Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Supernatural – Episode 9.12 – The Gripe Review


    Enable Dark Mode!

  • What's HOT
  • Premiere Calendar
  • Ratings News
  • Movies
  • YouTube Channel
  • Submit Scoop
  • Contact Us
  • Search
  • Privacy Policy
Support SpoilerTV
SpoilerTV.com is now available ad-free to for all premium subscribers. Thank you for considering becoming a SpoilerTV premium member!

SpoilerTV - TV Spoilers

Supernatural – Episode 9.12 – The Gripe Review

Feb 1, 2014

Share on Reddit

Welcome to my vent room, where I write about things I wished I didn’t feel the need to write about.

This week’s episode was about Garth, which made writing this review both easy and hard. Easy because I don’t like Garth so I had no reservations about griping about this episode. Hard because it was difficult to remain objective and not fill this article with reasons why I don’t like Garth.


My dislike of an episode solely focused on Garth isn’t directly related to Garth himself but to the fact that I don’t think he deserves it. In my opinion, for a character to deserve an episode fully devoted to them, they have to be on the show for a good amount of time and earn their stripes by doing interesting and relevant things. They have to put enough time and effort as a side character before the show turns the spotlight on them. Bobby was such a character and he only got two episodes dedicated to him, one of which was his swan song. Castiel too falls under this category (even though he is a third lead now, at least when it comes to the mythology) and he only got one. For Garth, who only has three episodes under his belt and no impact on the mythology, getting his own episode is like cutting in line.

This is not a gripe though, just my personal opinion. And even though I may not feel much attachment to the guy, I would feel the same about any Joe Shmoe they would replace him with in a generic Monster of the Week episode instead of this one, so it's not a big deal. Besides, if Adam Glass’ niece replica, Krissy, gets two episodes, and Robbie Thompson’s self-insert, Charlie, gets three, Garth can have this one and get high on it.

Now the gripes:

Gripe #1 – “After we find Garth and get to the bottom of this…”




Says Sam in the episode. And even though he finishes with “I’m gone,” we know what he means is “then we’ll talk,” because we can’t have the brothers separate without talking, and we can’t have too many episodes with them being separated.

My issue with this statement however is what it implies: After we finish this random job that has nothing to do with the ongoing plot and is just a filler to stretch the show to 23 episodes then we get to the more pressing matter of our unraveling relationship, you know, the thing viewers mostly care about.

I personally don’t like one-off episodes, but I understand their function and accept the fact that some viewers enjoy them. Another good argument presented to me on a ratings board was that such episodes are easier for random viewers to pick up as opposed to mythology heavy episodes that have the potential to spin their heads.

However there should be some care given to the placement of filler episodes. In the past it used to be that standalones appeared after a major crisis in the story was resolved. The idea was to give viewers time to breathe before they were plunged into the next pool of action and drama. At that point viewers could relax and enjoy the singular episodes with no major question marks hanging over their heads or anything sharp and unpleasant poking them on the side.


Recently however (season 7 and up) it seems the showrunners don’t care much about this placement. The fate of the world might be hanging from a thread at the end of an episode, yet the boys would go duck hunting with Swamp People in the next one.

Bad placement of a MotW episode makes them act like roadblocks instead of vacations. If you have a storyline going that has the viewers' attention, it’s best to finish it before throwing something funny or random at them. Doing otherwise would be like clowns appearing in the middle of a production of Hamlet and pulling the audience out of the poignant scene they were currently watching.

I don’t think I have to say what pressing matter currently exists on the show that needed to be resolved before Garth jumped on the stage in his clown costume. We all watched Sam and Dean separate, emotionally and physically. Their relationship was at an all-time low before this episode aired, so it's only natural for me to not want to turn my eyes away from it and toward the skinny, awkward hunter and his adopted family. This episode dragging the unpleasantness of the brothers’ separation without improving or evolving it in any way only makes it a source of annoyance.

Gripe #2: Am I supposed to care about Mormon Werewolves with no personality?

They sing, they pray, they sit around a table and smile a lot while eating disgusting grub, and they project zero likability. The only reason we might care about them is because Garth cares about them, and Garth isn’t as endearing a character to have that much trickle effect.


You’d think a New Age, bovine eating werewolf family would be a lot wackier and more interesting than this. They could be uniquely odd and their eccentricity could be utilized to make them attractive to the audience. Unfortunately no step was taken to achieve that in this episode. Sitting around the table for dinner, they acted no different than any other pious family we have seen a dozen times on TV, except for their nauseating table manners. None of them had any personality beyond being a happy family who loved each other and were strong believers of their faith. It was so boring I felt sorry for Dean who was trapped there and had to listen to their accounts about their past and how they became what they became, i.e. more “telling.”

Even the stepmom – later revealed as anything but nice – was just nice. And that was still better than the father who was as bland as the stuff he was talking about, or the two mute sons, or Bess, who had the personality of a goldfish.


It’s so hard to side with Garth when the people he loves are so meh you expect them to blow up at any moment and reveal their innards full of circuits and wires. I assume the point of this episode was that hunters could let some monsters live if they are good monsters. But when the monsters are so boring they seem like robots I won’t care whether they live or die and what lesson this teaches Dean. In fact I may prefer Dean killing some of them in flashy, bloody ways just to get some action up in dullsville.

Gripe #3: Sam is finally talking, yay! But wait…what is he saying?

If you read my past reviews you know I was dying for a Sam monologue that would reveal what was going on inside his head. In this episode he finally talked, and it did as much good as if he had opened his mouth and started yodelling.

I’ve now listened to Sam and Dean’s conversation at the end of the episode three times, and I have transcribed it, yet I still don’t know what the heck Sam was talking about. I am going to post his dialogue (and my reactions to it) here to show you how exactly it confused me.


It all starts when Dean apologizes to Sam and they both agree that when they share the road it “splits the crappiness.” I understand this and like it because all it says is that even though they have a bad life, being together makes it easier to bear. So far so good.

Then the conversation goes like this:

Sam: Something's broken here, Dean. (Me: Awesome! Tell me more. What is broken? The codependency? The brotherly love? Dean’s trust in you? Your trust in Dean? Please, elaborate.)

Sam: We don't see things the same way anymore, our roles in this whole thing. (Me: Ok! What do you see that Dean sees differently? Where do you stand and where does he stand? Are you still talking about the brotherly relationship or something else? Please elaborate.)

Sam: Back in that church, talking me out of boarding up hell? (Me: What? But I thought that was your choice. Didn’t we hear the phrase “you chose each other” on and off the show many times since that scene? Doesn’t that mean you didn’t board up hell because you “chose” Dean? And what does this have to do with the broken thing? Or the thing you see different from Dean? Or your different roles in this? Would you elaborate?)

Sam: Or tricking me into letting Gadreel possess me? I can't trust you. Not the way I thought I could. (Me: Alright, this I understand. Your problem is you can’t trust Dean because of what he did. Great, now tell me what conclusion you have made.)

