Re: Supernatural

I really enjoyed the 300th episode from an emotional standpoint.  I thought it was a really nice moment in the series, and I thought they hit on all the notes they were supposed to.

And I get why they had to have both brothers leave for story reasons, but their dad has been gone for 15 years and both brothers go out for groceries?  It could've been cool if they'd had JDM for more than one episode because this could've been a cool 2-3 episode arc.  Maybe get old John on one last hunt?

There are a lot of nits I could pick about how the timeline worked, but I'm going to leave it be.  The scenes between John and Sam/Dean were good enough for me.

Re: Supernatural

The storyline with Nick is interesting because Lucifer corrupted him. Lucifer's whole shtick is that he is appealing and following him makes people feel good as they head toward Hell. That said, I don't really get the story. This isn't Nick's body. Nick shouldn't be in there any more than Jimmy is in Castiel. It's another example of the show contradicting established mythology this season, and why I think it is time for a new showrunner.

I don't think that it would work to reveal the supernatural stuff to the world. Supernatural works as a truckstop horror story, but whenever they try to go bigger, it falls apart. Kripke understood this about the show, but others don't seem to. The more you see, the less scary something is. The bigger you go, the less impact it has. The more you bring people back from the dead, the less anyone cares about life or death on the show. This is why the Heaven/Hell stuff became almost comedic and silly after a while. People in suits talking about how powerful they were while accomplishing nothing. It was so much more powerful when we got bits and pieces, but never saw what was really going on.

Season 7 was the closest we've come to seeing the world let in on the big secret, and it was a mess. We later had the President and big government agencies, and it looked ridiculous. Whereas one FBI agent tracking Sam and Dean in the early seasons felt like a real threat.

One of the most overlooked parts of storytelling these days is just establishing boundaries. Now that we can show anything on screen by using computer animation, everyone wants to show everything.


The 300th episode had some good moments, but I'm not sure it was really on the mark. It captured how far Sam and Dean have come, but it didn't capture where John was at that time. He didn't act like the John Winchester of that era. I don't think that he needed to be all angry and abusive, but I think that he definitely would have questioned some of the decisions that his boys have made.

It did feel rushed (maybe we didn't need the whole storyline with the kids and the town). Parts felt too wacky (Sam's Steve Jobs costume). There was some good emotion, and I think that Samantha Smith did a great job of making us feel a connection with someone whom she barely worked with 14 years ago. That said, the overall execution of this scenario didn't feel... real. It seemed more fanfic-y than, say, the time travel episodes where Sam and Dean interacted with their parents in earlier seasons.

I get that they probably didn't have JDM for very long and it was easier to play it out on one stage, but it felt off to me.

Re: Supernatural

It really did feel fanfic-y.  Like a small little story where the boys get this little moment because that's essentially what happened.  The rest of the story was simply set-up for the story to happen and for it to end so quickly.

I do wonder, if given more time, whether we could've gotten more about John's philosophy vs. the brothers'.  Whether or not the brothers have outgrown their father or not.  All those are interesting questions the show could look at.

I agree with your stance on the supernatural elements going public, but I wonder if, after 15 years, it's no longer believable that any of this would still be a secret.

Re: Supernatural

It's not really a secret. The show is (or was) based mostly on urban legends, ancient folklore and religion. All of those things are widely available. The world knows about reports of werewolves going back hundreds of years. Everyone tells ghost stories. We make tons of movies based on those stories.

The thing is, most people will choose to ignore the scary realities of the world until they're in a situation where they have to address it themselves. How many people take part in any charitable 5K when they haven't been personally impacted by whatever disease they're running for? What percentage of the population even joins the military to fight enemies that we know are actively trying to kill us? (0.4 percent. I just looked it up)

Hunters have always been portrayed like the soldiers who are fighting that war. The normal people might toss salt over their shoulder, or go to church on the big holidays, but they're not really interested in the war. They don't want to think about what could be lurking under their bed, or the demon that might take over their body at any moment. Even in our world, we have stories of demonic possession, and you could probably find thousands of people to back up those stories, complete with video evidence and horrible stories of normal people suddenly developing a taste for human faces. At the end of the day, people will laugh off the idea of a demon in favor of something that we can medicate and lock away, but do we really know for sure?


