and I sincerely doubt Sam is going to be shackled to the bat cave for the rest of the season. But we'll wait and watch and see what transpires.
For me its more about Sam vanishing form the frame.As i have said before in torn and frayed after Charlie destroys the book till the fairy leaves if I had tuned in that moment I would have thought Sam to be not involved in that scene.
Looking at that list, it does seem as if the writers and showrunners this season are going to great lengths to emphasise Sam’s unsuitability for active battle in the field. Perhaps they are trying to introduce the idea that Sam is not suited to the physical side of hunting and is best suited (in the long term) to a world of books where he only things he’ll be in danger, and need rescuing, from will be dust bunnies and paper cuts??
I hear you girl, I hear you. It's been one dissapointing Supernatural year yet again. I've felt so disconnected again this year because the Sam that I see, does not feel 'right' to me. I wish he was revealed as Soulless again or some other explanation because this just doesn't feel like Sam Winchester, at all!
One thing about your post caught my eye and it's the issue I've had since the very beginning. Sam not looking for Kevin.
I can in some tiny tiny microscopic way, see Sam not looking for Dean. Atleast Dean dissappeared with Cas, so it could be said that atleast wherever he got send to, he'd not be alone. And Dean is a very skilled hunter, and a very smart and resourceful guy.
And even as it screams in my head that Sam leaving Dean to an unkown fate is wrong, wrong, wrong, even more wrong is Sam leaving a KID in the hands of the King of Hell. I cannot see Sam doing that, ever. Crowley took Kevin and Sam just let him. Didn't even bother to try and save him. I don't really care how Kevin was shown escaping and living on his own for a year, Sam didn't know that. He obviously didn't care. A 17 year old kid who knew next to nothing about the supernatural. A kid who had no one else to depend upon but Sam and Dean. And the other one had a pretty darn good excuse not to help. Sam? Well, his "world imploded" and "he ran". He even tossed the phones that nobody could call for help. Great.
And now, because of certain interview, it's become apparent that, that was indeed how it all happened. What we saw is what we got. Sams world imploded and he ran. And then he just got a girl and went on with his life. That interview wrecked me more than Show ever could. Atleast before that, I had some shread of hope that "maybe it isn't so".
And now he's back in hunting. Not because he enjoyes it, or the company of his brother. But because he 'has' to. It's his job, his duty. The same story he told in 8.01. What progress is that?
I remember writing a response in that ComiCon interview where it was revealed that Sam would not look for Dean, or Kevin. The same ending applies here still,after all this time.
Oh Sam. What have they done to you?
Excuse me, I'm gonna go hug my SPN seasons 1-5 DVD's and pretend the rest was just a bad dream.
God, I hope they prove me wrong.
Well, they didn't.
And no one provided an answer.
Carver's decision to have Sam not look for Dean or help Kevin does NOT make Sam a "damsel in distress" to me. It's plain bad writing. That's all. I don't see it as a statement re: Sam or his character b/c we all know that's NOT how Sam would act. In my mind, Carver doesn't understand Sam, which is why he decided to take him down this very OOC, whacky route.
And honestly, I have never paid much attention to who rescues whom unless the situation is weird and unnatural in some way like Dean just standing there w/a gun in his hand doing nothing like he did in some episode last year. I do recall that Dean was always rescuing or saving Sam in S1. That didn't make Sam seem weaker, incompetent, or a DID in my eyes. I remember reading a lot of complaints from Dean girls that in S6 or S7 (can't remember which - maybe both) Sam was always rescuing Dean. It was a chief complaint of theirs. Again, who rescues whom is just not something I note unless the situation is weird.
I pretty much disliked every episode prior to this one so I can't recall much of anything that happened in any episode. I don't even remember T&F, and that just aired a couple of weeks ago, right? Aside from Castiel flipping out (I think), I don't remember what happened in that episode.
Look, I was never trying to talk you out of what you're feeling. Feel what you want. I had a specific question about a specific episode. That's all. If he's being presented as a DID to you, then fine.
This season pretty much sucks. I liked this one episode. If they suddenly make Sam a bumbling, incompetent hunter, then I'll just call foul like I've been doing since I read that Sam wouldn't look for Dean.
I know you weren't trying to talk me out of my feelings.
You kept asking. I finally decided to answer. That's all. Unfortunately, I can't think about it without being pissed off.
For me, the DiD was NEVER about one specific episode, even if you meant to ask about this particular one. It's an ongoing thing. The writing in this episode just continued to build on the problem.
You liked the episode. Lots did. No problem.
In this specific situation Sam could have tried an exorcism. He could have tried to slip the bonds, attempt an escape. He could have taken precautions (ie the angel or demon blade or testing the couple) to possibly prevent him getting caught in the first place. Jeez, at the very least he could have gotten snarky with the demon, showed a bit of spirit. He didn’t have to succeed (in his attempt to escape); the story dictated that he wouldn’t. The point is that Sam wasn’t even shown to try. He knew that the demon wasn’t going to kill him, he was needed for the trade so why didn’t he try something? It was almost as if he knew Dean was going to save him so what was the point in trying to save himself?
I hear what you're saying, but I'm not sure what slipping the bonds or being snarky would have gotten Sam other than being hurt. Additionally, the boys never test the people they interview. I can't recall a single instance of them doing that, so I wasn't too surprised that Sam didn't do it in this instance. Maybe they should start doing it though, but, other than Fake!Adam, it isn't something they've done in the past.
However, I do understand your and st50's overall point that Sam has been presented as far too passive this year, and that this was just another stone in a growing pile. I get your beef.
I must admit that I don't recall much about the episodes that came before ATGB. I just haven't been all that interested in Supernatural this year, and I especially don't remember the specific fights in the episodes. Even when I loved Supernatural, I never really kept track of who rescued whom; I only notice it if I feel the scene is "weird" in some way. All I can say is Sam's behavior w/Abbadon didn't strike me as odd or weird. I did think it was odd that Sam told them Dean had the key, esp. since Sam hesitated after mentioning Dean but then went ahead and told them. That was strange to me, but it didn't put me off the episode or anything. Once captured, I didn't find anything off or wrong w/Sam's behavior and actions. His behavior wasn't so odd that I took note of it.
That's just my opinion though. I understand that you guys feel differently. I hope you can understand my position as well.
They wouldn't get too far splashing water or cutting people.
I guess the difference is Sam probably didn't approach the last MOL w/a cover story or anything. They were on a time crunch so I'm thinking he just went w/the truth. I could see them testing people in those rare instances when everyone is fully aware of the supernatural, etc.
I'm afraid my dipping in the shallow pool is just not relaxing enough for me any more.
I've decided to give it until the next mini-hellatus (Beginning of March I think), which gives the show another 4 episodes to show me there's a reason for all this crap. Then I'll re-evaluate. Getting very tired of hanging on and hoping.
I really hope that somebody who goes to the Con in March will ask the boys if they realize how badly they broke the brother bond and the equality between the boys, and if they know it still needs fixing.
