Jump to content

AwesomO4000

Member
  • Content count

    5,885
  • Joined

Community Likes

5,763 Excellent

1 Follower

About AwesomO4000

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Trapped on the Satelite of Love
  • Interests
    Bugs and spiders, snorkeling, photographing bugs, spiders and creatures seen while snorkeling (as well as various fungi), vegetable gardening, collecting buttons, and knitting.
  • Favorite TV Show
    Supernatural, Buffy, and Mystery Science Theater 3000

Recent Profile Visitors

2,474 profile views
  1. I agree. Me, too. For me, that was Lucifer seeing the green army man and getting hit with those memories. I thought Jared did an excellent job of showing the difference in how he looked when he was Lucifer and then the transition to Sam. Even the way he carried his body changed. When Sam gained control again, he seemed surprised that he was in control, so in my opinion, Sam had been fighting for control of his mind. It was Lucifer who saw the army man and got hit with the memories. Sam didn't get control until after all the memory flashes were done. It'll be interesting to see what Jensen does with how he looks and carries himself as Michael.
  2. I agree. I have subscribed to something similar to this theory for a long time. In my version, though, not only is Lucifer hit upside the head with the flood of emotions, he's also hit upside the head with the fact that Dean has always cared for Sam and still does, even when Sam made a mistake, while Michael... doesn't for him. At all. As in Michael said "nope I gotta kill you." And Lucifer's ego couldn't handle that. For me that was part of the payoff for the contrast of Dean not listening to John's "you have to either save Sam or kill him" by refusing to kill Sam versus Michael listening to God and trying to kill Lucifer even when Lucifer asked him to make his own choice and walk off the playing field. And I won't be surprised if this comes up again somehow in reference to AU Michael, because for me on this show, ego and hubris is often the downfall of the villains. The reason why Crowley lasted as long as he did I think is because he never underestimated his foes - especially the "denim clad nightmares" - and wasn't too proud or delusional not to run and hide to fight another day. I like the addition of Baby as part of the Team Free Will Lucifer defeat. I will have to include this in my interpretation now. And Lucifer could only hope to have such an awesome car - more reason for Lucifer to be jealous. ; ) Taken to the Sam thread.
  3. Sam Winchester: aka Moose

    Brought over from the Spoilers thread. No spoilers here: In my opinion: Why doesn't it? For me, I don't care if Sam didn't overcome Lucifer but that instead Lucifer was probably defeated by "the power of love" and the wounding of his own ego.*** It was canon that a human wouldn't be able to overcome an archangel under normal circumstances, so Lucifer having to be compromised makes total sense to me. And none of that takes away from the fact that Sam had to be constantly fighting (he hadn't given up) and ready to take advantage when Lucifer was vulnerable or that he had to look in that deep, dark hole to the box in hell, knowing what it would mean because of what happened to Dean, and willingly taking that fall to stop the apocalypse. That's plenty strong enough for me. I don't think it puts Sam in a bad light at all. And as cassieopeia said in that other thread, it doesn't mean that Sam wasn't fighting against Lucifer hurting Dean. To me it just means he couldn't over come Lucifer without help, which made sense because it was Lucifer after all. *** In fact I like this consistent plot point in the show that the villains often fail due to their hubris and/or ego. I don't think it's coincidence that this keeps coming up.
  4. Spoilers With Speculation