Dean: We're family.


Sam: You say that like it is some sort of cure-all, like it can change the fact that everything that has ever gone wrong between us has been because we're family. (Me: So…you’re not family? How can you not be family when you’re family? What is it you want to change? Please elaborate.)

Dean: So what we're not family now?

Sam: I'm saying you wanna work, let's work. If you wanna be brothers... (Me: What? What? If you wanna be brothers then what? Don’t hunt? Don’t take care of me? Don’t make decisions for me? Don’t blame yourself? Don’t go off on your own and make deals with Crowley? Don’t stay because I can’t stand your face? What? WHY WON’T YOU ELABORATE, SAM???)

This isn’t Shakespeare. We’re not supposed to interpret the abstract meanings woven through the verses. This is a small show called Supernatural that is currently confusing the hell out of this viewer. It’s like they intentionally write Sam’s dialogue loopy, just to make us go to work on figuring out what he says.

This exact same thing happened in the church scene at the end of season 8. Sam was saying things to Dean and Dean was responding back to him yet I had no idea what the heck they were talking about. Judging from the number of interpretations fans had about that scene, and the variety of reactions they showed, many felt the same, because every person had their own reading of that scene, tailored to what they liked to hear.

This is what makes connecting to Sam so hard. Already cries of anger are heard around fandom from those condemning him to have broken the brotherly bond. Those who defend him say he didn’t break anything just threatened Dean with it so he wouldn't trick him again. Some say Sam was demanding they put their job before their love which shows how fully back he is in the game and how willing to sacrifice himself for the world. And then there are those of us who want his speech to be about him dissing the toxic side of the brotherly bond, the codependency, and trying to dispel it.


I’m not going to claim that's the case, because that’s what I “want” to it to be, not what I'm hearing. In truth I can’t tell what Sam said because it was so much like a riddle and so full of broad concepts it could be interpreted as anything.This could be because the writers don’t know what they want to do with Sam or his stance towards the brotherly bond, or they do but are afraid to attempt it. Maybe they want to change the dynamics of the relationship and are scared of a fandom backlash. Maybe there’s a lack of consensus among the writers and they are keeping things open until they make a decision. Whatever it is, it’s confusing us and robbing us (at least those who don’t make an assumption and run with it) of the enjoyments of a coherent story.

Gripe #4: Why do you keep repeating this thing no one likes?

Let’s be honest, nobody likes the brothers at odds. The only merit this storyline has is the moment they hug and make up. Every relationship has its up and downs and for us to take pleasure from the ups we have to sit through the downs. However it seems like recently there has been way more downs than ups in this particular relationship.

If we take a look back at the previous seasons we’ll see a gradually worsening pattern. In seasons 4 the brothers were at odds because of Sam’s attachment to Ruby. It was resolved in the beginning of season 5 and the brotherly bond became stronger than before. In season 6 Sam was soulless and Dean pointlessly blamed him for it a couple of times, but eventually it got resolved when Sam got his soul back and they became a team again. In season 7 they had a row over Dean killing Amy – a minor incident that had nothing to do with the main plot and felt latched onto the season just to tear the brothers apart – and for the first time the issue wasn’t fully resolved. In season 8 things got worse when Sam didn’t look for Dean in Purgatory and they disagreed on Benny. Neither was resolved.


Now we’re in season 9 and there’s once again something pulling the brothers in opposite directions, only now Sam is speaking elfish and Dean wants to be on his own and their conversations – those that used to be the highlights of the show – are spiteful and difficult to watch. I wish to think the showrunner and writers are doing this to bring them back together and reap the joys of a reunion, but judging by the past two seasons I won’t be surprised if that doesn’t happen. If they are planning to go somewhere with this they should do it fast and stop dragging this hostile air, suffocating the brothers and viewers, into more episodes. If they aren’t planning to do something with it and this is just their way to create more drama on the show they should stop repeating this formula that the fans don’t like and use some new way to ramp up the tension.

Mini Gripes

There were some issues with the episode that I didn’t think needed full analyses the way those mentioned above did, yet were pocking me hard enough that I decided to briefly talk about them.

#1 No mention of Castiel?

It’s a small thing, but it always bothers me. Whenever Misha Collins isn’t on the show the boys talk as if Castiel doesn’t exist. When Dean and Sam were catching up at the beginning of the episode Dean did not ask Sam where Castiel was even though it made sense for him to do so, not just to show he gave a damn about the friend who spent the last two episode as a pillar of strength and support for both of them, but for us, the audience, to know what happened to him. One line would have been enough, but alas.

#2 Garth did it for a woman too.

Remember last week’s second trope that was repeated so many time it had to be banned? It was about the fact that every guy who had a transformation on this show did it because of a woman he loved more than anything else in the world. Garth joined that club in this episode.


#3 Sam is kidnapped and tied up, again.

This is another one that keeps repeating without rhyme or reason. Every time the plot demands a brother to be kidnapped, it’s Sam. Not that I care much if it’s Sam or Dean who gets to listen to the villain’s inane monologue about how to be evil, but I wouldn’t mind some variety in my soup, like watching Sam barge through the door for once and save Dean.

#4 I am a villain. I’m going to give you a full account of all of the evil things I plan to do, before I kill you.


James Bond villains used to do this a lot in the 1960s. And it is as absurd now as it was back then. Why does the villain waste time talking about her evil schemes, backstory and motivations when she knows the captive’s brother and her own husband are outside looking for the missing people? Why won’t she simply do the thing she is babbling about doing? Anything could go wrong in the time she spends explaining herself to people who would be dead anyway if everything goes according to her plan. These monologues sound fake and out of place because they aren’t a character telling something to another character, but a character giving info to the audience, that pesky telling instead of showing thing I talked about in the last Gripe Review.

A word on dialogue and “show, don’t tell.”

There was a bit of confusion about a few things I said in last week’s review regarding show vs. tell. A few people wondered how I expected to hear Sam talk about what was in his head when a couple of paragraphs later I complained about characters telling each other things the writers wanted us to know. I feel I should explain my point about dialogue and what I think is ok or not ok to put in it.

Dialogue is a powerful tool for a writer to apply to many things. But just like any tool that has its primary and secondary functions, as well as things you can do but shouldn’t do with it (like cleaning between your teeth with a sharp army knife,) dialogue too needs a lot of attention.


Even though dialogue consists of words (telling) it should always be used for showing first. It can be used for telling when there is no other way to advance the story, but even then it still has to pull its weight in showing.

How is that possible? Simple. Dialogue’s primary function in every story, movie, or TV show should be showing the emotional state of the character who’s talking. Then, and only then, is the writer allowed to also use it to give backstory, details about the plot, or premonitions about the future. To only have it used as a tool to give the audience “information” or “moral lessons” is turning it into a megaphone that plays pre-recorded messages at full blast.