Fix Sam ...and SamnDean is my only wish....and FIX SAM, or I am out for the next season! I won't hurt myself
anymore
Those are my words of importance "fix Sam, Jeremy Carver"
Dean is favorite and when Dean doesn't approve Sam how can anyone approve Sam nowadays? Sam used to have an independant character trait, but he came almost everytime back to Dean when something was off and saved him from whatever.
What I want to say is that I am not satiesfied with one episode where Dean can say that he wouldn't let Sam die, or would always try to save him, normally I should have gotten warm and fuzzy feelings, but I didn't. The emotional foundation is not there, I feel more that its his duty to save Sam, not out of love. Why would Dean love Sam? Why would Dean care for Sam? Sam is Dean's mysery and only brings him doom and unhappiness, anger, disappointment.
Dean can talk with others but not with Sam (emotional support, empathetic) Dean also says "atleast one of us should be happy" I think Dean IS happy now with hunting and all, why does it sound like Dean does the duty job, the personal sacrifice, when it is Sam who sacrificed his normal life? Dean talks with others why not with Sam? And then there is a reason why he can't with Sam so give Sam someone different, a person who is loved by fandom and give this person a real arc/relationshi p with Sam, make this person loved and likable by fandom.
And when Sam doesn't need emotional support from others and from Dean himself so I guess that he is a soulless version of S6 Sam who was uncomfortable to share and to pretend to feel? Why did they gave Sam even his soul back when we don't get the emotional aftermath of it? Let him be soulless for the rest of SPN, so Dean can bond with everyone and then I have atleast one reason why Dean can't do this with Sam....awwww...sigh.....
not to mention J's wanting time off and so characters bonding with others....but its Dean who gets the bonding scenes, Sam gets the research scenes and it seems that this will continue.....si gh.....if they would not let Sam emotionally drown and dried out of all the "big" scenes, I wouldn't say much, but....sigh....
Someone above said they didn't see the writers ruining the Sam character. That it doesn't make sense and I agree that it doesn't. Unforunately, that's all I can see when they refuse to give Sam any real depth and sideline him from the MOTW by having him do research. That makes him a support character which is how I see him now. He gets even less characterizatio n than a support character (Benny) does. How sad is that?
Btw, do you think all these issues with Sam and Dean are stepping stones for the next two seasons? I mean someone mentioned that they are planning on bringing SPN to season 10.. (I hope the writers will give Sam's character something). Sometimes I also wonder, if the writers are doing this on purpose to bring the fans into a frenzy >.< and not just by poor judgment.
Quote: I do agree with you a certain extent. I don’t believe that the showrunners have any intention to deliberately malign one brother. However (and there is always an however), if I may just note a few things.
We don’t know what the show or Carver’s intent is. None of us is privy to what is going on inside his head so none of us can comment on what the show’s intent actually is. Could it be their intent to sideline Sam or Dean and focus on something aside from the brothers? Of course it could. Why couldn’t it?
Some fans on here think that Sam is deliberately being written unsympathetically and while many don't agree with it, an argument can, and has, been made for it. Some fans believe that Dean has not been part of the mytharc for years now and is being deliberately kept from the frontline by ‘special snowflake Sammy’ who gets all the good storylines. Again, an argument can, and has, been made for it. Whether or not people believe these arguments is irrelevant; a valid argument has been made and ‘truth’ is based on perception. Isn’t that what the court of law is about; the prosecution presents the ‘truth’, the opposition presents the ‘truth’ and both sides hope that the jury will believe their ‘truth’?
Secondly, people think what they think and if they think it then it’s true to them, and that’s really all that matters. That’s what perception is. People see what they see and they react accordingly. That doesn’t mean they’re sensitive to a particular type of comments etc. I mean, if I reply to a comment dumping on John should I first consider whether I am replying because I disagree with it, because I have a point to make about it in rebuttal or because I’m 'sensitive' to those type of comments?
However, I do join with you in relation to being puzzled about fan reaction to other fan reactions. I’ve been puzzled, frustrated (disappointed, disheartened and often sickened) by it since Comic Con interviews in July and being honest, if I never again read a comment about how annoying or repetitive or depressing or off-putting or narrow-minded or irrational ‘some fans’ are then it’ll be too soon. It’d be great if people could read a post and make comment on that, and not on the type of fan they believe the poster to be based on their reaction to an episode or a spoiler.
Quote: Then this, being honest, is a worry. What is it about the season, or the writing this season, that made so many fans hop on the ‘Sam is to blame for Martin’s death’ idea but no-one consider the same in a similar situation involving Dean? Our reactions to and analysis of a situation are fed by what we see on screen so is it solely the way that Sam is being written this season that make his actions less than understandable to so many, or are they all wrong in their perceptions, that they’re not seeing things the way the writers intend for them to be seen?
Barring that, and genuine question, does Sam just have that many bashers, who want to see the worst in everything he does or are they just that many fans out there with Dean bias who don’t want to see what he does? Surely there is serious imbalance in the way the stories and the characters are presented going by the reactions to those two similar situations alone? Would that not give some validity to the ‘Sam is not being written well’ idea i.e. the ‘conspiracy’ theory?
Quote: It’s not easy to read through the lines because what you read, and how you chose to take what you’ve read, also depends on you, and not just the post.
Being honest, when I made the decision to post that observation I was well aware of how my point would be received. Some people would think ‘Huh, that is strange’. ‘Others will think ‘See, doesn’t that show that we’re not getting Sam’s POV’ and yet more would think ‘She’s some bitch. I bet she hates Dean and that’s why she’s saying it cos she thinks he’s responsible for everything.’ Therefore, how a person chooses to read my comment will depend very much on their own bias (and every single one of us is biased in some way) or the kind of bias they perceive that I have.
Quote: I don’t quite get this, Bamboo24, ‘allow them to colour the way I perceive the show’? Perhaps I’m taking it up wrong but surely the only person responsible for your perception of what you see is you? If you like the episode, or if you see certain things from it and why are you allowing the views of others to change that? And if you don't want your perception to be coloured then why are you reading the thoughts of people who might colour it??
Also, taking reactions and imposing them on the show is something every fan does with every comment they post. If JimBob posts a comment about how great the brotherly bond is and how it should be to the forefront of every episode and the show is terrible without it then isn’t he/she imposing his reaction on the show itself?
Quote: This is the thing. With all due respect, Bamboo24, neither you, nor emmau, nor I can decide what is ‘objective' because objectivity is something unique to each poster. The theme of the season is ‘perception†™, therefore objectivity is kind of irrelevant. People see what they see and they comment accordingly. And I’m sorry but I believe that what people see and what they think should be respected enough so that it's not referred to as a ‘conspiracy theory’ or a ‘persecution complex’.
First, thanks for a great response! There's lots to mull over here, and you make many good points.
For the sake of discussion, and at the risk of either coming across as extremely nerdy and pretentious or totally stupid, I'm going to take a crack at addressing what I see is a bit of a philosophical difference that seems to underlie our comments. Bear with me. :)
Quote:Quote:It seems we reach sort of existential impasse when we start talking about truth and objectivity. Truth, or more accurately, 'objective reality', and perception are two different things. (How accurately this discussion aligns with the show's theme!) Take the existence of gravity, for example. I can say I don't believe in gravity, or that I think it's something else, and that may be my perception. But the objective reality is that gravity is a scientific phenomenon that exists and works a certain way, despite any perception to the contrary. Likewise, going off your courtroom argument - the prosecution and the defense each spin the facts in the light most favorable to their respective clients - however that doesn't change the fact that there is one way, and only one way, that the events leading up to that lawsuit transpired; one truth. One objective sequence of events.