    I agree. The only things we knew back then were that if our Michael killed Lucifer then half the planet might be killed in the process and then afterwards there would be "paradise on earth." We weren't told what that was, but I myself never thought that that would be good for people, so while the idea of 5000 chosen is a retcon, this new thing wouldn't surprise me much. For me, it would entirely fit for our Michael too, because that's pretty close to what I thought was gonna happen anyway. Heh - actually 5000 people is about 4980 or so more people than I expected. I actually thought Michael would let whoever Dean asked to be kept alive / safe stay alive, but that they would be the only ones he'd keep his word about.
  5. I also like both brothers - I just happen to prefer Sam most of the time (not in seasons 4, 8, and 9 though). But for me, I often put emphasis on whether or not an episode is good as much as whether it's a Sam episode. And at least "The End" is not only good, but has "Sam" in it (even f he is possessed by Lucifer.) Even though I liked "In the Beginning" well enough (though not one of my favorites), I didn't include it because that one really didn't have Sam in it at all. As for "What Is..." I like it especially because other Sam was kind of a jerk -although in a way, weirdly that was more Dean imagining Sam would be a jerk without hunting rather than any real reflection on Sam himself - and what a contrast that was with real Sam. This was the episode that cemented for me that yes, Sam had indeed changed by his experience with Dean over the past two seasons. It showed not only that Sam was proud of Dean and understood what he (and they) do is important, but that he wouldn't trade what they had then for anything. For me, it was just as much a turning point in Sam's story as it was Dean's. It was Sam admitting that he'd come to terms with the hunting life and his life with Dean, that he wasn't running from it anymore, and that he was not only good with it but felt a sense of fulfillment from it. That's the reason that I love it so much, I agree about "Devil's Trap." That's probably one that's liked by fans of both brothers. Also this: I think I remember myself going "What?!? Noooo!!!! (imagine that in a Monica from Friends voice). And I had no idea if the show would be renewed either. It was a looong wait for the season 2 opener. I don't know about "No Rest For the Wicked" being a favorite of mine. It was kind of depressing.
  6. I decided to put this here because well you'll see in a moment... So somewhere on this board I remembered reading a question about whether there were any episodes that were beloved by both fans who leaned towards Sam and fans who leaned towards Dean, and I wanted to think on that for a bit. Of course now that I've thought about it and wanted to answer, do you think I could fine the original question and the one answer I remember? No, no I could not... So I'm putting it here instead, I apologize for not giving credit to the original question writer or the one answer I remember, but oh well. So here are maybe some potentials? I won't be hurt if others don't agree. These are just ones I'm throwing out after considering it for a bit. First I agree with the question answerer's post that "In My Time of Dying" is a good choice. "What Is and What Never Should Be" "The End" "Changing Channels"*** "The French Mistake"*** "Slash Fiction" excluding the angsty end part "Time After Time..." (including the deleted scenes) "About A Boy" "Baby" "Safe House" "Regarding Dean" (? - well I really liked it anyway). *** Though maybe not for those who dislike the alternate universe stuff, rather than disliking due to either Sam or Dean reasons.
  7. The Walking Dead in the Media

    Ooh, I may have to find a time to sit down and watch that Red Machete thing all the way through now. I love Jeff Kober (first watched him in China Beach), and thought that his Joe character was suitably creepy and menacing... And whereas I can't buy why no one has put a bullet in Negan's head way before now, I pretty much understood how Joe was able to get his small band - and even for a while Darryl - to buy into his philosophy... and also how Darryl slowly figured out what a mistake that ended up being. The Claimers storyline was one of my favorite villain arcs of the series. Thanks for the link.
  8. Spoilers With Speculation

    I think I'm going to claim at least semi-ownership of that one... unless you predicted it at the same time you predicted what would happen in the finale - which I don't remember if I read spoilers for that so maybe wouldn't have seen your prediction - in which case then you would have precedence. I didn't predict that there would be no repercussions for killing Death until the few moments after the "Brother's Keeper" episode. I think I semi-predicted that there would be good repercussions though - even though I think I was being sarcastic - so sort of a point to me there. The only other Wild Ass Guess I can potentially claim - and I think it was more an educated guess - was that Sam's visions after he prayed in "Form and Void" came from Lucifer rather than God.
  9. Battlebots (2018): All Episodes Talk