Granted, the show has gone a bit far with their monsters. As I said, they're relying much more heavily on showing us everything in great detail these days, and that doesn't help the show at all. They could easily have Rowena die and come back to life on camera, or Castiel do whatever his level of power will allow him to do this week (I'm still not sure what his deal is this season). But the general idea is that people know, but they'd rather not.

Re: Supernatural

I never understood all the weight the fans and fan-press put on bringing Jeffrey Dean Morgan back. Occasionally, he was needed for flashbacks and they settled for a younger actor playing him at a younger age. But functionally, John Winchester was dead; he gave his life to save his son in the Season 2 premiere. What more was there to gain? Since then, the show had done a fine job of exploring the character’s mixed legacy with Sam often speaking poorly of John as abusive and insane while at other times saying that John had taught him how to protect himself and others.

From what I can tell, Morgan’s stipulation for returning for this guest-appearance; he wanted to play Sam and Dean’s father and was extremely displeased with the mixed memories that surrounded John after his death. Morgan had, he felt, always approached his role as a loving but misunderstood father and he wanted that to be his role in his return, which is why, as Informant notes, John isn’t played as the volatile, alcoholic solider forever at war but instead as Jeffrey Dean Morgan’s view of himself.

I liked the episode for all of Slider_Quinn21’s reasons, but I can’t help but think that SUPERNATURAL left Jeffrey Dean Morgan behind a long time ago.

Re: Supernatural

On Taking Monsters Public

Yeah, I hadn't really thought about it that way, but I agree that it's probably as public as it is now.  Someone could die and all the evidence could point to "Vampire" and I might not believe it a normal dude in America.  Without seeing it, I won't believe it.  And even if I saw something filmed on a shaky cell phone, I might think it's a student film before I believe it's legitimately a monster.

The only reason I even asked is because Nick is talking to this policeman about the Devil, and Nick literally holds all the cards to prove it.  He knows where the bodies are buried.  He could do this big Miracle on 34th Street - type show about it.  And for half a second, I thought that's where they were going and was briefly intrigued by it.  Then another half-second later, I thought he could flip on Sam and Dean and bring them in.  Because while the system might want Nick, would they be willing to bargain with him to get Sam and Dean?  I probably watch too many cop shows.

On John

I completely agree with all that.  I think, with more time, they could've done some interesting things with John.  What if he tried to assume leadership of the bunker?  Would Sam be okay with that?  Would Dean?  How would he have handled 13 years of season finale decisions?  Heck, how did the last 15 seasons look?  How did they avoid the apocalypse without Castiel or even Castiel knowing who they are?  These are things I doubt anyone thought about.

And one more thing - the last scene.  I read in an interview that it's simply John waking up from what he thinks was a dream in his time.  Which is funny because I read into it differently - I thought John was in Heaven.

Re: Supernatural

Slider_Quinn21 wrote:

I thought John was in Heaven.

I see no issue with that interpretation.

I think that the rationale for why John is so gentle in this episode in contrast to Sam and Dean's memories of him as a harsh taskmaster -- he's in shock from seeing his sons over a decade older from how he remembers them last, he's in shock from seeing his wife alive again. John never wanted to be a hunter until Mary died; it was Mary who descends from a legacy of hunters and reluctantly showed John her world, and when Mary is alive, John doesn't feel the call to be a hunter anymore.

Re: Supernatural

If they had the option of featuring John more, I could honestly see him on a completely different team than Sam and Dean. Maybe not trying to kill them, but probably trying to stop them... And maybe kill their friends. They live with monsters more than they live with people these days. Even the humans they know aren't of our world. They keep making deals and pushing the line, and while John might not be above those things himself, when it comes to saving his family, I think he would feel a need to correct course if he came back and took it all in. John would not like Castiel. John would not like Rowena. John may warm up to Jack in some ways, but he would always view Jack as a threat.