And how do we determine what is objectively true? How do jurors measure truth claims? How do we come to say that gravity is a scientific fact or law? Evidence. Common sense. Granted, evidence can be "spun" to favor a pre-supposed conclusion, and one can make an argument for anything. But arguments are validated or invalidated based on rules of morality, reason, and logic. Depart from these rules - particularly ones of reason and logic - and you no longer have a valid argument.
For example, Hitler made an argument for why Jews were enemies of the Germans - but it wasn't based on objective reality. It wasn't valid. Slaveholders made arguments for why African Americans were inferior and why slavery was necessary - but they were, quite simply, wrong. Their perception was not in line with objective reality. Their perception was not, in fact, truth.
The basic rule of morality tends to be the golden rule - treat others the way you'd want to be treated. Applying that to the "PTB hate my favorite character" argument and, at least to me, it seems the rule would obligate one to - in the absence of evidence to the contrary - assume the best about others. The rules of logic and reason are pretty straightforward.
So truth - objective reality - is something fixed and certain. And perception can be wrong, or invalid.
This is why saying "any argument is valid because it's true for the arguer" rings false to me. By definition, an argument is valid if and only if the truth of its premises results in the truth of its conclusion. What I'm saying is that arguments which result in the conclusion that the PTB hate or dislike or are deliberately trying to damage certain characters are based on faulty premises, and are therefore invalid.
Likewise, if someone comments: "Sam hates Dean" - well, that conclusion is only as true as the evidence supporting it. Are the premises flawed because they are colored by that person's inaccurate perception? I find that they often are. It's human nature.
You're absolutely right that we can't "know" for certain what PTBs think or why they do/write the way they do. But we have evidence we can evaluate, and common sense to call on. And using the rules of morality, logic, and reason, we can come to a valid conclusion. Those who choose to ignore such the valid conclusion are choosing to ignore objective reality - and that's fine for them, but it's likely not 'true'.
That being said, I don't think it is disrespectful of anyone to point out logical fallacies or unreasonablenes s when it's there, so long as the tone doesn't come across as snarky or disrespectful.
UGH- so that's my extreme over-analytical side coming out. :)
That said, if I happen to think they are purposefully writing Sam as an unsympathetic character because they don't like him (which I don't), then suddenly I'm HITLER? Really?? Isn't that a bit OTT?
That is SO not what I said.
I just thought it was an OTT comment. I'm sorry if I upset you.
I'm sorry, I just don't think that's fair, especially when I went to such great lengths to be clear in my comment. The fact that someone would get my point but still make a comment mis-characteriz ing what I said does upset me.
My understanding is that Godwin's law would apply only if I had actually compared someone to Hitler or someone's views to Hitler's views. Since I made no such comparison, I don't see how it applies. In fact, saying that someone compared other posters or fans to Hitler when they actually didn't seems to fall more into Godwin's law territory, IMO.
Perhaps my comment was unnecessary or too outside the bounds of the thread discussion. Perhaps I could have used different examples. But you didn't suggest those things in your initial comment. I'm sorry that my comment set you off, and it's fine if you thought it was OTT; but it's not okay, IMO, to mis-characteriz ed what I wrote as suggesting that I compared other fans or posters to Hitler.
What is perceived as an ‘objective reality’ or an ‘objective sequence of events’ often changes as more information comes to light. Hypothetical situation; a guy gets up in the middle of the night and goes downstairs to find his wife on the couch being raped by someone who has broken into his house. Husband jumps to his wife’s aid, attacks the rapist and knocks him out. This is his objective sequence of events; he saved his wife, protected his home and stopped a criminal.
On closer investigation, the wife reveals that the ‘rapist’ was actually a man she was having an affair with, who happened to be her ex-husband, and she invited him into the house. So there is now a different sequence of events.
On much closer investigation, they find out there was a glitch in the divorce and it turned out that they were still legally married and his (ex?) wife got the house in the ‘divorce’. Therefore, the ‘rapist’ was a man who has actually having sex with his own wife in his own home when he was attacked by a man who had no legal right to be there. This is now the objective sequence of events.
Which of those three narrators is objective and what is the objective perception or logical sequence of events in this situation? All three narrators have their own perception so what would be the ‘truth’ (as decided by the jury)?
The same applies to your gravity example. Based on the information that we have at present, gravity can be explained scientifically and because we live in an age where science is the new god, it is accepted to be the ‘truth’. However, prior to Newton, does that mean that the way gravity was explained was not objective? Not at all. It meant that a hypothesis was formed based on what they knew at the time. Science is fallible. One changed variable, one new realisation and it’s no longer the law of gravity but the theory of gravity so some time in the future we might look back on ‘gravity’ and think ‘Jeez, what were we thinking trying to explain gravity with science. It was all down to the aliens etc’. (I’m not saying that will happen, just that an objective sequence of events is dependent on the knowledge available to us at that time.)
Quote: Then here again is the crux of the issue. What you regard as ‘common sense’ others might not. You mentioned that arguments are validated or invalidated based on rules of morality, reason and logic. That’s not entirely true. Very often personal bias, prior experiences, not getting all the evidence, believing some evidence/witnesses more than others, finding the prosecution/defence lawyer more appealing etc all come into play when deciding on the ‘truth’. Morality, reason and logic are all dependent on perception and experience. So it is not possible to say what is a ‘valid argument’, you can only say what is valid to you.
Add to that, if we look at what is being argued as a ‘valid argument’ in this context then morality, reason and logic kind of goes out the window because SPN is a TV show. Its moral, reasoning and logical ideals are dictated by the fact that they want it to stay on the air therefore it constantly changes based on what it believes the market wants (eg Castiel).
Quote: Bringing Hitler into a discussion is always contentious issue and is usually a conversation stopper. However, given that you opened the door I assume you won’t mind if I step through it. It’s probable that what I say will be found objectionable and dismissive, however, it’s not meant to be so kindly bear with me.
I would vehemently argue against the simplification of the validity of Hitler’s reasons as to why Jews were considered enemies of the Germans (and were treated as such). In order to be able to judge a situation/motiv ations you need to put yourself into the time and context of the event and see it as those living then saw it, not as you see it with the information and the beliefs that you have now. Also, when discussing history, you need to keep in mind that (a) history is written by the winners and (b) history is written by man, and as such is as open to as much bias and interpretation as anything else.
We look at the reasons we’re given for Hitler’s personal hatred of the Jewish people (everything from his place in Music College being given to a Jewish student, to his dying mother being treated by a Jewish doctor to him catching syphilis from a Jewish prostitute) and we think ‘His reasons for hatred were not valid’. However, had the German’s won WWII then it is highly probable that every one of here would feel the same way about the Jewish people as Hitler did. His reasons for hate would be ours, his truth would be our truth, his objective reality would be our objective reality and Hitler’s ‘truth’ was not based on his perception, they were based on his beliefs, and his beliefs came from his ‘logic’ and his ‘reason’.