When I said I wanted Sam to talk about what happened to him it wasn’t because I didn’t know what happened to Sam, but because I wanted to see how Sam felt about it. His speech would have given me a window into his emotions. That’s different from Cain, or Reverend Jim in this episode, whose words were only used to inform me about their story.


An example of a good dialogue/monologue is Dean’s speech to Sam at the end of Heaven and Hell. Through that speech we find out what happened to Dean in hell, but more importantly, we find out how he felt about it and how it affected his current state of mind. The fact that the dialogue was masterfully written in a choppy, evasive fashion, and Jensen did an A+ job delivering it, were extra icing on the cake.



So there you have it, this week’s Gripe Review. It got unnecessarily long for a Garth episode. I hope I didn’t bore you with my hair splitting analysis of a story about a goofy hunter dating a Barbie doll from a church going werewolf family. I’m sure this all sounded much better in someone’s head before they turned it into an episode of Supernatural.

Don’t forget to leave your paw prints, and opinions, in the comment section.

Tessa

tessa-marlene.tumblr.com/
twitter.com/tessa_marlene 

73 comments:

  1. Recently however (season 7 and up) it seems the showrunners don’t care much about this placement. The fate of the world might be hanging from a thread at the end of an episode, yet the boys would go duck hunting with Swamp People in the next one.


    I think season 7 is generous. I don't know if anything can make me roll my eyes as much as season 5, where WE WERE IN AN APOCALYPSE and Lucifer was apparently doing the Achy Breaky Heart offcamera while Sam and Dean went cosplaying and broke one of their father's friends out of a mental institution.


    I didn't mind Sam's dialogue as much as a lot of people seem to mind it, mostly because I think it was realistic that Sam wouldn't know what to say. I do wish there had been more clarification, especially about the church scene (I would have had him mention his conversation with Dean in A Rock and A Hard Place where he told Dean he would always be sick inside and Dean still didn't tell him the truth). The "family" part I think was mostly about what Dean's idea of family has become, not that they're no longer family.


    I do agree that it was confusing.


    I've seen this rehashed in so many reviews and comment threads on boards and tumblr that, frankly, I'm sick to death of it, so I wanted to say thanks for spending so much time on the fail of the characterizations for the werewolves. The non-role for Garth's wife was just awful and embarrassing. That poor actress. And the woman who was holding them at gunpoint - I spent most of her scenes wondering if it was Laurie Holden from The Walking Dead. She was about as smart as poor Andrea in the end.


    I have never liked Garth, although he was OK here, very much toned down. I felt like this episode was trying up a loose end, since they seemed to have plans to bring him back last season and it never happened (maybe because of scheduling conflicts, I don't know), so this was their way to say goodbye. I don't think he really deserved it, but I did like his scene with Dean about Kevin.


    I actually really liked Krissy's last episode and I thought it was in large part an episode about the positive changes in Dean at that point. When a character is used for that purpose, I don't mind self-insert characters.


    I agree with you about show-not-tell dialogue. The show has a lot of really bad dialogue. Honestly, outside of Edlund, it almost always has, but that's not an excuse.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for your gripes. I'll add one more: If this pack of werewolves are sooooo established with several generations, how come in all this time they haven't bothered to buy a freakin' farm and raise their own cattle? I know...small gripe, comparatively...but one that still took me out of the story to say WTF while I was watching. :P

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for the comment. I'm now rethinking dedicating three of my four gripes to the brother relationship, even though #1 is more or less still about the Garth story. This is why I write these reviews. Everybody is yelling at poor Adam Glass for that one scene at the end. Someone has to point out the flaws of the rest of his episode. ;)


    I'm confused why people are so mad at Sam's speech while I'm still scratching my head trying to figure it out. How are they so sure he said what they thought he said? I swear to Gadreel he said a bunch of things that could mean nothing, or anything. You could make up a story about gambling, fishing or smoking weed and insert that dialogue into it and it would fit.

    ReplyDelete
  4. No actually that's a valid point. You'd think by now they'd have the lifestyle down so they wouldn't have to trespass on someone else's property and steal their livestock. That's still a crime even if it isn't as big as killing a human and eating his heart.


    But I think not much thought goes into these one off episodes, which is why they are usually so bland and boring.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I feel like the writers of these episodes, at least the ones on Twitter, seem proud of them, although maybe they just want attention from fans, I don't know.


    I just wish someone working on the show would tell them some basic ideas to improve scripts. For instance, in this episode, tighten up the dialogue at the end, and have stronger roles for women.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I feel like the writers of these episodes, at least the ones on Twitter, seem proud of them, although maybe they just want attention from fans, I don't know.

    They (Adam and Robbie) are always proud of everything they write. They could defecate all over an episode and claim it smells of roses. Problem is, fans who aim to sway them to write for their favorite relationships/characters keep pimping them and add to the illusion.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Well the brother fan backlash to this episode makes that a lot less likely for Adam Glass in the future (lol emoticon here).

    ReplyDelete
  8. I feel like with this show, people (including myself) often interpret a scene the way we want to interpret it. Everything is very ambiguous. But making a scene like this too ambiguous isn't a good idea, because what Sam was saying was really important and now it's just turned into warfare over whether Sam is done with family or why does Sam blame Dean for stopping his suicide.


    Sam really needs a POV, and a consistent one. I wrote out paragraphs of meta on Sam yesterday, and, you know, that's great, but that's what the show should be doing.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Well, I checked Adams's tweet replies during the live-tweeting saga and those were as nasty as you wish. So they have an idea, they are getting a fair share of this fandom hate too.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I don't know whether I have this right - feel free to correct me or disagree! But I just wanted to make a point about show and tell. A couple of points, actually.
    First, in a tv show, the showing is the actors moving around- hugging, waving, running to and fro, fighting, crying - all those things that aren't saying. Even the WAY something is said, and the expression that goes with it, they're all showing. Going to the past? Show us a newspaper with the date from the past. Needing a hug? Hold out your arms and make eye contact.
    So, that's all very necessary, might as well be radio if you didn't use those things.
    But telling, now, those are the words. I don't think - and again, disagree by all means - that showing means subtle communication in words, and telling means unsubtle communication. I'm not even convinced I've interpreted what you said about the dialogue correctly, and if I haven't please put me straight.
    "Show don't tell" is, if you'll forgive me, the crudest expression of advice to writers to avoid too much exposition. It doesn't mean telling is bad and showing is good - you need a balance of both. If you feel the balance was not as you would like it to be, well, that is of course absolutely fine. But giving Sam a monologue to explain what he's saying, thinking and feeling more clearly? Isn't that telling us? I realise you think his dialogue was unclear to you, and others may feel that too - but to me, the meaning was clear, and the co-dependency which has caused some reaction from viewers has been at least partly addressed.
    Anyway - my thoughts about show and tell!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Minor point, though not really relevant to SPN: there actually IS a "clown" scene in Hamlet, with the grave-diggers, before the "alas, poor Yorick" speech. Ther're even called clowns in the character headings, iirc (though obviously not the red-nosed, big-shoed kind, just the not too bright kind).