John would want Heaven to stay in Heaven, Hell to stay in Hell, and hunters to fight monsters, not have them as roommates.

And honestly... I might be on John's side of this fight.

Re: Supernatural

ireactions wrote:

I think that the rationale for why John is so gentle in this episode in contrast to Sam and Dean's memories of him as a harsh taskmaster -- he's in shock from seeing his sons over a decade older from how he remembers them last, he's in shock from seeing his wife alive again. John never wanted to be a hunter until Mary died; it was Mary who descends from a legacy of hunters and reluctantly showed John her world, and when Mary is alive, John doesn't feel the call to be a hunter anymore.

It could be that, but I have two alternate explanations:

1. Instead of being plucked out of 2003, John was plucked out of Heaven.  And after spending 13+ years in Heaven, that's what softened him up.  If my interpretation of the final scene is accurate, then he's been hanging out in an idyllic place, softening up.  So he shows back up, things are looking great, and he stays in a Heavenly mood.

2. The pearl didn't bring back the real John Winchester, but an idealized version that had all the good traits of John but few of the bad ones.  The thing Dean's heart wished for the most wasn't the real John but one that would confirm that Dean did a good job and be someone who'd be proud of him.

Re: Supernatural

Informant wrote:

If they had the option of featuring John more, I could honestly see him on a completely different team than Sam and Dean. Maybe not trying to kill them, but probably trying to stop them... And maybe kill their friends. They live with monsters more than they live with people these days. Even the humans they know aren't of our world. They keep making deals and pushing the line, and while John might not be above those things himself, when it comes to saving his family, I think he would feel a need to correct course if he came back and took it all in. John would not like Castiel. John would not like Rowena. John may warm up to Jack in some ways, but he would always view Jack as a threat.

Yeah.  John is essentially Dean without a Sam, and Sam had to convince Dean to deal with all the monsters they work with.

Re: Supernatural

S14 has been a good one so far.  Yeah some dumb plot arcs here and there, but a lot of really good individual monster stories and whatnot.  Jeffrey Dean's return, despite the Negan beard, was excellent.  Wow!  The EP team they've had the last 3 years has been really strong.  We'll see how long the show goes, though I kind of feel like 15 will be the end, at least that's the impression Sam Smith gave me at a con last November.

Re: Supernatural

So....what is this season about?  Is it about Michael creating a monster army?  Or Jack possibly going to the Dark Side?  Or Lucifer coming back somehow?  Or the void's deal with Castiel?

It sorta seems all over the place.  I'm enjoying individual episodes, but the overall season-wide storyline seems a lot less clear than it usually is at this point.

Re: Supernatural

https://deadline.com/2019/03/supernatur … 202581010/

The longest-running series on the CW is coming to an end. Supernatural will wrap its run after its upcoming 15th season, which will consist of 20 episodes

Re: Supernatural

IB: "Lauren! Next year, will you watch FRINGE so we have something to talk about without SUPERNATURAL?"

LAUREN: " ... I am not ready to joke about this yet."

Re: Supernatural

I thought the way they announced it was pretty cool.  You can tell they felt terrible, like they were letting the fans down.  But I think Jensen and Jared are pretty fun actors, and I think it's time to let them do something else.

I have a feeling that they'll come back to this well at some point.  Maybe a TV movie or something.  I think they love the characters, but I don't think they should have to do the show forever.  And I think there's a chance the network was running out of eternal patience with them.

I'm glad they have a lot of time to plan the ending.  Because there's a lot of stuff I'd love for them to touch on.  Like, can we find a way to save Adam?

Re: Supernatural

In leaving his show, Jerry O'Connell was ridiculous, refusing to perform an exit story for SLIDERS. In leaving her shows, Katherine Heigl was ridiculous, whining about how she hated being on ROSWELL and GREY'S ANATOMY for the long hours when she knew what they'd be when she took those jobs. Wil Wheaton was also ridiculous, quitting STAR TREK after three seasons because he believed regularly being in people's homes every week was somehow holding him back from superstardom.