Hitler’s beliefs and feeling about the Jewish people were, unfortunately, not unique to Hitler. On the contrary, they were very much in line with wider European and American thinking at the time (and long before it). There were Jewish pogroms and anti-Semitism throughout Europe and America prior to WWII. Ireland had a pogrom in 1901, years before Hitler. What separated Hitler was the scale of the persecution, not the thinking which drove it.
Hitler could not have sold the idea that the Jews were enemies of Germany based on simple personal hatred. He could not have gone to the Reichstag and said ‘Okay, I want to wipe out the Jewish people because I may or may not have caught the clap from a hooker who may or may not have been Jewish’. His arguments had to have been considered ‘valid’ and based on what was (for them) sound historical, logical and economic reasoning; they had to have been; otherwise they would not have been accepted and acted upon.
You mentioned slavery. Did all those who owned slaves know that what they were doing was, quite simply, wrong? No. They believed it was right because that is the way that people acted, and thought, for generations. I’m sorry but we can’t look back at what happened 80 years ago or 200 years ago and say ‘Their reasons for doing that were wrong’ because we are judging their morals and their beliefs by our 2013 morals and beliefs. No-one was around to wave the UDHR in the faces of all those who owned slaves, or who persecuted Jews because the UDHR and the thinking and reasoning behind it hadn’t even come around yet.
There are always logical and reasonable reasons behind why people do what they do. They might be illogical to us looking back but they were logical (and 'correct') reasons to those in that position and at that time. Take, for example, the situation in Northern Ireland where Catholics were legally denied civil rights for decades. We look back on it now and think ‘That’s so horrible. Boo, hiss, the Crown etc.’ However, Catholics (mainly because they were Irish Nationalists) were considered enemies of the Crown so it was felt necessary to deny them rights in terms of voting, education and employment in order to preserve the Protestant (mainly those who wanted to stay within the British Empire) way of life. The reason for this was that (as daft as it sounds) Catholics, being Catholics, have larger families than Protestants therefore it was believed that in the future, Catholics would outnumber Protestants and, were they allowed to vote and be educated etc, then they would vote for Northern Ireland to separate itself from the British Empire. Sure, it sounds ridiculous now, but logically (and without emotion), their reasons make perfect sense. It’s about preserving your own way of life, promoting the betterment of your people, the same possible reasons we saw in relation to black civil rights and even WWII.
Quote:I understand that personal bias, perception, and experience all color our interpretations of things. I keep coming back to the point, however, that if every claim is equally valid as you suggest, and if there is no 'rules' for evaluating such claims, then there is something of intellectual chaos. If there are no boundaries to what constitutes a good or valid argument, no way to evaluate truth and falseness, then there is no sense in debating at all. Knowledge and language become meaningless.
As to your second point here about this being just a TV show...I know. :)
Quote:Well, I know and agree with this - I do not look back on times past with judgmental modern eyes. There's one minor problem here: if it's true that no one during that time thought the justifications for anti-semitism and slavery were wrong, then there would still be anti-semitism and slavery today, because things would have never changed. Sure, there were people who thought they were right, who thought Hitler was right, who thought slavery was right. But there were many others - DURING that time - who believed they were wrong. Abolitionists. Germans who hid Jews in their basements. Etc. You say history is written by the winners, and that is the only reason why we look back and say that these views were wrong - I cannot believe in a reason or morality so frail. Suffice it to say that I understand and respect where you're coming from, even as I approach it from a different angle.
One comment about your Irish Catholic - Protestant example - perhaps this is a good argument actually for how logic can be perfectly sound, and yet immoral. JMHO.
Thanks for hashing this out with me, Tim. I'm afraid I'm too curious for my own good; one who can play devil's advocate until the cows come home. I tend to like discussion for discussion's sake, so I do not intend any of this to come across as me trying to change your view or impose some view on you - I merely enjoy the conversation. :)
Now for the disclaimer: I’m not even remotely suggesting that Carver, JP, JA, anyone associated with SPN or its fans or any poster on here has Hitleresque ideologies. I’m also well aware that some people are probably thinking ‘You anti-Semitic, racist bitch’ but I’m fully mindful and respectful of all that the Jewish people and African Americans (and all minorities) have endured over the centuries. The Holocaust was one of the worst events of the 20th century and deservedly will always be remembered as such. I’m aware that there is a huge dispassion in my arguments and there is meant to be. I also teach History and you have to take a dispassionate view of events in order to be able to do that because otherwise you’re teaching students your morals, not the events. It’s one of the things that’s drilled into kids who study History nowadays; there are no good guys, there are no bad guys, there are just guys. The importance in studying history is in relation to why what happened, happened, not just that it did happen and for me, the oversimplificat ion of ‘Their reasons were not valid’ is dangerously dismissive.
Quote: I’m afraid I can't agree here, Bamboo24. The rules are logic and reason are far from straightforward because we are not machines, we are people. Without knowing any background information, without knowing the motivations, the reasons, the thought process and the intended end game, what exactly is the ‘objective reality’ of the way characters are written this season? There is nothing fixed and certain about it. For example, it is a fact that Sam did not look for Dean. For some fans it is a fact that he didn’t look for him because he was so overwhelmed that he didn’t know where to start. For others it’s a fact that he deliberately choose to not look for him because it would lead to dark places and disastrous consequences. For others it’s a fact that he was so caught up in grief he couldn’t look for him. For others it’s a fact that he didn’t look for him because he was glad Dean was gone so that he could have his normal life. We can’t determine what the facts are until we know all the variables (and even then there could be bias in it's interpretation), and we won’t know all the variables until long after the show ends (if even then). In ten years time, if Carver or JP or JA does an interview and comes out and says ‘Well, we decided to sideline Sam for the season because we thought he had been overexposed’ etc then what we now believe to be fact, could change.
Quote: With all due respect, Bamboo24, no one person can dictate the validity of an argument or the truth of its conclusion; not you, not me, not even Carver. The truth that you argue to be valid is based on your interpretation of what you perceive to be fact and therefore is prone to as much bias as anyone else.
Quote: But there is ‘evidence’ supporting it; that he left to go to college, that he went with Ruby, the words he spoke while on demon blood, that he didn’t look for him, that he was talking about leaving hunting throughout season 8 could be held up as valid evidence that Sam hates Dean. There’s also ample evidence denying it and that too is coloured by that person’s possibly inaccurate perception. An argument can be made that Dean hates Sam or John hated them both or neither of them are heroes. Hell, thirty minutes and a packet of TicTacs and I’ll argue anything you want; with evidence!