    ReplyDelete
  12. Actually they aren't new age or Mormon. Qualls himself said evangelical. As for Sam Carver the butcher at work again. In seasons 1-7 if the guys parted there was a believable if nothing else reason for it. Carver's lame attempt at tension with abusive Amelia or Sam's freak out for no reason over Benny and this season it's saying Dean tricked him when nobody tricked Sam it's just buyers remorse. He didn't ask for the details before HE Sam said yes and now he's bitching. Of course why a guy so ready to die and making sure he can't be brought back would suddenly 180 and agree to a plan that would save his life for no reason is also confusing.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Suicidal people waver quite a bit, and Sam was delirious at the time. Him agreeing (as he had no idea what it would entail) didn't surprise me.


    I think the problems with Sam started in season 4. There's a reason why seasons 6 and 7 avoided writing for Sam beyond being not-Sam or being afflicted.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I too had no problems with the dialogue. I understood what Sam was trying to say to Dean and I feel it was more realistic and natural than have Sam doing a monologue.

    ReplyDelete
  15. He was not delirious. Where do you see signs he was delirious. He seemed perfectly normal average Sam.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I think we're talking aobut him saying yes to living, not saying yes to letting Gadreel in. The latter, yes, he was tricked; the former, no.

    ReplyDelete
  17. It was not proper consent . What you are trying to do is absolve Dean of his responsibilty and culpability by blaming Sam ,you are doing exactly what your last line is accusing Sam fans of.

    I do not mind if someone does not like Sam however I do mind when someone try's to insert blame when something is done to him on him. The possession and subsequent fallout was a direct result of Dean's decision that Sam had to live , it was his choices not Sam's that resulted in where the brothers are right now and even Dean knows that. Dean can also be human .

    ReplyDelete
  18. I don't make it a secret that Dean is my favorite of the two brothers. But that doesn't mean I don't want more Sam on this screen. I sort of feel like what started as a show with two main characters, has turned into a show solely from Deans POV (from season 6 I would say). The only time I can remember since then getting Sam's POV are the awful soap opera flashbacks we got last year when he was with what's-her-name and the dog. I'd love to know what Sam USA thinking for a change. In my view, that final scene when Sam didn't finish his sentence would have been the perfect chance for him to actually tell us what he wants and stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  19. No, Tawrens is definitely referring to the Gadreel possession.

    ReplyDelete
  20. So it would seem from that subsequent comment. Hunh. No, regarding the possession, Sam was tricked into saying yes. Hard to argue against that, I'd think. He thought he was talking to Dean and agreeing to live, not that he was talking to an angel and agreeing to be its vessel.

    ReplyDelete
  21. In the chapel he was delirious - he was saying things Sam would never say in his right mind (the part about Benny and Cas). In the hospital he was hallucinating and going in and out.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I think it shifted to Dean's POV in season 2 or 3 and has never really shifted back, for a variety of reasons.


    I wish it would, because we need it. Or I do, anyway. I don't want to lose Dean's POV, because it's what keeps the show running, but I want to know more of Sam's thoughts and feelings. I get tired of all the debates over whether he hates Dean, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Aww, I like Garth. :( Not nearly as much as Bobby of course but NO ONE will ever replace Bobby. I felt someone should have asked where Becky was though, lol, weren't they dating or is she shagging God again? Haha.

    ReplyDelete
  24. No, sorry, that's wrong. Sam didn't agree to being possessed by an angel. You can argue it was the right thing to do on Dean's part, fine, by the facts are Sam didn't agree to be possessed. No buyers remorse.

    ReplyDelete
  25. She does have a vibrant sexuaity that can be intimidating.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Yup. I'm not even mad at Dean about it so it's not about being a Sam fangirl or something either. Honestly if I HAD to chose, I'd say screw both of them and choose Cas, lol.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I thought Sam's speech to Dean was clearly, separate family from the job. He needs to see Sam as an equal partner, not a little brother.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Becky is awesome. She just feels like my online Supernatural BFF Fangirl, lol. Though much more extreme, haha.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I don't agree that Sam has been the protagonist through all of this. During the same period you mentioned, Dean was the sole player to not cave in to the angels and created the concept free will, which spread to the angels and created the set up for season 6. Dean uncovered the Cas/Crowley plot and while failing to stop it, killed Eve, killed Dick Roman and was sucked into Purgatory. He was Death's choice as a student. While Sam started the trials, Dean made the decision to end them, and has been the decision maker for everything that has happened with the Gadreel story this season so far. To pretend that Sam has been the only protagonist is to ignore most of what has happened to Dean and rob Dean of a lot of the influence he's had.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Dean was the sole player to not cave in to the angels and created the concept of free will.

    That was before the period I mentioned. Dean's involvement as the protagonist ended in the episode "Point of No Return." Since then he had been only a Main Character while Sam had been only the Protagonist. Here's a link to an article about the difference: The Confusion between Main Character and Protagonist.

    All the stories Dean has been involved have been brief. He never had a PTSD story, not when he came back from hell and not when he returned from Purgatory. Sam's emotional state after hell however was a point of tension for many seasons. Dean killed Dick Roman but even in season 7 the focus was more on Sam's wall damage and his hallucinations than the Leviathans. Dean went to purgatory but we got more flashbacks of Sam and Amelia than Dean in that place, and it was the Amelia story that got a resolution. Dean argued starting the trials, but Sam got them, which launched him into yet another quest as the pursuer of the Story Goal. Only now, with Dean getting the mark of Cain, there might be a possibility for Dean to play protagonist for a change, if they don't drop it or turn it on its head so it would become about Sam.

    Technically the show is doing nothing wrong. Many good stories have had separate protagonists and main characters (To Kill a Mockingbird is a perfect example.) It's just that both of these boys have fans who may want their favorite to have the POV for a change, just to see how he sees the world, or be the focus of a storyline, to see how he would act as a hero.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Can you say he confused SOME of his audience as not everyone was confused. My friends who watch it were not confused either. Probably best not to include all as we know how people get if they think others are talking for them.

    ReplyDelete
  32. No. The dialogue was ambiguous. It would confuse anyone, except people who insist that their reading of it is the right one, even though it's just their interpretation.It's like if Sam opened his mouth and spoke gibberish and some claimed they understood it perfectly. Should I say it wasn't gibberish, because SOME fans are so in love with their opinion they stamp it on the dialogue?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Sam is a plot driven character , he is reliant on that to give him a role . When Dean is given both protagonist and pov role which is what we have now , then the result is a Sam removed from the narrative. Dean has anchored the show , his pov even within a Sam sl has dictated the audiences view of not only Sam but the brothers relationship .