But Jared and Jensen -- they've been the leads of a show that has them in nearly every scene for 15 years. When SUPERNATURAL first started, their characters would pretend to be community college students; now they pretend to be FBI veterans. The recent 20 episode orders are to give them a longer rest after over a decade of 18 hour days. They've profited greatly from 15 seasons of pay, royalties, merchandising, conventions and other businesses. In return, they've done their part and more for the show and the fans.

The real disappointment, for me, is that WAYWARD SISTERS wasn't picked up. Had the spinoff been successful, the SUPERNATURAL universe could have continued in that form to cushion the blow. It is likely that SUPERNATURAL will continue after its conclusion as a digital comic that Slider_Quinn21 won't read just as SMALLVILLE and REVOLUTION did for a time and there could be a WAYWARD SISTERS digital comic as well that Slider_Quinn21 won't read.

SUPERNATURAL doesn't have anything left to prove or achieve at this point, so the reason why its departure is painful is because it had become an institution. I can't remember my life before watching the show; I am not sure if I even existed before its premiere and that's insane. I watched the pilot and then didn't watch it again for about eight years, getting caught up only because my niece was obsessed with it and I had to watch it to understand anything she was saying. Seasons 1 - 2 were a poor X-FILES clone, Season 3 found its feet and I've enjoyed every season of the show and outside of killing Kevin and Charlie and the alternate universe hunters, I've never felt hostile to the series or felt bored with its content.

FRINGE is often considered to be THE X-FILES done properly: it featured FBI agents investigating the paranormal, it played out its five season arc, it had running plotlines that were sustained and concluded, it had great love for its characters and gave them continuing and climactic arcs. But I think SUPERNATURAL is the true successor to THE X-FILES. Yes, it chose the supernatural over the FRINGE choosing the technological. It also features Chris Carter's multi-genre anthology attitude but, unlike Carter, the SUPERNATURAL writers were careful to keep Sam and Dean's characterization consistent even if they'd been in a splatterfest last week and were in a metatextual parody this week. It features lengthy arcs like THE X-FILES, but sustains the arcs even through the standalones. It ensures that monsters-of-the-week are thematically tied to the arc even if they aren't situationally connected.

Almost everything THE X-FILES attempted, SUPERNATURAL perfected aside from its portrayal of women. THE X-FILES inspired a generation of women to go into science, engineering and medicine; SUPERNATURAL wanted to inspire women to go into law enforcement and the military but WAYWARD SISTERS didn't make the CW's cut. Both SUPERNATURAL and THE X-FILES were renewed well beyond their intended or natural lifespan and SUPERNATURAL wrapped up its original myth-arc and conceived new ones while THE X-FILES stalled. THE X-FILES had a revival and still left us on a cliffhanger. SUPERNATURAL will end.

I kind of hope that there might be a revival (not a reboot) every 3 - 5 years with Sam and Dean in a six episode mini-series whenever the actors are available and willing. SUPERNATURAL conventions will likely continue for at least another ten years as 15 seasons gives actors lots of amusing on-set anecdotes.

Re: Supernatural

I actually knew about this from a cast member since last fall (won't squeal on who, ha ha), but I think it's time.  The show continues to churn out great scripts, it's really amazing.  It's been YEARS since I said, well that episode just sucked.  Probably going back to the Gamble-run years.  But it's time, I mean, they had to use a parallel universe to bring in new characters, there's just nothing left to hit on.

Re: Supernatural

Grizzlor wrote:

I actually knew about this from a cast member since last fall (won't squeal on who, ha ha), but I think it's time.  The show continues to churn out great scripts, it's really amazing.  It's been YEARS since I said, well that episode just sucked.  Probably going back to the Gamble-run years.  But it's time, I mean, they had to use a parallel universe to bring in new characters, there's just nothing left to hit on.