    Thanks so much for the information.. and I, too, would be interested in seeing how they made the wheels. I wish they would do a "making of..." type episode with some of the most successful / favorite bots (even if it was only a half hour thing), because I'd find that really interesting.
  10. Because that is one of the standards that @Aeryn13 uses to look at how a character is portrayed: whether or not they are portrayed as weak. So I was saying that if a character as nanny was considered by Aeryn as a "weak" portrayal, what would that mean for the character who needed the nanny? How would that character be being shown as any more "strong?" But in addition to that, Sam tried to push Dean away in most cases, trying to assure that he could do it all on his own. I don't think that was the case, myself, since he at least needed help in the second trial and he didn't have the mental conviction to finish the last one. So when Sam started the trials - or at least insisted he was going on to the second one - I don't think he was considering his own limitations or considering that he might need help. And then even when he was having trouble, he hid his symptoms from Dean and tried to pretend that he was fine even though his compromised health had the potential to affect the outcome of the trials - so it was potentially a risky choice not to tell someone about his physical condition. For me this was an example of Sam not accepting and admitting his own potential limitations... or at the very least hiding his potential limitations that could have had negative results. In contrast, Dean straight out admitted that Amara's influence over him might compromise his ability to kill her. He wasn't hiding it and just hoping that it might not be an issue that might compromise the mission later. Actually if I remember correctly Benny not only told Sam how to get out, but first saved him from getting killed by a purgatory monster. Then later Benny held off more purgatory monsters while Sam escaped, so no Sam hadn't completed the trial by himself, in my opinion, and would've been killed in Purgatory - leaving Bobby's soul stranded there - if Dean hadn't sent Benny to help Sam. As for the last trial, in my opinion Sam didn't have the mental conviction to finish it. The situation wasn't painted as Sam having second thoughts about what they were doing - like if it would be dangerous or something - so if Sam presumably should have still believed that finishing was the right thing to do. Instead Dean waved a shiny "rah rah of course you're my BFF" in front of Sam's face, and that was enough for Sam to cave. I don't blame Dean, because "save Sam" has generally been a thing for him and Dean stuck to his guns on that one. He wasn't willing to sacrifice Sam for closing the gates, and so he was gonna fight to make sure that didn't happen. Sam - on the other hand - supposedly did think closing the gates was worth his death. Sam pretty much said as such. But being that this was season 8 "Kevin? Monsters? Ehn it's someone else's problem" Sam rather than season 6 or 7 Sam, when it came down to it... nope, no conviction on that one.*** He caved for a promise from Dean that Dean would always put him first. So nope... for me Sam was shown as the one who caved and failed to do what he said that he was going to do. Dean did do what he said he was going to do as soon as he found out that Sam would die, and his reasoning on that was sound. He was right. There was no having to save the world involved like in season 5, so in Dean's view, since Sam didn't need to die to save the world, screw it, this time Dean wasn't going to have Sam die. I'm not going to fault Dean for sticking to his convictions. I'm more going to fault Sam for not sticking to his. And for me, that's what season 8 gave us. Man, for me Carver sucked as showrunner, especially in season 8. My opinion on that one. Others will vary. *** (And in my opinion if Dean had done the trials, he would have finished them... which is why the writers didn't have Dean do the trials. It would have been wildly out of character for Dean not to finish. In my opinion it was fairly out of character for Sam too - as was most of season 8 - but the writers in general seem more willing to compromise Sam for plot purposes than Dean, so Sam it was.)
  11. Hee, but for me even using your parameters, my evaluations likely wouldn't change much, since for me strength of character goes along with strength. That's why season 4 wouldn't be equal to me. Much of Sam's "strength" as the writers showed it was to me actually born out of weakness. For example, I wouldn't call a person on PCP - no matter how physically strong they were on the drug - a "strong" person. As you said, Sam was being played by Ruby, and she was playing off his weaknesses - his feelings of failure and his need to show that he wasn't powerless - not his strengths. For a while there, Sam did seem to decide to beat his addiction, and that was a somewhat strong moment, but his rather unceremonious fall right back into the addiction - complete with vague reasoning by the show (meaning to me the writers didn't really care about showing Sam having a legitimate, understandable, or even sympathetic reason to fall off the wagon wagon so long as he fell off) - pretty much wiped that out in the end for me. The narrative even included supposedly "strong" Sam having to put down Dean in order to further the illusion that he, himself, was strong. For me that was intentional to show Sam as actually weak and delusional since it wasn't otherwise necessary for the story as a whole. And the fact that in the end, Sam didn't overcome his addiction and even embraced it, and his weaknesses lead to him raising