Quote: The common sense we call upon is that SPN is a business. It’s not some grand novel, it’s not some person’s life’s work, it’s a business and as such, its aim is to make money. It does that by giving the fans what they believe the fans want to see. If (if) the powers that be decide that the best way forward for the show in terms of its longevity, appeal and money making ability is to focus on Dean and his new relationships with Benny or Castiel then that is the objective reality of SPN. There are constant comments about how SPN is about Sam and Dean, two brothers hunting evil etc etc but that’s not necessarily true because SPN is whatever its showrunners decide it’s going to be. If Carver wants SPN to be about Dean with Benny and Castiel on the road and Sam in the MoL library with Amelia (she’s a vet, she has to be good at the books), then that’s SPN. If Carver wants Sam and Dean at each other’s throats the whole time then that’s SPN. If he decides that Dean wants to give up hunting and become an exotic dancer by the name of Ms MoonForAPenny while Sam bats off his brothers admirers with his laptop then that is SPN because it is HIS show, and he can decide to go in whatever direction he wants with it. As long as Sam and Dean are present in the episode then it’s under the SPN banner.
Quote: With all due respect, Bamboo24, everyone’s arguments could be deemed unreasonable and with logical fallacies depending on whether or not the reader agrees with them. Nobody here sets out to present a logical fallacy or an unreasonable argument; others merely deem them so.
Saying SPN is a business is only half the story - it is about giving audiences (and, in fact, not just "fans") what they think audiences want; but at the same time there must be some creative honesty and not making "arbitrary left turns" (to quote Bob Singer) which don't arise organically from the story and characters themselves. Not only would no audience buy it, but it would genuinely "not be SPN" - a show is not "just what the showrunners decide" if their decisions are capricious they will just destroy a show (I know many people felt this about Sera Gamble's season 7, but I loved it (sorry) and felt it was definitely more evolution than revolution). They might evolve it along new lines (I know I'm in the minority, but I kind of liked the Amelia flashbacks, for example, though they just didn't get enough development), but radical departures need to be justified artistically or they will simply not produce the business results.
Of course, all this is perception too - and, thank God, rests in the free interpretation of the viewer. To paraphrase a famous (and much-maligned) star-fleet captain "I dread the day when everyone in this ship agrees with me".
Quote:I agree. Love the quote here.
Do I believe that the powers that be hate certain characters? No. Do I know it? No. Do I believe there’s a conspiracy going on to diminish Sam as a character this season? No. Do I believe that the writing and exposition of Sam and his actions this season is severely lacking? Yes. Do I believe that Sam and his actions can be understood? Yes. Do I believe that the show is playing its part in explaining them? No.
One thing I do truly appreciate about Sam this season is that the way he's being written has paved the way for some of the best articles and meta writing I’ve read in a long, long time. However, therein lies the problem; it is the fans that are doing the work and understanding Sam this season is hard work. A lot of fans won’t do that, and why should they? For many people, once they get home from a long, hard day at work it's time to veg out in front of the TV, disengage the brain and just chill. Of all the people who watch the show, a small percentage of them will post and read on boards and maybe get an alternative point of view from their first impression, and the first impression of Sam is very negative.
Look outside this site (which is a relatively safe haven) IMDB, one of the biggest boards out there is on its third variation of its ‘Why is Sam so unlikeable?’ thread this month (and the month is only six days old!). Look at supernatural.tv and check out the number of comments that refer to Sam as a selfish bastard or a self righteous prick. Look at TWOP and bleach your eyes after if you’ve any liking of Sam whatsoever. Are all these posters not viewing the show objectively? If the intention of the writers is to write Sam and his actions as human and understandable this season then either there are a hell of a lot of people who are intent on not understanding him or there is something serious remiss with the writing so far this season that prohibit them from understanding him.
Might be a 'conspiracy theory', might not.
Another thing about the perception that Sam has been thrown under the bus is the fact that there are a number of people here who feel that way. Not all of them are just Sam fans and I would say most of them are fans of both brothers. If it is just perception would that many people think that there is something wrong with the way Sam has been written? From my POV, I don't think so. To back my claim, notice we have a bitterness thread that is almost exclusively dedicated to that topic.
I am new to SPN so am not sure what the fans' reactions were to season 4 Sam, it must have been vitriolic. I will say though, now that I have watched season 4, even in Sam's darkest moments in the final Ruby hour, I still felt a connection to him and sympathised; my heart ached for him. What I think has misfired this season is the Sam Amelia interaction or lack thereof. I think it just flopped on a spectacular level, resulting in the fan's not being able to feel that special connection with old familiar Sam. I for one could not buy into Sam not looking for Dean. No great love story (never mind with such an unlikeable character as Amelia was first portrayed, I mean what the crod) was going to whitewash that for me. It just does not fit into canon. In fact it attacks the very heart of the show. This is the crux of the problem, IMO, that fan's have for the Sam character. Changing such a fundamental aspect of the brother relationship changes SPN; because the writers had Sam choose not to look for Dean for such an insipid reason (read lack of chemistry, bad writing, directing and lighting issues) has had fan's scratching their heads. I feel that Sam's weak storyline was also positioned alongside a very well received and exciting Dean storyline which doesn't help. I don't think it is fan's pitting themselves for or against a particular brother so much as them voicing their concern over a very badly received storyline. I know this isn't really related to to fan perception so much, but I think it does help to explain why there are so many discussions about the Sam storyline. I had no idea there was so much Sam bashing going on on other sites. Very sad indeed
Since you're new to the fandom, you don't know how hard it has been to be a fan of Sam and try to explain his POV to the fans who only see Dean's and don't bother to try to understand Sam. All those fans have done since S4 is hate Sam for everything that has happened even when it's not his fault. He's gotten 100% of the blame for starting the apocolypse even though Dean broke the first seal. He's a bad brother for going to college to save himself from a life he hates. Don't understand that but fans only see Dean's POV as right.
It wears on you and you start to get really paranoid when a new showrunner 4 seasons later does the same thing by giving all the POV to Dean.
This is all on the showrunner and writers. It started in S4 with EK and has not changed. At this point I don't have any hope that it will change.
You know, I think I am beginning to understand where you are coming from. I read the other day that Sam was meant to be the entry point or representation of the everyman. Apparently originally the audience was meant to understand the world of supernatural through Sam's eyes and not Dean's, who was written to be the wise-cracking, devil-may-care character. However, I must admit wrt POV, it is predominantly through Dean that we understand supernatural, i.e. the audience understands the affects of any actions as how they pertain to Dean. Case in point is the 'heaven' scene. If you look at all the dream memories. Both Dean's are selfless and family oriented, whereas Sam's are about Sam only. Now as dreams go neither brothers' were bad, evil, harmful etc, yet somehow Deans just seem more altruistic, which endears you to him more. Sam's dreams were fine, there was nothing wrong with finding a little me-time (Flagstaff) nice and fun (besides he was just a kid), and there is nothing wrong with wanting to better your life and get away from a father that has neglected you. However, because it is seen through Dean's POV we sympathise with his feelings of betrayal/abando nment that Dean displayed when he realised that he wasn't central to Sam's life at certain periods. We are not shown a scene for e.g. of the fight before he left for Stanford which might have made the audience understand him better.
(Does this make sense to you, and have I understood you by what I have said here?) So now here is a shift in tone...
I am not sure it is just bad storytelling though. E.g. I see Sam's character as more reticent and who doesn't easily allow ppl in. My understanding is that he is happy to be on his own, in fact, IMO it is canon that he is sometimes needs to be on his own (Flagstaff; escaping to the desert). I have mentioned before that he has all the traits of an introvert, so I have no problem with him not having his own friends (which has been of concern to you before as I remember). (Am just thinking as I am writing here so forgive me if it sounds all over the place). Perhaps it is just more difficult to relay perspective through such a 'tight' or restricted lens as that of an introvert (eek no disrespect to introverts; I am one myself).