    I do not think the writers are going to give Sam the narrative role in the sl that Dean enjoys and just make Dean the protagonist . The show is not set up that way , it is not geared to Sam's pov , hence why we have very little focus on Sam regarding the possession outside of the Castiel conversation in First Born which was mostly Castiel talking . I would love exploratory pov storytelling for Sam but it is not in the nature of the show to do that.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Thank you. I certainly agree that any writers should choose vocabulary suited to their audience, otherwise they are not going to be understood. Nevertheless, I do think a writer should be careful with their technical vocabulary, and there is a way that the words "show" and "tell" are jargon words within writing circles. To use them, in a way that is not quite accurate simply to make a point - I'm not sure that's a productive way forward. One wouldn't use "metaphor" to mean "simile", for example, or "euphony" to mean "rhythm".
    And yes, of course, one can show a character's origin by using the vocabulary they would be likely to choose, or show a character meaning the opposite of what they are saying, but these are details of dialogue rather than the overall thrust of the dialogue, whose purpose is to tell, surely. You are, after all, in one way or another, telling a story, and there is a long and noble tradition of using that word to describe what is
    going on.
    As for the final phase or your argument - I think there were questions (which I think all writers should be leaving, for future solution); I think, in addition, he was allowing the viewers to pick up and think about clues from many, many other occasions when these characters have spoken to each other. And these are men for whom even finding the vocabulary to have a "chick-flick moment", as Dean famously summed up such moments, would be a considerable challenge. So they say what they can, and the co-dependency which has long been a subject of fan scorn, if I am reading things correctly, is broken. Sam, metaphorically, does not want to be merely Dean's younger brother, Sammy. All this does develop from dialogue earlier in this episode (Dean's "told you we couldn't work together", for example - and the way Dean lies to him about having more information about Garth). and thus, for me, and apparently for a couple of others too, made the dialogue perfectly comprehensible.
    That's all I have time to say at the moment. I would like to continue this discussion, if you should find it interesting. It is always an interesting exploration, this discussion of writing.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Have to admit the mangled talk at the end turned me from going from understanding Sam's anger about the subject to thinking that Sam just came off as a...well a dick.

    Too much has happened for Sam to be that ambiguous while shoving the blame on others (I'm talking about the bit about Dean talking him out of closing the gates thing) even if he is still reeling, especially as they shoved him into the damsel in distress position, yet again. To claim that his relationship with his brother is toxic and going on how he can't trust Dean is hard to take, even though it can be described that way, when yet again we have just had to have Dean burst in at the last second to save him. Its like they can't decide to give Sam a true personality (like in First born) or just have him as a plot device right now.

    Though I did think there was an interesting idea in the episode hidden among the cliches - the idea that the monsters have to deal with their feelings that they have the right to feel that they deserved to have as much revenge as those that hunt them, because really what is the difference between evil step mom and John. She had given up her father's message until her brother got killed, John had given up War until Mary died. Also they had talked destroying humans but what humans had actually died? None that we knew about and the only ones attacked were Sam and Dean, hunters and confessed killers of their kind who fell into their laps.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I disagree that Sam's emotional state after Hell was a point of tension for many seasons.

    Sam returned from Hell soulless in S6. That was an arc, which I found quite entertaining. When Sam's soul was returned, a wall was put up in his mind to prevent him from remembering anything. Cas dropped the Wall. At the start of S7, we got two episodes about the hallucinations, and then the story was promptly shelved for almost 15 episodes until it was brought back up and resolved in one episode. The writers explicitly stated they were shelving the story to focus on Dean's 15-episode emotional arc. Sam, IIRC, has never expressed any feelings at all about Hell or anything that happened to him there.



    I thought the soulless arc and its aftermath had great potential, and, IMO, that potential was wasted. HCW was an excellent episode but nothing came of it. Sam's hellucination story was reduced to the occasional hand rub, and I can think of 100 more interesting ways to tell that story that don't require MP's presence.



    I do agree that the pointless Amelia FBs were shown more than Dean's PTSD story, but I didn't see Sam (or anyone for that matter) as the protagonist in the story.

    ReplyDelete
  37. When Dean is given both protagonist and pov role which is what we have
    now , then the result is a Sam removed from the narrative.

    I couldn't agree more w/you. As the show has gone on, the writers have increasingly neglected writing Sam's POV. When Dean had the mytharc and POV in S5, Sam was removed from the narrative until the very end of the season. Heck, evev in S4, Kripke admitted to telling Sam's story in the background. He also admitted to "forgetting" that John was Sam's father too, and that he should have focused a bit more on how Sam felt about John's death.

    I'm a bi-bro fan who has been asked why I write about Sam so much, and it's b/c I fear that Sam will be lost and/or ignored if he doesn't have the plot. Even if Dean doesn't have the mytharc, I know the story will likely be told through his eyes. He will never be sidelined as he is the character most of the writers care about. I can't say the same for Dean. Without the plot, Sam's just there. Even now, I sense a struggle among the writers to get a handle on what Sam wants and how he feels. That's why he keeps getting these cryptic, poorly written speeches.

    The writers seem quite limited in their ability to write both plot and POV for two leads.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Your selection on what the stories on Supernatural were during that period are interestingly picked. As for the period of time, since you mentioned Sam stopping the Apocalypse, I included Dean’s role in that, and Point of No Return was only four episodes before Swan Song.

    I’m curious why you included Amelia as one of the main stories but not Lisa and Ben? You say the focus was more on Sam’s wall damage than on the Leviathans, but Sam’s wall damage only lasted for a handful of episodes before it reached a point where the hallucinations seemed barely remembered or acknowledged. Sam was hunting and acting perfectly normal during most of the period when he was supposedly having hallucinations.

    Dean had a PTSD story. This is before the period we’re talking about, but Dean came back from Hell changed. He lost some of the fight he had previously had and saw himself as a torturer and unworthy of being the
    angels’ champion. And after he came back from Purgatory, he was little off for a while as well. It wasn’t PTSD, but he was different. But this is off topic anyway. PTSD doesn’t equal pursuing the story goals, and I think the definition of a protagonist was your point.

    According to the article you referenced, the protagonist “pursues
    the story goals.”

    The goal in the first half of season 6 was getting Sam’s soul back, and Dean was the only one pursuing that. Even RoboSam didn’t want it. The goal in the second half was killing Eve and then stopping Cas and Crowley, and again Dean was again the protagonist there. Sam was removed from most of that story because of his wall issues.

    The goal in season 7 was stopping the Leviathans from destroying the world. Sam’s hellucinations were colorful, but had little effect on the story. After Bobby was killed, Dean was portrayed as being set on revenge (not because of Sam’s hallucinations, but because of Bobby’s murder by Dick), and the was the main protagonist in the hunt for Dick Roman storyline.