Lucifer pretty much mean to me that in season 4, the writers were not trying to show Sam as strong at all and that came across to me clearly. In the end, Dean was the only non-evil character - and I mean only character - who stuck to his/her convictions all the way through and was shown to be right about those convictions. So definitely season 4 goes to Dean for me. It's not even close. Season 6: Much like blood addicted Sam, I didn't see Soulless Sam as all that strong. Sure he was a killing machine, but it's easier to go out and kill things if you don't care about the consequences of your actions. I wouldn't exactly call that strong. In my opinion, it takes more strength - and this is where strength of character comes into it for me - to get the job done while actually caring about the people you are saving and making sure that saving them is the actual goal and not just an unexpected benefit. Interestingly to me, Soulless Sam showed some of the same delusions as Sam addicted to demon blood did. When I'm including this as a strong Sam season, I'm actually more talking about what Sam did later in the season - not shirking responsibility for what Soulless Sam did, looking out for Dean's interests with respect to Castiel (because of course Dean wouldn't want to think Castiel was going behind his back), and once again embracing hunting and "making a difference" as a worthy goal and one that made him feel fulfilled. That - to me - was showing Sam's strength. Not what psychopath Soulless Sam did on his almost serial killer like killing spree. That regular Sam killed Soulless Sam in his dreamscape was the icing on the cake to cement this for me. In my opinion, of course Sam won. Sam had a purpose and a lot of reasons why he couldn't let Soulless Sam win there. He had conviction that Soulless Sam didn't. And one of those was that he wanted to be there to back Dean up in his fight against Castiel. This - this is my favorite Sam. The one who wants to back Dean up and knows that's where he's needed and that that is a worthy and fulfilling place to be. And this is one of the reasons I liked Gamble so much (and Kripke, too, since he wrote this episode, and so this is what I think he intended Sam to be in the end), and missed her so much later on in the series. Similarly Dean was strong for me in season 6 because, like in season 4, he once again stuck to his convictions no matter what everyone else tried to throw at him... Bobby - in what was my opinion a weird writer choice to move along "plot" - Castiel, and Soulless Sam all tried to convince Dean in one way or another that he was maybe imagining things and there wasn't anything "wrong" with Sam. But Dean stuck to his convictions, and not only was he right in the end, but he once again fought opposition from Bobby, Castiel and eventually Soulless Sam to do the right thing and get Sam's soul back. Dean could have easily succumbed to the pressure and outside arguments from the others and taken an easier way out, but he didn't. He showed strength of character and got it done. And then in the second half of the season he showed other strengths of character - leadership, smarts, and conviction - to defeat Eve and try to talk down Castiel even though it hurt him to have to oppose his former friend. Season 8: Whoo boy. Talk about a change. All of that strength of character I talked about above for season 6? Throw that right out the window. You mention Nanny!Dean as showing weakness, well as you argue for season 12 and Dean going along with Sam... what does it say about the guy who needs the nanny to take care of him? To me, it says he's too weak to even get the trials done that he said he was going to get done so he could show Dean the light at the end of the tunnel. Since nope, faced with the actual trials, Sam needs Dean to take care of him - except he's even pissy about that, trying to pretend that he doesn't need the help he so obviously does ...And in the end Sam falls apart and doesn't get it done, because all he - apparently - really wanted was Dean's approval: awwww... not. I'm sorry, but no strength of conviction means not a strong character portrayal for me... far from it*** At least Dean got to mostly keep his convictions, so this season goes to Dean for me as being portrayed as the stronger one... again, like season 4: no contest. Not even close. I can't express how much I hate season 8. *** And I really can't help thinking that this was Carver's intent, despite logic to the contrary. I can't help it since in my opinion the undermining of Sam's character was so heavy handed. (And having Sam - who previously was appalled at the though of pursuing engaged Ava - willfully sleep with a married woman appeared to be just one more vicious and intentional dig at Sam's character... again no strength of conviction. I mean why was that even done if they had no intention of Sam staying?) All the things that I liked about Sam above in season 6 were stripped away in one fell swoop. No Sam wanting to make a difference and being fulfilled doing that, no Sam backing Dean up or even appearing to like being with Dean, and no Sam having any convictions. Carver even threw out Sam's usual giving the monsters a chance and added this jealousy crap I don't remember seeing before in the series ever. I really didn't recognize this characterization of Sam at all. To make it worse, Carver threw out a lot of the stuff I liked about Dean, too, but at least Dean (mostly) got to keep his convictions and didn't willfully commit adultery and then leave the woman. Season 11: I thought it was a pretty balanced season. The narrative might not have gone into the detail it could have in terms of Amara, but Dean got it done, and once