Once again, Samantha Smith cannot keep a secret about anything.

Re: Supernatural

ireactions wrote:

I kind of hope that there might be a revival (not a reboot) every 3 - 5 years with Sam and Dean in a six episode mini-series whenever the actors are available and willing. SUPERNATURAL conventions will likely continue for at least another ten years as 15 seasons gives actors lots of amusing on-set anecdotes.

Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman used to (they don't much anymore) talk about their version of Sherlock and how they'd love to come back and do a "series" of it every few years.  Their plan was, they used to say, to have Sherlock and Watson "grow old together."

I'd sorta love for that to be the case for Sam and Dean.  And while I do think it would've been cool to have Wayward Sisters (or even the other weirder spinoff) work, I think it's sorta appropriate in-universe to have these attempted (then failed) spinoffs.  Sam/Jared and Dean/Jensen would love to be able to retire - they've done the work/show for a lot longer than anyone thought they would, and they'd love to be able to pass it on to someone who could take it over.  Whether it be the Men of Letters/Bloodlines or the new hunters/Wayward Sisters.  But they realized no one could do it better than that.  So if anyone is going to hunt/do Supernatural, it needs to be them.

I know it wouldn't allow for a great wrapup if they left things open enough for Sam and Dean to return every few years, but maybe that's the best for this show.  Maybe Supernatural doesn't need Sam or Dean to die but just drive off into the sunset, allowing us to await the day they show back up.

Re: Supernatural

My niece seems to be experiencing some sort of mental health crisis over the announced conclusion of SUPERNATURAL. Honestly, I think she seriously needs to get a grip on reality because it's just a TV show.

ireactions' SLIDERS bibliography

Re: Supernatural

With Lucifer confirmed to be in the Empty and nothing truly dead ever in this universe, I wonder if the final season is setting up to be some sort of final confrontation with Lucifer.  Trying to recreate season 5 in a way?

Re: Supernatural

The Season 14 finale confused me and yet, it seemed oddly inevitable to make Chuck the villain. I think it's safe to say "Moriah" alarmed many viewers especially Chuck fans. The characterization didn't track with his arc up to this point. In previous episodes, Chuck was an awkward, earnest, clumsy, good-hearted writer who wanted to see people survive and succeed and be happy and he also very much wanted to be left alone. It suggested that God was on Sam and Dean's side but unwilling to intervene too directly as the Apocalypse was the result of humans, angels and demons exercising their free will and making poor and cataclysmic choices.

And when God returned in "Don't Call Me Shurley," this interpretation was upheld entirely. Chuck is characterized not as the Lord Almighty of Christian lore, but just a person who also happens to be the entity that created all of existence. Also, Chuck is shown to be fallible and his power is not infinite. Not only can the Darkness hurt and kill him, Chuck says that he does not feel divine intervention helps his children, merely enables their misdeeds and self-destruction and overdependency. "Nobody likes a helicopter parent," Chuck explains.

This perspective is reiterated in "Moriah" where Chuck describes Sam and Dean as "my guys" and "my favourite show," but when Dean refuses to act out Chuck's plotline where Dean is to sacrifice himself and kill Jack, Chuck gets upset and behaves in total contrast to his previous regard for free will. He offers to resurrect Mary to induce Dean to fire on Jack. He shows enjoyment and pleasure in Dean's agony.

Then he throws a tantrum when Sam also defies him and fires a non-lethal shot on him. Chuck is furious when Sam accuses Chuck of creating endless torment and loss for the Winchester brothers but does not deny Sam's claim that Chuck has permitted their suffering and finds it entertaining. And then Chuck, in a strange act of pettiness, unleashes every caged monster and demon upon the Earth and declares it "the end."

This is not the pleasant, aloof, distant father figure who wanted his children to be independent and self-reliant. This is a child frustrated by his pets not performing tricks for them and smashing apart their world for being insufficiently amusing and a completely different character. And yet, looking back at Seasons 6 - 14, Chuck's villainy seems oddly inevitable.