However this doesn't answer the question as to why the POV has shifted to Dean. So I need to know whether you have noticed a shift in POV over the seasons. One answer might be that it is just easier for the writers to tell a more exciting story through the extrovert? let me know what you think. Just another spin on why the POV is an issue wrt Sam
Anyway, season four happened and Dean became the brother to root for while Sam became the brother to root against. After that the writers just seemed to lose interest in writing Sam's POV. The only time Sam was allowed to explain his reasons for going with Ruby was in Fallen Idols, which had Sam saying that ONE of the reasons he went with Ruby was because Dean treated him like a subordinate. It was poorly phrased and ended with many fans saying that Sam blamed Dean for all of his bad actions, even though Sam that it was SAM'S fault, but that Sam did some of what he did in reaction to some of Dean's actions. After that, the writers just seemed to give up, focus on Dean's POV and also build Castiel as a character. Sadly this was all at the expense of Sam.
As all this was going on, Sam fans were leaving online fandom because of the animosity toward Sam and then later leaving the show because they weren't getting Sam's POV. Now, the show is firmly rooted in Dean's POV and I think it would be hard, if not impossible to pull it back to Sam's. Season six is the worst as far as presenting Sam's POV. Possibly the writers will deign to show us what Sam is feeling in the last half of the season, but I'm doubtful.
Meanwhile Sam was with someone and a sl that much of the audience did not take too and with very little Sam insight outside of 'I ran' and' My world imploded' . Sadly some of the idea's about Sam are ingrained and were born in the coldness of Season 4 .
These writers definitely have a problem w/doing the showing part of a story. They'd rather tell than show, which leads to disjointed stories, IMO.
Here's the problem for me. Sam was not an introvert in S1-3. He was just as open with the people they dealt with as Dean was. In fact he was usually the one who displayed sympathy and understanding to the people they were helping. It wasn't until season 4 that he was hidden away from the fans. I could sort of understand it because of the story EK was telling. However, after that season, why has it continued to be that way? Why do they no longer show who Sam is? After all this time, to me it just seems as if the writers don't want to write for Sam. And JC making Sam so OOC as to not look for Dean has just added more fuel to the Sam hate that is already out there. Makes me sad and angry.
Quote:I wasn't comparing my argument to gravity being present. I was using gravity as an example to illustrate my statement that there is a difference between truth and perception, that not every view can be said to be 'true', and that not every perception is logically valid.
However, I wasn't saying that all perceptions shouldn't be respected, regardless of the reason behind them. I think when people disagree it should always be respectful. I wasn't saying I'm immune to a flawed perception, or that I'm the only one with a correct view. I know there are many times I need a different perspective on things, even this show. And I wasn't referring to any specific posters - I was speaking generally, using hypotheticals to make a point. I apologize for the lack of clarity.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/30/supernatural-season-8-spoilers_n_2586582.html
I like the character of Sam , he is after all a Character on TV. I think the writer's are messing with his story and maybe hopefully will clear things up, especially not looking
for Dean then I will be happy, I have no troub le believing that he had a breakdown after Dean disappeared and lost it, especially after all he has been thru in the past couple of seasons. I could have bought into the Amelia story line if they had just picked a more believable and empathetic actress. She was just plain awful imop. I will give her the benefit of the doubt and suggest maybe the writers , directors ptb wanted her to play it that way, the same with Jared he just looked like he was not feeling the relationship.
I am fairly new to supernatural and I have to admit I am first and foremost a Dean fan. Someone suggested I visit some Dean sites which I did.When I went to Imdb for example the wank on there is awful . They go on and on about Dean having no ark Dean being sidelined, the writer's not caring about him giving him no story and then you go to other sites and fans are saying the same about Sam. It is always the same people and I wonder how they find the time in a day .
Now people are going on and on about Dean's sexuality.
I believe he is straight as can be but loves to be admired after all how many times does the show remind us he is pretty! Also most of the slash parings seem to center around Dean, he is much Objectified!! I thought the gay scene in Hitler was hilarious.
Just my opinion but I think Carver spent the first few episodes trying to retrofit SPN after the Gamble years and maybe some do not like the way he went about it but I honestly think he is trying to fix things. Carver said it is all about perception and I think more things will be revealed.
I love to come on here for the reviews and I just love Spn and the actors but find the Fan wars sometimes hinder my enjoyment of the show and need to step back.
I did go to a convention and enjoyed the actors was rather dismayed at the time that was wasted on their having to answer really stupid questions like what disney character they would be ect. I would love to have people from CG on or have the boys answering more questions about the actual filming of the program and their insights as they are both very articulate.
Personally I am in viewing this program till the bitter end and loving the boys.
Quote:Quote:You are so right, I also find it hard to read the diatribe sometimes, but by and large this site is fair, even if some lean toward one brother more. Most just want BOTH brothers to be happy DAMMIT!
Quote:Right with ya Chrisgranny, SPN til' the bitter (or hopefully, prayerfully, beggingly) sweet end.
You know, I am absolutely blown away by the knowledge that the fans have regarding the show. I swear, I watch and rewatch certain eps to get a handle on something on of the fans have said, and I can't believe what they pick up! I always miss the ONE sentence that makes ALL the difference. Oh well, I suppose I will eventually but, like you, am knew and will probably NEVER catch up enough to speculate from a place of expertise. But I like dabbling in the shallow end.
THEN he went and swept everything under the rug, resolved nothing and put blinder on the boys. And under the pretense of this 'better' relationship and 'new maturity' he has the boys do exactly the same things they always have done. And getting the exact same result. Lies, distrust...etc...etc.
The relationship between the boys has become diseased under Carver.
Plus, what reason would this person have to lie anyway? It can be easily disproven by anyone else who was there.
Jared's comment sounds plausible to me. The story sucked, and he knows it. It's been how many months now . . . and he's still answering questions about this crap story?!?!?! If it had been a good, compelling story, I doubt that would be the case.
I'd love to see it verified by a second person. I'd love to have a report of his whole meet and greet, but I don't know if we'll ever get that, since it is a smaller event, not a full panel, and I think sweetondean went to Jensen's - not Jared's.
You can either accept what was said or not. To me, it doesn't sound either harsh, or hard to believe.
One have to be careful before spreading as a sure thing that somebody said this or that. It's easy to turn a rumor into fact and then quote it in order to defend a PVO.
It would be nice if someone who was at Jared's M&G would post the way they have for Jensen's but if nobody does then we are stuck with a one-source hearsay (as opposed to multiple-source hearsay)
Quote:I have found MANY times over the course of my involvement with this fandom (and life in general), that people (well-intention ed, no doubt) say "Jared said this" or "Jensen said that". And I have gone to the source to find, in reality, what they interpreted was not what was actually said, implied, or even intended.
Now granted, I am a notorious fact-checker in every aspect of life. I don't believe anything unless I read or see it from myself from a reliable source. And yes, I would consider someone like Alice to be a more reliable source than a regular fan, because of her history and experiences, as well as the more professional nature of her interactions with the actors and the show in general.