again, he stuck to his guns to do so. Despite his understandable misgivings considering the obvious balance of power in Amara's direction, he - with one exception*** - never really gave up on fighting her hold on him, even when others questioned Dean's convictions (which I thought was out of character for the others and even contradicted what they'd said before, and so I think was partially there to highlight Dean's convictions). Dean didn't even back down when it came to God himself. He'd said he had issues and intended to give God a piece of his mind... and he did. So strong convictions and strength of character = strong Dean season for me. *** Which for me wasn't really a sign of weakness. I've always contended that it is a strength to know your limitations rather than pretend or delude yourself into thinking you can do something and potentially cause problems later when you get yourself in over your head. It is one of the flaws of Sam's that most annoys me when Sam doesn't always understand his limitations... see season 4 and 8 as an example.
  12. I can answer if you'd like... Since even though I do like Dean, I definitely lean Sam much of the time, so... I agree with you on seasons 1 and 2. Season 3 is weird in that regard. It depends on what someone means by "looking better," because it sort of switches off there for me. For me, Dean was a bit "rough" in the beginning in that - and unpopular opinion coming up, so sorry about this - I didn't quite think Jensen pulled off the subtlety needed not to make Dean look a bit jerky in the beginning of the season. By the end though, Sam was looking a bit self-involved, a bit unhinged, and morally questionable so for me it sort of balanced out in the end. Season 4 - hee - I definitely disagree with you here. For me, Sam came off looking way worse. It could've been more balanced, but for me, the lack of Sam's point of view and the "intrigue" involved in the attempted shocking reveal moment insured that that didn't happen. Even the shocking reveal for Sam's storyline itself was buried in an episode that was more meant to show Dean in the more sympathetic light and showcase Dean's plight. For me, I also would include seasons 6 and 7 and season 11 in there also, even though I know season 7 and 11 are likely contentious choices. I think a case could be made for season 10, too though actually for different reasons (in that both were actually making questionable decisions for understandable reasons.) Perhaps interestingly even though we agree on some of the other seasons not being as balanced, we probably wouldn't always agree on which character came off looking better. Probably season 5 (Sam), but not seasons 8 or 9 where I would say that Dean came off looking way better.
  13. Alright, but let's say that I buy this. As you often say, implying that a character is "weak" is in your opinion one of the worst things that the writers can do to a character... so how is implying that Sam is leading now - connection needed or not - because he was just too lazy or timid to do it before a positive thing? To me, it is saying - intended or not - that before Sam was just not applying himself or confident enough or brave enough to do it, and now that he is... well NOW he's really doing something. As someone who doesn't think a character has to be the leader to have worth, and actually prefers Sam because he isn't necessarily comfortable being the leader because I relate to that, I found that to be insulting. So I think that message was not only clumsy, but annoying. Kind of - "oh, you liked Sam before? But he really wasn't being all he could be... This is what Sam really should be... please ignore everything you liked about him before, because that was just Sam being a wimp / taking the easy way out / hiding in Dean's shadow / whatever... If they intended to make Sam look better with that leadership scene, then that is actually part of the problem for me, because it is seemingly telling me that Sam wasn't really good enough before... which I think you can probably imagine my response to that. And I don't care if that wasn't their intention. That is what they gave me. That is what Sam's words specifically said... And then once those words were said, the narrative apparently had no intention of having Sam actually be an effective leader after that point that I could see. The other hunters were never mentioned again and neither was that mission even really. Sam's one main "leader" stint after that couldn't have really been that much more of a disaster... well maybe Sam could've carelessly caused the death of both of the people he was trying to save before getting killed himself in a trap set by monsters who arguably were supposed to be running on instinct due to hunger - so how smart could they actually be? - but maybe that would've been too obvious of a message that they think Sam sucks at this. And if that wasn't bad enough, how was implying that Sam was just being a sheep-like follower to set this up in the first place - even though both you and I agreed that it made no sense that Sam joined the BMoL - showing Sam in a good light. For me it is a good example of what I was talking about in that piece of my post that @catrox14 quoted above. Making Sam do something that makes no sense - join the BMoL - in order to further whatever plot they had in mind whether it fits or not. Will it make Sam look like a jerk to lie to Dean to get him to go along with it? Enh, who cares!?! It gets the plot to move forward, so let's do it! We'll just ignore it later, characterization be damned!" That kind of thing actually illustrates my point point I had there about "trashing" Sam's character. In my opinion, little thought was given to how