    The bigger story in the first half of season 8 was Purgatory, Cas being missing, and Benny. Dean was the protagonist there too, in that he had brought Benny back from Purgatory. Dean’s Purgatory storyline was resolved when Cas returned, Dean chose Sam, and Benny went back to Purgatory. I don’t know if Sam’s flashbacks got more time or not. I didn’t time them. But they seemed pretty even, and Benny had much more present day story time and focus than Amelia did, if not flashback time. Also, while the CW was heavily promoting the Dean in Purgatory storyline, no one was promoting Sam gets a dog.

    The only time you could argue that Sam was the protagonist during this period was in the last three episodes of season 5 and in the final third of season 8. The trials story wasn’t even primarily Sam’s until he killed the hellhound.

    ReplyDelete
  39. No, regarding the possession, Sam was tricked into saying yes. Hard to argue against that, I'd think.

    You would be absolutely right. Sam was tricked into being possessed. I am not sure why one would even argue that he was not. That is clearly what happened. For all we know, Sam thought his "Head" Dean had returned to convince him to stay alive and fight, so Sam said, "yes" to that brother. Sam didn't know he was speaking to an angel.

    Dean even says his brother wouldn't agree to being possessed and wouldn't say yes to Gadreel, which is why he permitted Gadreel to come to Sam as "Dean."

    ReplyDelete
  40. But how do you and your friends know if you correctly interpreted what Sam meant?

    That's why I'm saying the dialogue was flat out confusing. It wasn't clear. It wasn't direct. It was cryptic and poorly worded. I have a friend who watches, and she thinks Sam doesn't want to be brothers w/Dean anymore. We've both been watching since the Pilot, and we are both diehard "brother" fans. We watch for the brother relationship.

    While I did not reach the same conclusion as she did, I think it is entirely possible to walk away from that episode, thinking Sam doesn't want to be brothers w/Dean anymore and just wants to hunt w/them. I don't believe that's what Glass meant to imply but the fact that several people think that indicates a huge problem w/the dialogue.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Oh, God, Tessa. I have been on a rant since this episode aired last Tuesday. You nailed everything I am feeling, although I addressed it as an issue of the episode completely messing with the structure of the story being told. I was left completely confused as to what story is being told this season. Is it the PMSing brothers and how they kiss and make up? Is it the demon war, with the angel story being carried over to S10. I am sure I was not imagining Bart, Malachi, and Metatron. Is it the angel and the demon wars, or are those the B-plot now. This episode has the potential of completely ruining the story told in S8 (I think it did already), but more than that, it has the potential of ruining the stories told in all the seasons prior to it for the mere fact that Sam's little speech (or lack thereof) basically said that family was the cause of everything that has ever happened to the brothers and not the one thing that allows humanity to overcome the chaos throughout a lifetime. WTH?
    I don't like Garth either. He was introduced as the village idiot, but when they elevated him to Bobby 2.0 and put him in the role of marriage counselor, I felt it completely diminished Bobby as a character and all of the good work Jim Beaver put into the show. As a character, Garth diminishes hunters and hunting...and so does Charlie and Krissy...as does these season's long woes that the brothers have amongst themselves that are NEVER resolved. Meanwhile, while the two Winchesters continue to wallow their way through their motional issues season after season, Garth gets a backstory and Cas and Crowley; two support characters, have clearly shown character growth. And can I just wonder a little here if Dean is over his feelings of being 'poison' to everyone around him since he wants Sam back in the car with him again? And what exactly is Sam mad about? I am not clear on that one at all. I am not even clear on whether he wants to live or die, let alone what exactly he is mad at Dean for. Do these guys even like each other? Not according to S6, S7, S8, and S9.
    So here I am at halfway through S9 and I don't even know what the story is. That is messed up.

    ReplyDelete
  42. When they take no pride in their profession, the fans have a right to be angry and to not worship at the alter of the writer's ego, IMO. I don't take part in their tweeting, but have occasionally glanced at their accounts. I almost drowned in the fan syrup.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I don't really want to talk about Sam's POV and whether Sam ever gets a story or not, but I will just throw out there that I am finding it hard to have much sympathy for Sam these days. I have a hard time identifying with a hero who wants to retire his hero halo for whatever Sam's idea of normal is. He did quit for a year with Amelia and was content to let someone else handle the role. He eventually choose to give Amelia up and fell into taking on the trials, but S9 with Sam deciding he had done and nothing worked out, so he was willing to die. Here we are, halfway through S9 and apparently Sam still thinks everything the brothers have done has caused more problems than it has solutions and he is either mad at Dean for saving him or mad at his lot in live, or something. I have a hard time rooting for a hero that wants to give up his hero halo.
    As for Sam's no POV, I don't get how fans can complain about that and in the same breath say things like "Jared did an awesome job of playing Soulless Sam" or "Jared knocked it out of the part playing Gadreel." You can't have it both ways. Either you like the stories Sam has been given or you don't, because there is no way he can have the POV of a story come from Sam when he is playing a different character (and JP has repeatedly said he likes these different acting opportunities). What I am left thinking is those fans actually do not like the storylines Sam has been given and it comes out as 'Sam has no POV.'
    Another point that I found confusing in this episode was to wonder if, in fact, the show hasn't shifted the POV with this episode; that perhaps the confusion Sam's little speech did was to show inside Sam's head and his confusion about what Sam really wants. Maybe walking through Sam's head, with Sam's POV, is confusing because Sam is confused? Or maybe the show has once again just dropped Dean's involvement in the mytharc and Sam's side of the story will play out now that JP's baby has been born.

    ReplyDelete
  44. That's a little bit harsh, don't you think? Take no pride? I am not by any means a fan of Adam, but there is no needs to be nutsy and hateful to people who just trying to do their job.

    ReplyDelete
  45. I stand by what I said and gave a honest opinion , there is not much I can do if you wish to not like it. Giving someone a sl and pov are two different things and if I am so wide of the mark then it seems others must be as well. You are certainly entitled to view the show your way as for sympathy for Sam unless you believe he asked for the possession I see little point in punishing the character for it. As for his speech at the end would of really mattered what he had said ? how he said it ? .

    Has for Dean's mytharc I cannot answer that for you .I would assume they intend to stay with Dean esp after the outcry over the trials sl .And the MOC is a good sl for him but I stated my beliefs in the storytelling and the characters above , my concern is Sam .