It's noticeable that despite Chuck's supposed interventions in Season 5, Season 6 saw the angels seeking to immediately bring about the once aborted Apocalypse with Castiel discovering that the angels could not grasp the free will and freedom their creator had now given them. In fact, Castiel's prayer for guidance and clarification from Chuck is flatly ignored.

In addition, the Leviathans and further lunacy with Gadreel, Metatron and Lucifer are met with no response from God. On one level, there's a grain of truth in Chuck declaring that Sam and Dean have what it takes to meet and overcome any threat to the world. But given the trauma, grief and sacrifice they've had to endure, how can Chuck claim to care for his creations when he condemns them to a life of endless torture? Why does he make them the center of the Earth's divine defense plan? Doesn't he worry about employee exhaustion and diminished job performance?

The reason for every season of SUPERNATURAL subjecting Sam and Dean to madness and cruelty is because it's a TV show and the writers are compelled to heap one threat after another upon their central characters. Giving Sam and Dean a full season of vacationing is not an option. However, within the fictional universe of SUPERNATURAL, it is Chuck who is if not targeting Sam and Dan, then at least permitting their continued situation while other humans deal with problems like mental health, financial security, raising children, caring for elders and retaining homes and employments.

Within SUPERNATURAL, if Chuck continually allows all the ills of the world to be entirely Sam and Dean's responsibility, then Chuck is a villain. "Moriah" declares that Chuck's insistence on making Sam and Dean the first line of defense for every threat with no concern for their well being makes him the villain of the series. It exposes his professed respect for free will to be a fraud and a lie.

It does not track with Chuck's previous characterization. It does not track with the in-depth exploration of Chuck's character in "The Monster at the End of this Book," "Dark Side of the Moon" and "Don't Call Me Shurley." But in retrospect, it seems inescapable and inevitable.

Re: Supernatural

I think this is something I've always struggled with in terms of my own faith and my own understanding for how the universe works.  To me, it doesn't make sense for God (Chuck, in this case) to be all powerful or all good.  Free will is great...and if we could blame all the problems in the world on free will, then that's fine.  But what about the child that gets a terrible disease out of sheer bad luck?  What about damage caused by things we refer to as "acts of God?"  If one person kills another, that's something that God would stay out of?  But what about things that free will seemingly is unrelated to?

If God has the power to fix some things, why can't he fix all things?  The scenario I like to use is a policeman who arrives on the scene of a man threatening another man with a gun.  The gunman doesn't know the policeman is there, and the policeman has a clear shot.  The policeman is, for the purposes of this scenario, an expert marksman.  The policeman has the time and ability to incapacitate, distract, or kill the gunman if he chooses.  The policeman lets the situation play out, and the gunman kills the other man.  The man's daughter sees it all happen, including the policeman's inaction.  Who does she get the most angry at?  The man who did it, or the man who had the ability change the situation and simply chose not to?

To me, Chuck is a pretty safe way of understanding the world.  He's a good guy, but he's not all powerful.  He can fix some things, but he can't really fix everything.  He's also realized, on some level, that he shouldn't fix everything.  So he watches us from afar, either doing a little here and there or simply leaving us be.  He's essentially provided heaven as a place to enjoy eternity for putting up with what is essentially a broken world that he can't fully fix.

But even going there, it's kind of a nutty prospect.  Chuck created a broken world and then forces people to live in it.  Yeah, there's a reward at the end, but there's no guarantee of a reward.  Even his caretakers have their own issues of both good/evil struggle and lack of power.

Since he's not all-good, he's capable of evil.  And as he fancies himself a writer, the Winchesters are ruining his ending.  What good is a great novel with a bad ending?  There's still a chance that Chuck is painting himself as the villain because he needs a villain for his story.  It wouldn't surprise me if that's where they're going.

But they took down the Devil.  The only bigger villain can be God.  It was shocking for me to see it happen, but I didn't feel like it was unearned.