it would look to have Sam join the BMoL and lie to Dean about it. It was more important that it happen anyway to move the plot in the direction the writers wanted. My opinion on that one, I admit. For me, who cares if the writers' intentions are supposedly good if in order to get to these supposed "good intentions" they warp Sam's character and seemingly just make him do and say whatever it takes to get him there even if it makes little sense? To me that looks like they sometimes don't really respect Sam's character but rather want to use him by turning him into whatever they want him to be at a particular moment to illustrate some point or forward some plot. Except for me there were 5 1/2 seasons in between those things where Sam was more complex than the simplification of him supposedly wanting to get away. Sam learned that "getting away" wasn't all that it was cracked up to be, that you can't force yourself to fit in when you don't feel like you belong no matter how much you might want to, that sometimes you have to accept you can't always get what you want, but that sometimes those sacrifices are worth it... which was what Sam told Dean in "What Is..." Sure sometimes Sam questions that on and off during the series - but don't most people do that at times? Even Dean does that. There have been numerous times throughout the series where Dean has expressed that he's wanted out of the life... some as far back as season 1 even up until season 6 and probably beyond. The purgatory arc itself was partially about that very same thing, actually, in my opinion. But that doesn't mean that such questioning is somehow seen as an intrinsic part of Dean's character as far as I can tell or proof that Dean doesn't really like hunting after all. I don't see why the few times Sam does it it's somehow proof that he's just pretending and really resents his life and Dean too for being a part of it. I just don't see it the same way as you do, because I don't see how they are that different in their sometimes questioning and / or sometimes wanting out of the life. To me, what Carver did with Sam looked more like a plot manipulation for drama and angst, because what do you know? By season 10, Sam is right back to where he was in the second half of season 6 and throughout season 7, wanting to be hunting and finding a purpose in life by doing so, just as Sam told Dean in "The French Mistake." When Dean suggested Sam would probably be happier staying in the alternate universe, Sam pretty much said (paraphrase) "Don't be stupid. We don't even make a difference here." Which was pretty much a reiteration of what Sam said at the end of season 2. For me, it wasn't coincidence at all that Sam ended up right back there again in season 10 once teh DRAMA was over. The only thing Sam really learned in season 8 through 10 - well the only thing he really learned again, in my opinion, since he actually already learned it in season 6 and 7 - was that he needed and wanted Dean to be doing it with him. I understand that for you there is a question about Sam's motivations, but from what I see, there really isn't one. For me, Sam has mostly been finding self-worth through hunting and falling apart without Dean at his side since at least late season 2.*** All the angst and questioning and waffling ends up in the same place again in the end. *** (The Amelia thing being arguably an anomaly - though I'm not exactly sure how stable/well adjusted Sam really was there truthfully *shrug*) Your entire post was awesome, @companionenvy. I couldn't agree more. Well said.
  14. I don't remember the reaction being "yay, Sam standing up for himself." I did say that Sam had a bit of a point about Castiel... because he did, in my opinion. Castiel wasn't exactly sanity boy at the time, and had made some questionable choices and betrayals of his own in the past. And I more remember a lot of reaction being "Sam is being a jerk" and "poor, woobie Benny is more reliable." I basically thought Dean overshot with his "don't ever think I'd put anyone before you" and was being a bit manipulative there myself, but ehn a lesser offense compared to the mess Carver made of Sam, so it's all a matter of perspective maybe. And I think based on show history during that time that Sam likely wouldn't have had a chance to say "...don't get mad at me...", because likely the thing that he helped possess Dean would've turned out to be Lucifer himself or some equally malevolent and dangerous entity that then would've started an apocalypse, so Sam would've had to be hearing that for the next few seasons... And Sam did get variations of "are you going to choose another demon or hit another dog" at various times... not only from Dean, but even more humiliatingly from Crowley... as if Crowley was a better BFF for Dean than Sam and deserved to call Sam out after everything he himself did to Dean. And instead of it being played as at least a supposedly touching moment - as ill conceived as it was - it was instead played for laughs. "We turned Sam into a huge bag of dicks. Ha, ha, ha isn't that hilarious?" No, no it isn't. And, in my opinion, much worse with how cavalierly they chose to trash his character. Except that's not really what happened in my opinion.