    ReplyDelete
  46. These writers are at the TV network level in their career. This is not Writers Kindergarten. It is not nasty and hateful to expect more from any writer at that level to give more than a perfunctory introduction of new mythology (as Glass stated he was giving us in this episode.
    It is not nasty and hateful to expect the writers to know show canon (screwing up angel/demon mythology or the big one -- confusing reapers with demons).
    It is not hateful and nasty to expect writers to know the characters they are writing for.
    It is not nasty and hateful to expect the focus of the show to be on the Winchesters, not support characters.
    It is not hateful and nasty to expect writers to do a little research beyond the first paragraph of Wikipedia.
    It is not hateful or nasty to expect writers at this level to know how to use dialogue and to write dialogue that is actually crisp, clear, and/orwitty or, as in this case, does not leave the entire fandom confused.
    So, no, I do not think I am being even a little bit harsh or hateful. I want them to step up their game. At this level, I expect them to do their job and do it well, otherwise, it comes off as taking advantage of a loyal fandom.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Interesting debate. I may have misspoken about the protagonist role. There's one more element involved here that gives Sam an edge, and that's Story Goal. Even at times when Sam isn't the protagonist and not pursuing the Story Goal, he isn't left afloat. He <>is the Story Goal. That's why people think (at least why I thought) he is more involved in stories than Dean is. Because even when he isn't driving it he is in the story.

    Lisa and Ben barely had a story in season 6. They were just road bumps hindering Dean's quest to retrieve Sam's soul. You could say Dean had a protagonist role then, but his Story Goal was to save Sam. This happens quite often in Dean's stories. When Sam has the protagonist card he gets a variety of goals, usually saving the world or taking revenge. When Dean gets it, it's nearly always about Sam.


    People on this thread have argued that Sam disappears when Dean gets to be the pursuer of the Story Goal. I disagree precisely because of this. On the other hand Dean has the tendency to stand around and do nothing when Sam is the protagonist, like we saw in the trial storyline, because being a POV character who has no part in the story isn't really much of a role. You might as well replace him with a camera lens.

    I talked about this in my season 9 So Far review. If you haven't read that one here's the link: Supernatural – Season 9 So Far – The Gripe Review. The problem with the way the writers have constructed Sam and Dean story deprives each of them of something important on the show. They both get to be protagonists true (even though I still think Sam gets it more often than Dean.) Problem is Sam never gets to be Main Character (POV character) and, as I described, mostly when Dean takes the role it's in a story about Sam.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Lol, what are the chances. I knew I should've gone with Macbeth. Thanks for the tidbit.

    ReplyDelete
  49. And what exactly is Sam mad about? I am not clear on that one at all. I am not even clear on whether he wants to live or die, let alone what exactly he is mad at Dean for. Do these guys even like each other? Not according to S6, S7, S8, and S9.So here I am at halfway through S9 and I don't even know what the story is.


    Exactly my thoughts. I'm glad someone else agrees. At this point in the show I neither know where the brothers stand in terms of their relationship, nor where the story is heading (or what the story even is, as you pointed out.) That is why my reviews are The Gripe Reviews because I realized I couldn't write a review about an episode of the show without turning it into a gripe piece about all the things that bother me on it.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Gripe #3 is great that's what happened in my head why Sam change like this! he became hate Dean or what , don't care about him or what, he didn't care about him any more, is this perfect brotherly love is done , actually i hope Sam elaborate!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  51. I would also want the showrunner to be included in this. I was so excited when I heard Carver was coming back, because I loved many of the eps he wrote. Then the first ep in s8 he throws Sam under the bus by having him NOT look for Dean. Then we had the Grand Canyon canon problem. So let's not put all this just on the writers, but their boss as well. There have been canon disasters all over the place.

    ReplyDelete
  52. I always have a problem with the bad guys talking instead of killing, giving the good guy time come to the rescue, or in fights 3 against one, but usually it is one bad guy getting knocked out then another one comes in and so on. Also when Dean is sneaking up at night, headlights out and Baby's motor can be heard for blocks. lol

    Anyway good article that I agree with this time.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Thinking that Jared did a great job being Soulless!Sam, Lucifer, or GadZeke doesn't preclude one from thinking Sam needs a POV. Those are two separate things in my mind.

    On the one hand, I am complimenting Jared on his acting skills. That is separate and apart from Sam. I thought Jared did a great job being GadZeke this year. I also quite enjoyed his Soulless!Sam. On the other hand, I'm also saying I would like to get some perspective from Sam on how he feels about the things he's experienced. What is the point of being soulless or possessed if the character expresses no feelings about that event?

    To me, an arc like Soulless!Sam or GadZeke is a two-part story. You get the character being someone different, but once that ends, you should get the character's POV on that experience otherwise why do it? That's why Sam feels more like a plot point than an actual character b/c things happen to him, and he has no feelings/thoughts about the things that happen to me.

    Anyway, that's JMO. YMMV.

    ReplyDelete
  54. I honestly don't know where you get the idea that because Sam is pissed about what Dean did to him means he hates him/doesn't care about him. You can love someone and still be pissed when they do something bad to you.

    ReplyDelete
  55. I'd be interested in reading your paragraphs of Sam meta.

    ReplyDelete
  56. I'll reply to both of you. I did not like Soulless Sam, Hallucinating Sam, Mentally Ill Sam, or Trial Sam, and the reason I did not like those characters is because I want to see RealSam. For me, having these different versions of Sam made the RealSam not a viable character in the narrative. Plot device? Yes, but a plot device using a different character and that different character had the storyline. You cannot get a Sam POV from someone who is not Sam, and that equates to RealSam not being a viable character.

    I am not sure this is coming out clear and maybe I am being too black and white in my thinking, but I simply do not see how a character that is NotSam can give a Sam POV.
    BTW, I do agree that Sam, so far this season, is lacking a story equal to Dean's lack of a story last year. I excused that as JP was on baby watch and they were keeping his workload as light as possible. If the entire past history of this show holds true, though, Sam should pick up the storyline now that baby is here.

    ReplyDelete
  57. I include Carver as one of the writers. In fact, I think he is a talented writer, nuanced, and introduces some interesting ideas into his scripts. Unfortunately, the rest of the stable of writers are incapable of or too lazy to pick up on those things and carry them forward. I seriously wonder if anyone is running the show anymore.
    As for the Grand Canyon remark Edlund wrote, it is just my opinion that Edlund was giving the fans the middle finger for all of the complaining about trashed canon. Don't get me wrong. I like Edlund, but Edlund does not make minor league mistakes like that. That was on purpose.

    ReplyDelete
  58. You know, when everybody is talking about Sam, when "he is the story goal", he usually isn't on screen or he's unconscious. That doesn't happen with Dean, because he is always "driving." Unless it is just questioning a witness, Sam normally doesn't get to go off and do something "interesting." That was something I liked in the Hitler episode. There was a scene where Sam got to go upstairs and fight the bad guy while Dean sat on the stairs... That doesn't happen very often. Of course, then Sam got hit with the poison dart and Dean had to save him... That does happen a lot.