Re: Supernatural

Slider_Quinn21 wrote:

To me, Chuck is a pretty safe way of understanding the world.  He's a good guy, but he's not all powerful.  He can fix some things, but he can't really fix everything.  He's also realized, on some level, that he shouldn't fix everything.  So he watches us from afar, either doing a little here and there or simply leaving us be. .

I think this makes sense up to a point, but "Moriah" points out that Chuck's unwillingness to interfere looks less like respect for free will and more like a decision to put Sam and Dean in harm's way at all times for reasons that "Moriah" finally revealed.

From a real-world standpoint, nine seasons of Sam and Dean enjoying peaceful semi-retirement was never on the table. But from an in-universe standpoint, "Moriah" observes that Chuck has by passivity forced Sam and Dean to serve as Earth's protectors despite continual loss and suffering for them.

Season 11's "Don't Call Me Shurley" had Chuck putting the blame for the recent run of threats on Sam refusing to lose Dean to demonic conversion. But in Seasons 12 - 13, Lucifer's return and the alternate universe situation were due to Chuck once again abandoning his son and a "failed draft," yet Chuck did not return to help.

By Season 12, any benevolent employer in Chuck's position would have put Sam and Dean on vacation and found some new hires to act as Earth's divine defense division. It didn't have to always be Sam and Dean facing every conflict between heaven and hell. They'd done their part and more, it could have been someone else's turn to take up the mantle. It could have been Charlie. It could have been Jodi Mills, Donna Hanscum, Kaia Nieves, Claire Novak, Patience Turner, Alex Jones.

But Chuck allowed WAYWARD SISTERS to fail. What kind of God would fail to get WAYWARD SISTERS picked up? Why did Chuck always want it to be Sam and Dean?

CHUCK: "I built the sandbox -- you play in it. And you're my favorite show."

SAM: "But why, when the chips are down, when the world is -- is failing, why does it always have to be on us?"

CHUCK: "Because you're my guys."

Chuck says he's granting humans their free will, but then the episode points out that Chuck always puts the consequences of his supposed non-interference entirely upon Sam and Dean. Why is Chuck allowing two exhausted, traumatized, burnt-out employees to carry on performing their duties with steadily diminishing efficacy and ability? As if to answer this, Sam observes Chuck taking pleasure at the sight of Dean's agony.

SAM: "You're enjoying this!"

And when Dean refuses to follow Chuck's plot direction, Chuck suddenly gets upset.

CHUCK: "This isn't how the story is supposed to end. The story? Look -- it -- the -- the -- the gathering storm, the gun, the -- the father killing his own son. This is Abraham and Isaac. This is epic!"

DEAN: "Wait. What are you saying?"

SAM: "He's saying he's been playing us."

"Moriah" completely overturns the Chuck character as we know him. But "Moriah" makes a very clear point: Sam and Dean have been forced to manage Chuck's responsibilities since Seasons 6 - 14 when their roles should have been over by the Season 5 finale.

Part of this is, I think, a wry commentary on and from the writers who have, for nine seasons, had to come up with new threats and new suffering. The original authorial intention for Chuck was to make him a warm and loving father figure who represented the writers and their affection for the characters. Chuck allowing free will and acting indirectly throughout Seasons 1 -5 to maneuver Sam and Dean into averting the Apocalypse without overruling individual choice was heroic. Chuck acting indirectly throughout Seasons 6 -14 to keep Sam and Dean in the line of fire for nine years after the original crisis, however, is manipulative and cruel.

SAM: "This whole time. Our entire lives. Mom, Dad -- everything. This is all you because you wrote it all, right? Because what? Because we're your favorite show? Because we're part of your story?"

DEAN: "The Apocalypse, the first go-around, with Lucifer and Michael -- you knew everything that was going on, so why the games, Chuck, huh? Why don't you just snap your fingers and end it?"

SAM: "And every other bad thing we've been killing, been dying over -- where were you? Just sitting back and watching us suffer so we can do this over and over and over again -- fighting, losing people we love? When does it end?"