I don't think what this person claims Jared said is harsh, or even unbelievable. J&J have been honest when they haven't liked storylines, and there is nothing wrong with that. However, I do question the wording as it sounds (to me) like 'fan-talk' and not the talk of these professional actors as I have heard/read of them. Plus, I've already read Jared's opinion on the Sam/Amelia storyline several times - he's expressed uncertainty about it, but also that he understood what Carver was trying to do. The thing that sticks out to me is that whenever these guys talk about something they don't like, they are careful with the words to not speak ill of the writers or the showrunners. It's that professionalism .
It's entirely possible that Jared said he thought the Sam/Amelia storyline was a little out of character or a little weak, but I'd bet money there was more to the conversation than that. And I do think we should be careful about, as Ale said, spreading rumors or mis-quoting. She's right, it's just too easy to do, especially when looking for something to validate an opinion.
If he had said that he felt the storyline was strong, now THAT I would have had to have verified. The Sam/Amelia story is indefensible, not really because of the love affair which was mediocre at best, but because of what had come before. Nothing would have justified him not looking for Dean, and I think that is the main problem. I have no problem with who said it, it needs to be acknowledged to the fans anyway!!
I do think this new account is in line w/the earlier report that Jared went to Carver to discuss his storyline and was reassured after that conversation. Now what else could Jared have spoken to Carver about but Sam's OOC decision to not look for Dean and Sam's boring relationship w/Amelia? That's the only story Sam had going on at the time. If he was upset enough to seek out Carver, then it's not crazy or impossible, IMO, to hear that he wasn't happy w/the overall storyline.
If it was hard for us to understand Sam, then I can imagine how difficult it was for Jared. He had to play Sam in a completely different way w/no clear direction or reason for Sam's actions. Poor Jared was probably scrambling to come up w/some motivation or reason for Sam's OOC choices.
I agree that there has been no real justification for why Sam did not look. Plus, it has never been clear to me why Sam thought Dean was dead. They have both disappeared before w/o being dead so what was so different about this time? I will never understand why the same story couldn't have been told with Sam actually investigating Dean's disappearance. There was no real reason Sam didn't look. How did Sam not looking advance the story? It didn't. It was conflict for the sake of conflict. All of which has been pretty much swept under the rug, making it all the more pointless.
Exactly!!
I don't know how long you have been on this site for. Hopefully long enough to tell me whether this has ever happened before in earlier seasons? Apparently Jensen was none too happy with the Dean/Lisa story? I didn't think it was that bad, and I put that down to the fact that he LOOKED unhappy when he was living with Lisa and, plus the audience was told that Dean had tried to look for Sam (very early on in the season) so I think Lisa wasn't seen as a threat (if Amelia ever was, but you know what I mean).
I want to know if this has happened in earlier seasons because I am hoping that TPTB heard the bleating of the fans and have learned from their mistakes. Has there ever been a time before where the fans were as unhappy as they are now with OOC Sam not looking for Dean?
The one difference was Kripke was in charge then and he was responsive to fan complaints. I have no idea how Carver reacts to fans. He may be willing to stay by his story because he thinks it's a good one. He may be stubborn and decide to not fix the Sam situation because he doesn't want fans to run the show. He may have planned to explore Sam's OOC actions at the end of the season and this is all going according to plan. He may give in an explain Sam's actions , or retcon them somehow, in response to the outrage. We just don't know how this team will handle the blowback.
I know I carry on about this to the point of
I do know Jensen was not pleased w/the Ben/Lisa story. I either read that or saw a video of him speaking about the story. These guys are very prof'l so he never trashed the story, but he made it clear that he didn't understand Dean in that relationship.
From what I've heard, Kripke & Co. did re-think Bela b/c of fan outrage. I will say that Bela was the network's decision though, not Kripke's. That said, I will never understand why Kripke didn't make her a better character, but I guess he was rebelling against the network forcing him to add her to the show.
I'm not sure if any fan outrage has ever reached these levels but I could be wrong.
"You know me, you know why, I am not leaving my brother out there alone"
All this is shredded and mashed now into an unrecognizable character: A new reseted Sam! I am a fan of Sam (and love him to bits) and I am easliy able to list all the reasons why Sam wouldn't be in the place after all what happened (TO Sam) todecide to not look for Dean, but not be able to survive the supernatural challenge mentally, emotionally! Not able to go on! Just let go! Make an end! Devated, destroyed, broken!
But, BUT we didn't see Sam coming from A (the lab in 7.23) to C (whatever this is, his normal, his turning point, him being able to go on)
Why not showing Sam's side in all this? There wouldn't have been such an uproar if we would have gotten his POV, insight in his time with scenes where we see him, conversations with others about HIM, I am angry because I don't see tptb doing anything to explain Sam!
But I love those words of Sam so much and that Jared loves them for Sam too!!!
Season 8 has sucked except for maybe 3 episodes for me and I won't be re-watching any of them.
Thanks a lot, JC for ruining SPN for me.
I've always been pretty bibro or the preferred Team Winchester but before this episode I was becoming the bitterest of Sam girls for the damage they had done to Sam's character this year without explanation. Carver solved that not by giving Sam a voice about what happened to him during that missing time, but by turning Dean into a sanctimonious asshole. It was one thing to bring up Sam's mistakes while under the influence of the specter, that wasn’t supposed to be rational, so even the soulless thing made a certain amount of sense. But now he has Dean say it while perfectly rational. So not only has Sam not paid for his actual sins by being tortured so badly for for 180 years that Castiel said his soul felt like it had been skinned alive, but he also has to atone for things his body did even as he was still being tortured. Even though he saw what that torture did to Sam. He though he experienced similar torture and broke and the weight of it. But that is still not enough for his Dean (or apparently some reviewers who are sad that Sam didn’t apologize during the scene).
All I can think about this season is WHY.Why did you have Sam not look for Dean? Why did you never really have him explain his reasons? I can kind of see why you had everyone trash his character all season, but all this just so you could have 1 scene? If so why couldn’t you have had him explain his reasons then? Why were Sam’s scenes with Amelia not used to get into his head and were instead reminiscent of a telanovela?
I think my problem is that Carver just doesn’t see either character the way I do. His Sam is weak with no real judgment. His Sam didn’t make one huge error in judgment after losing Dean. He has been a continual fuck-up that Dean has had to clean up after over and over. He is in some ways a burden and he is not to be really trusted. And Dean is a hero for looking past all his mistakes and loving him anyway, especially since his Sam’s feelings are kind of shallow. After all he easily moved on after Dean disappeared. He does want Dean’s approval obviously, but good luck getting that since his Dean is a bit of a self-righteous dick who apparently thinks Sam will never suffer enough for what he did in S4 and now not looking for Dean this season. The whole thing just makes me very very sad.
In this episode, a few things were set right, for me. I don't think Carver sees Sam in the way you've suggested here. (and believe me, I've been more of a bitter Sam fan than you, this entire season!)
I agree, we haven't had resolution about the Didn't Look thing yet. And I haven't changed my mind that that whole thing was OOC and WRONG.... But if I start the season at about LARP, I can see where Carver was going, and it works for me.