*** Dean didn't trust Sam and it took over 3/4 of the season for Sam to even begin to get himself out of the doghouse. For me, the working relationship was an entirely different entity... and Dean maybe even only gave lip service to that part anyway -maybe to keep Sam "happy" - because when it came down to it, for me, he didn't trust Sam and made huge unilateral decisions about the task at hand to show that he didn't trust Sam... So was Dean even really meaning it when he was being agreeable in "Fallen Idols?" In my opinion, based on Dean's all too easy barb at Sam's judgement in "Abandon All Hope" and that he didn't really tell Sam the entire truth about why he agreed to come back with Sam in the first place after "The End", I think it's kind of questionable myself whether or not Dean was really being sincere in "Fallen idols" to begin with. Which for me changes the dynamic of what was going on - i.e. that Dean was saying that he agreed, but he really didn't, meaning Dean's actions were maybe more calculated for a result (to keep Sam around so he could keep an eye on him) than Dean actually being agreeable. And I think there was enough evidence in what happened later sprinkled throughout the following episodes to support that theory. *** (And I dispute that that episode "made Dean the bad guy" also - for me that's all interpretation - but that's not really the point here.) After Dean treated Sam like it was Sam's fault that Dean had left and that Sam hadn't forgiven him right away and then blamed the universe for what happened "Somebody changed the rules." In my opinion, what Sam said in "Sharp Teeth" was more equivalent to Dean's (paraphrase) "there isn't anything you can do to make this right" in "Sympathy for the Devil" rather than a "Fallen Idols" thing. "The Purge" is more the "Fallen Idols" comparison in my opinion, and while I hate, hate, hate what Carver did to Sam there and thought what Sam said was cruel and untrue, there is at least one important difference. Sam agreed that he was wrong for what he did concerning Ruby and said that he would take it all back if he could, whereas Dean didn't and then actually insinuated that Sam should have been grateful for Dean's aiding Gadreel and lying to him. Which is when Sam got really angry. I disagree that this happens even often - I basically remember the one time where it maybe could be interpreted that way - but Sam isn't exactly the only one who does this. See my above reference where Dean blames the universe for his Gadreel decision. Just say you messed up, dude. That's it. It's a criticism often leveled at Sam, but it could as easily be leveled at Dean as well in my opinion. And I'd argue so does Dean. He was pissed off at Sam for months concerning Ruby, but he expected Sam to be grateful for saving him via Gadreel and lying about it. How is that not also at least kind of a double standard? I mean, sure there are differences between the situations. Dean did what he did to save Sam, but there was still lying and Sam getting hurt. And I see just as many for Dean. In my opinion, Sam didn't get to "hold on to his anger" concerning Gadreel. Maybe for 4 or 5 episodes, but it wasn't for most of a season... and in the end Sam had to renounce all of his anger and accept Gadreel as a "friend" and admit that maybe Gadreel wasn't so bad after all and watch Gadrel see the error of his ways concerning Metatron and be redeemed. Therefor all of Sam's, in my opinion, legitimate anger concerning what Dean did with Gadreel was downplayed and swept under the rug by turning Gadreel into a "good guy" who was "misunderstood" and just wanted redemption and went about it in the wrong way. (Aww, poor sympathetic Gadreel.) and then the narrative further justified it by having Sam not stick to his convictions and doing the same thing to save Dean, further justifying Dean's actions and sweeping his lying under the rug. For me, that would've been like the narrative nullifying Dean's objections to Ruby and Sam choosing her by turning Ruby into a good guy and her helping to defeat Lucifer rather than Dean getting to kill her. And no, in my opinion, Ruby was not just misunderstood because she was just trying to get Sam strong enough for the fight by having him drink demon blood. She was trying to make Sam Lucifer's meat puppet so that Lucifer could take over the world and that was her goal up until the end*** ... no "good" there in my opinion. That's not for me remotely the same as Gadreel in the end turning against the bad guy and helping to defeat him. Not even close. *** And kind of weirdly Ruby wanted Sam to be grateful about being possessed by Lucifer, too - what is it with this show having characters insinuate Sam should be grateful for entities possessing / inhabiting his body and taking away his agency? Lucifer did it, too. Even Soulless Sam had that attitude. So I think it pretty much comes down to how we each see the show. I think there are just as many examples to show that the writing justifies BOTH Sam's and Dean's actions at times at the expense of the other. It just happens that I think Dean's is generally given at least some thought - even if misguided - and is done as part of the "brotherly bond" whereas Sam, it seems anyway, is generally more cavalierly trashed for plot and angst purposes and then it's played for laughs to show how inconsequential it is to the writers.