    ReplyDelete
  59. he didn't care about the mark , he want a relationship between each other to be just work not like family , what that mean ? Dean was try to save him unlike Sam didn't look for him ( purgatory) everytime Dean save Sam , Dean protect Sam , Dean sacrifice every thing for Sam what Sam did for him ??!! push him away

    ReplyDelete
  60. he didn't care about the mark , he want a relationship between each other to be just work not like family , what that mean ? Dean was try to save him unlike Sam didn't look for him ( purgatory) everytime Dean save Sam , Dean protect Sam , Dean sacrifice every thing for Sam what Sam did for him ??!! push him away

    ReplyDelete
  61. Sam was also the one who discovered the Judah Initiative while Dean gave the obligatory comment about Garth and Kevin heard so often throughout S8. As I recall, Dean was sitting around downstairs doing nothing while Sam went upstairs to look for the book he had seen. Once Sam got darted and lead the Nazi back to the others, Aaron gets darted, Dean orders the Golem to go after the guy while Dean remains on the stairs worrying over both Sam and Aaron. It was the Golem who caught the Nazi, snapped his neck, and saved both Sam and Aaron.

    Not arguing with you, though. Sam does need saving quite often, but I don't think that is a particular pattern. I also think that Dean gets saved lot, and I think there is a lot of saving of the both of them by guest stars for the sole purpose of letting the guest stars shine **cough**Charlie**Krissy** and more**

    ReplyDelete
  62. Comatose patients can't verbally consent to anything; Dean even said he tricked Sam and told "Ezekiel" that Sam would rather die than be possessed by anything.

    ReplyDelete
  63. sounds like the ususal bullshit fanwanking from certain members of the fandom

    ReplyDelete
  64. -Dean walked away
    -Dean pushed Sam away constantly over the episode
    -Dean expected to just drop the word Family and be forgiven
    -Sam didnt except Dean's excuse says things need to change
    -Dean accepts Sam's terms
    -Sam gets in the car and goes to hunt with Dean, clearly believeing that things can work out
    Fanwank all you want in poor Dean's favour but the truth is Sam didnt do anything wrong, Sam didnt walk away, Dean was ousheing Sam away all episode long and if Sam didnt want to work on the relationship he wouldnt have got in the car.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Hard to tell sometimes, but I think that goes both ways not just in terms of does Sam like Dean. Dean has at times appeared to not like Sam at all and has over the years tried to replace Sam with what he considers 'better' versions of Sam/a brother. For the most part I think they actually get along quite well and like each other perfectly fine...when things are going ok for them.

    ReplyDelete
  66. I guess Sam would be mad about be lied to, being possessed by an angel for months, being used to kill Kevin, having his agency taken away, that he gave up closing the gates of hell for Dean because he trusted Dean in the church only to have him betray and lie to him ot 5 minutes later. The speach didnt say why but its not hard to guess at what he might be mad about. Those are things anyone would be mad about including Dean.

    ReplyDelete
  67. I guess for a lot of people there ability to comprehend Sam's speach might actual be linked to whether they think Dean has dont anything wrong or not. It isnt hard to know what is broken and why it needs fixing.
    Also the co-dependancy had been a massive bone of contension in the fandom for a long time now, Dean fans have lamented Dean's lack of anything outside of Sam yet when Carver tries to break the co-dependancy they get up in arms because it is Sam who is being used by the writers to break apart and fix the brotherhood and I guess that might sting as they wanted Dean to be the one to do it and on his terms. There have been enough moanings about Dean leaving Sam at the side of the road and driving away so I dont see why this breaking of the co-dependancy should bother so many fans but like I said I guess it had to be dont in such a way that suited them.

    ReplyDelete
  68. I dont why that was so hard to get for some fans, but I guess it may depend on where ones symapthies lye.

    ReplyDelete
  69. I'd say Sam has been more the main plot device than the main pratagonist, season 5 was entirely from Dean's POV including the point when Dean had to help Sam to jump into the cage to save the world. Season 6 soulless Sam was a story told entirely through and about Dean and his reactions and how Soulless Sam affected him. In the back of season 6 Sam was completely absent from the plot untill he was agin used as plot device at the end of the season via having his wall brought down. Season 7 had what 3/4 episodes that had some of Sam's arc one of which was as plot device to re-introduce Castiel. The rest of the season focuses on various storylines that didnt involve Sam and Dean but all were told from Dean's POV and how they affected Dean. Season 8 first half was pretty even both brothers personal arcs were plot devices in the latest brotherhood saga. The back half well
    11-Dean and Charlie centric
    12-Mostly Dean and Henry
    13-MOL case both brothers
    14-Dean centric/trials start
    15-MOTW one small mention of the fact that Dean wanted to do the trials and about his trust issues
    16-MOTW another small mention of Sam being affected by the trials
    17-Cas centric
    18-MOTW case Dean/Krissy centric
    19-trial number 2, Sam gies to hell, Dean talsk to Kevin and Dean/Benny scene
    20-Charlie centric, lots of Dean and Sam
    21-Sam centric, episode split with Cas/Niamo
    22-leaning how to cure a demon, Crowley killing, Cas/Metatron, Sam/Sarah scene
    23-Sam doing the trial/Cas being tricked by Metatron, Dean decides and sets the storyline for season 9

    ReplyDelete
  70. -Dean walked away>> he think that good for Sam , did that for him too
    -Dean pushed Sam away constantly over the episode>>>> same reason
    -Dean expected to just drop the word Family and be forgiven>> yes it is the family not just word it's bind
    -Sam didnt except Dean's excuse says things need to change>>> i think excuse Sam about why he didn't look for Dean no one except it .
    -Dean accepts Sam's terms >>>> and Sam did that before him in this episode :)

    Sam didnt want to work on the relationship he wouldnt have got in the car........, >>>> hmmmm Sam didnt want to work on the relationship he wouldnt have got in the car........, >>>> hmmmm yes you're right if he hate him why he got in the car , right i agree with you :)

    ReplyDelete
  71. Yes, I know you can love someone and not like them. Have several around me. Maybe it's just the English isn't very clear, but that's not how it read to me.

    ReplyDelete
  72. The co-dependency has always been part of the story, but it did not DEFINE who the brothers were. It used to run in the background and it gave them both strength to fight the good fight and it was their weakness. It was not THE story. I don't want to watch the emotional trauma of two grown men working their way towards emotional manhood. That is a storyline of daytime TV.

    I am also one who thinks that the brothers love each because they are family, but don't like each other. I have never been in the camp of the 'mythical brotherhood' that, I think, has arisen in fandom and, IMO, is not supported by anything shown in the show. Even in S1, we saw the brothers join up after years of being apart and we saw them learn to "work" together the differences in them. As I said, I can concede that they love each other, or used to because of the way they were raised isolated from civilians and the hunting world, but I don't think they like each other very much as people.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Sam did agree. Comatose or not it wasn't impossible in the Supernatural universe. I don't need to absolve Dean of anything. Dean in Sam's mind is a creation of Sam's and not Dean.

    ReplyDelete

NOTE: Name-calling, personal attacks, spamming, excessive self-promotion, condescending pomposity, general assiness, racism, sexism, any-other-ism, homophobia, acrophobia, and destructive (versus constructive) criticism will get you BANNED from the party.