I don't see that Sam was portrayed as a continual fuck-up, a burden, untrustworthy.. .. I see that Sam THINKS Dean thinks of him that way... In the same way that Dean THOUGHT John thought of him, looked at him differently, after the Striga.... unable to do his one job of taking care of Sammy.
Sam THINKS Dean sees him as incapable of doing the job, having his back, making the right decisions..He THINKS Dean thinks he needs constant supervision. He's had those thoughts reinforced by a lot - Supernatural influences in S4/5, this season by Meg and Bobby, by Deans friendship with Benny, as well as by Deans actions....
WHEREAS WE HEARD - in Clip Show - Dean TOLD the priest he had utmost faith in Sam. So what Sam has been thinking is WRONG. Dean doesn't think of him as a screw-up.
Dean just wants to be there to protect and support his brother. He wants Sam to never feel he's alone facing everything evil......(He just needs to tell that to SAM!)
In this episode, I think Dean was just being a big brother - teasing - never meaning his words to actually hurt - never realizing how he was hitting directly at Sam's real insecurities. I think Dean feels like Sam must already know how much he values him, needs him next to him driving down crazy street.....I don't think he was being a self-righteous dick.. or that he thinks Sam will never suffer enough, as you suggested. He was teasing like a bratty brother will do, without thought.
I noticed (and was extremely grateful 'cause otherwise I'd never have forgiven Carver) that Sam DID NOT APOLOGIZE for his actions. He's paid the price, and done the penance where necessary, and is at peace within himself for those things.
What Sam regrets is what he thinks those things have done to Dean's confidence in him. THAT's what he's confessing... And it's not like he has a whole lot of control over that anyway. Sam has inferiority/aba ndonment issues just like Dean does.
I didn't need the first 10 episodes to know that's how Sam felt. That's where Carver blew it for me. That's where he did the damage. That is where my bitterness lies. Maybe, Maybe he'll be able to fix it in Season 9. Maybe, Maybe we'll revisit the Sam Didn't Look/ Hit a Dog/ Found a Girl crap that was the start of the season. Or maybe I'll just pretend that it never ever happened that way....
The way I saw it was that that wasn't an apology, or even a regret, it was a cry of despair on Sam's part, that he believes (with a fair amount of good evidence from the lectures he has received this season, and last and the previous one etc all the way back to the abject apology he made in the first 15 minutes of the first episode of Season 5) that, no matter what he does, NOTHING will ever be enough to be forgiven for the things he did or more importantly the things Dean blames him for.
If you look at the conversation between Sam and Crowley where Crowley asks him what he said in the confession, Crowley believes he needs to know so that he can find out how to get forgiveness. Sam doesn't answer him - he has come to believe that there is no forgiveness, not by Dean and not by the world he lives in.
I don't believe that Dean meant the confession lecture by the car to be taken seriously (I don't think he remembers what he said in SC) but to Sam it looked like, "wow here I am at the end of my strength and NOW is the time to lecture me on my misdeeds and say I need a chaperone? What the hell?"
Sadly the one thing that Sam would have gotten from curing Crowley would have been absolute proof that the universe (God) forgave him - his blood being purified - even if, as he sees it, Dean doesn't. As it is now he will never know for sure...
It is no wonder he didn't want to stop when Dean tried.
I have watched the scene between the guys a couple of times (well more than a couple) and while I am really glad that Sam finally got to say all that, I am not sure that Dean entirely understood what his issues were, even though he was perfectly genuine in his response. And he looked devastated at the pain he was witnessing.
But hell at least they're talking, right?
I didn't really think you guys were bitter either, which is why I missed it
Despair and regrets go together, in my mind...
I do believe Sam isn't sure he's been forgiven by God, and is pretty sure he can never earn Dean's forgiveness.... but I also think he's forgiven himself. I think he knows he's done all he can do.... but he believes it'll never be enough for Dean. (Not true, but that's sure the way it looks sometimes).
And I agree Dean didn't mean those things, but they sure hit Sam when he was down.
Man, eilf... you got me choked up again when you talked about Crowley's cure being Sam's proof of God's forgiveness missed again.
One hopes they'll keep talking.... Dean's starting to get the picture. And obviously there's that (co-dependent love) brother bond still there. (Which is what I thought Carver went a long way to finish destroying needlessly at the beginning of the season.)
Progress? Fingers crossed.
Oh and I started on this thread because I didn't want to maybe bum everyone who loved the episode out.
So very well put st50, I have been struggling to articulate this and you have done it so incredibly well. Thanks.
It is very hard to express! Sam's a complicated guy! (and so's his brother, even when we seem to get more of a glimpse into his mindset.
And I still can't figure out why they never explained what went on with Sam. I don't know, if nappi (and my niece) are right and they might actually pick this up next year. I mean all my problems with the show are easily fixable. I need them to start dealing with Sam's issues and Dean's in relation to him. I want for him to have a real POV and ESPECIALLY find out why he didn't look. Mental breakdown whatever, I just need to know why. Now that Dean knows how Sam feels I don't think that should be let go. I think tortured Sam with his sins for several seasons now, the least they can do is give him more than one abrupt speech.
But the problem is I have very little faith left in the writers. I think they CAN fix the show but I seriously doubt they will, especially since most people seem to be very satisfied. So I have a feeling they consider this story line a wrap and have moved on.
And I'm completely with you on WHY they didn't give us more on Sam. I have said more than once that this is a line for me. It STILL is. And I STILL want them to fix it.
At the moment, in order to survive hellatus, I'm going with a "lalalalalalal, it never happened, lalalalala" attitude.
I don't have a lot of faith in some of the writers, but 8.22 and 8.23 gave me hope that Carver and Edlund still know who Sam is. I am still clinging to the hope that they'll make sense of this mess.
(Edit to correct: 8.21 not 8.22)
Hoping and praying that the early interviews (like ComicCon) give us some hint that they know this was unsatisfactory to a lot of us and they have a plan..... It's not wrapped up yet. I'm a stubborn SOB, I haven't accepted it, but I won't believe they can't fix it. Not yet.
But I have been reading everyone's thoughts who did love it and why and I think I'm coming around. Maybe if I watch it a few more times. I was planning on cancelling my cable this month though and I will lose the recording so I better do it fast.
We'll hold the faith together, Kelly. Until Carver settles it once and for all, I'll believe that he's got a plan. (Please Chuck, let there be a plan!)
After the finale, where he showed he understood Sam's pain the way I'd always thought of it, I think - maybe, hopefully - he's deserved that.
I have rarely seen Sam be any stronger than he has been this season. If that was JC intentions then he failed miserably. Weak is never a word I will associate with Sam. I was left with a feeling of awe at Sam and his strength plus a feeling of sadness for his pain.
But I'm still not sure what Carver is doing, I don't know I guess I will watch the first few episodes of next season and see if my earlier faith in him was justified or not. I just seems like I spent the entire season waiting for something that never occurred. And I'm not sure I have any reason to believe that it will get better next season. I have a feeling I'm just setting myself for another HUGE disappointment by hoping for any kind of resolution next season.