  15. Yes, it would've been nice if Sam apologized. It would've been nice if Dean had apologized also. Dean didn't have to apologize for Gadreel specifically, because he wasn't sorry about that and I understand that, but it might've been nice if he'd said that he was sorry for letting Sam think he was crazy and going bad again and for letting Gadreel screw with his head and invade his personal thoughts and take his agency away for months, but that's not what the show was about during the Carver years. As for trying to find a way to deal with the mark... Sam did at times try to support Dean in that regard. He even said a couple of times that he thought Dean could beat it. I agree that the show wasn't very good at portraying that Dean's powers were getting out of control - but then again they didn't do a great job when Sam had them in season 4 either at first, in my opinion, since we didn't know how dark the origins of that power were or how addicted Sam was until way later on - but I think it was likely due to the Angelus*** factor. And in in the long run, I think it would've contradicted the basic stance of the show, anyway. In season 4, even when Sam was apparently doing good things with his powers, both Dean and Castiel were saying "this is obviously bad! Evil!" even before they knew that the powers came from demon blood. I don't remember Dean being supportive of Sam's powers in any meaningful way, even when Sam was saving people with them. So to me, it would have been somewhat hypocritical of the show if somehow Dean's demon derived powers - powers that were just as addictive in their own way as Sam's had been, and arguably more dangerous even than Sam's and with even a know really bad consequence - were now supposed to be seen as controllable just because it was now Dean who had the powers instead of Sam. Personally that would've ticked me off immensely. *** Where as - like in Angel: the Series - even though the audience knows that the protagonist's dark alter ego does awful, horrible things, upon having turned their protagonist into that dark, alter ego, the writers are suddenly squeamish about letting that alter ego actually do horrible things, sometimes - as in the case with Angel - to ridiculous levels, likely because they then think their audience isn't sophisticated enough to make then distinction between their protagonist and his altered state of being. (And they are generally wrong and usually just end up making their audience roll their eyes and think "lame." (TM Cartman). I understand why this annoys you and why you see it as not acknowledging Dean's leadership abilities because Dean's abilities weren't addressed, but I'm not sure you are getting why I was annoyed about what this all seemed to be saying and it doesn't have anything to do with Dean. Maybe because many are thinking that I consider a "Look see now Sam is coming into his own and finally becoming a leader!" to be a positive message and an acknowledgement for Sam. But my whole point is that that is exactly the message that ticked me off. Maybe I wasn't clear so I'll state it this way - I don't want Sam to be the leader. I don't think that it's Sam's strength and I personally - based on everything I've seen from his character previously - don't think that that is what Sam is even comfortable being. And that clunky, stupid speech just highlighted that for me. And either the writers couldn't see how clunky that came across and how ridiculous it was - in which case they don't understand Sam's character very well in my opinion - or they knew it was kind of clunky and stupid and were doing it to make fun of "Sam a leader." Neither scenario of which makes me happy. And considering that the writers later on have Sam screw up royally while leading, it sometimes has me leaning towards the latter scenario even though I know I'm likely writing too much into it. That in itself is bad enough for me, but them throwing in the stuff about Sam not leading before because he was maybe too lazy or timid to do so? That really ticked me off, because I repeat. I don't want Sam to be the leader. I like Sam the way he is - backing Dean up and making sure Dean doesn't lose focus or get off track. I want Sam to be acknowledged as being good at that.. not having the speech imply that Sam was just "taking the easy way out" in his previous non-leader role that's pretty much defined his character for the 12 previous seasons... except when he did try to lead and generally got in over his head doing it... which Sam learned that lesson already. And again, I'm fine with that. What I'm not fine with is the narrative saying that unless Sam is the leader, the he's a loser. I hate that message, and that was the message I got from that whole thing. And even worse - they had Sam behave entirely illogically by joining the BMoL just to set up this stupid message that I hate. For me this isn't an insult Dean = make Sam look good issue. At all. I think the scenario did somewhat shortchange Dean... but considering Dean is generally show to be the leader in most cases anyway, I don't think this one episode supersedes all that, especially since the following episodes go right back to Dean in the leadership role. For me I'm looking at this as an insult to Sam entirely independent of Dean. I mean of course Dean is going to support Sam - duh, that's the right thing to do, so for me I don't find having Dean let Sam have a moment he maybe needed to be all that horrible myself. However, the narrative implying that Sam "realizing" that he was just holding himself back before - like a timid, shy girl taking off her glasses and letting her hair down to suddenly realize she was beautiful and could be confident all along, she just had to believe it - was really insulting to me, and not at all a positive message. All it said to me is that the writers thought that everything Sam had done before was inferior, because he wasn't leading. It was basically insulting Sam's general characterization previously... a characterization that I mostly liked (except when the writers tried to mess with that characterization - as Carver did in season 8) and saying "Look, see we fixed Sam! He's all better now and being a leader! Well until we just ignore all that and he goes back to not being the leader again that is." I didn't need Sam to be fixed, thank you very much, and am annoyed by the implication that the writers seemed to be saying that they had to do so to begin with. I hope maybe that made my complaint concerning that storyline more clear? Maybe?