CHUCK: "Fine! That's the way you want it? Story's over. Welcome to the end."

Unlike the writers, Chuck is not required to deliver 20 - 22 episodes a year, not obliged to make Padelecki and Ackles' characters the center of a TV show and not bound to create a world-ending situation on an annual basis. The only explanation for why Chuck would continue to do it is because it amuses and entertains him to watch Sam and Dean suffer.

It doesn't fit the charming, grounded, silly character that Rob Benedict developed and played. This is a sociopathic puppetmaster, not the well-meaning observer who turned Benedict from a middle-aged, over-the-hill actor and part-time musician into an idol of positive masculinity and unthreatening appeal for a legion of fans.

This is a complete reversal to one of SUPERNATURAL's greatest creations. It's a shocking and painful betrayal. But it seems to me like the inescapable result of extending the lifespan of the series.

Re: Supernatural

ireactions wrote:

This is a complete reversal to one of SUPERNATURAL's greatest creations. It's a shocking and painful betrayal. But it seems to me like the inescapable result of extending the lifespan of the series.

Possibly.  But it could also either be some sort of trick (it's not really Chuck) or it's some sort of gambit to prepare the brothers for something bigger/badder.

Or, again, it's the only "monster" that the brothers haven't killed and the only way to end the show.

Re: Supernatural

Slider_Quinn21 wrote:

But it could also either be some sort of trick (it's not really Chuck) or it's some sort of gambit to prepare the brothers for something bigger/badder.

Or, again, it's the only "monster" that the brothers haven't killed and the only way to end the show.

I wonder if SUPERNATURAL will actually follow through on it. I wouldn't call SUPERNATURAL guilty of copouts, but their season-ending cliffhangers suggest season long arcs that don't last that long. Dean went to hell at the end of Season 3 suggesting that Season 4 would be set with Dean struggling to find some way to escape. The Season 4 premiere had him back on Earth right away. Castiel declared himself God at the end of Season 6, suggesting a human-angel-Castiel war for the whole of Season 7; it lasted two episodes. Season 10 was expected to be a season of Sam forced to hunt a demonic Dean like any other monster with Jensen Ackles now a villain; that lasted three episodes.

It's possible SUPERNATURAL will, by Season 15, Episode 3, have the boys encounter Chuck who is only human and explains that God separated the Chuck identity from the God identity to grant his human side independence, but now God without Chuck (while retaining the face) has become unbalanced and merging the two again will restore God as we knew him. It's not what I'd prefer, but it would get the show back to its usual formula. However, with Season 15 being the end, getting back on formula isn't as essential as it was for Seasons 4, 7 and 10.

But we just saw Dean finally taken over by Michael only for that to come to an end almost immediately in Season 14. We've seen this trick a lot -- although SUPERNATURAL does a great job of letting repercussions linger even if the resolutions come within a few weeks of the premiere.

I'm not entirely sure how Chuck would work as a villain. Can we see Chuck plotting villainy with his minions and addressing power plays like Crowley? Why would he need to? Can we imagine Chuck engaging in some lengthy plot of terror for some unknown end like Metatron? Seems kind of small-minded for God. Can we visualize Chuck trying to dominate and control all of America's hunters like the Men of Letters? I just don't quite know how SUPERNATURAL can fight God, but that's the appeal of the concept and the challenge for Season 15 -- unless they decide to gently nudge the reset button as they have before.

Re: Supernatural

Yeah, I sorta think something has to happen in the first two episodes, or it's virtually impossible to go back to the Monster of the Week stories.  What's interesting is that Jensen and Jared spoke at some conference recently, and Jensen was asked how he wanted the final season to go.  I tried looking it up but I couldn't find it (I didn't try super hard) but paraphrased, Jensen said "I would like the angels to go back to Heaven, the demons to go back to Hell, and we would just fight monsters like we did back in season one."

So Jensen, channeling Informant, said that he likes the Monster of the Week format.  If God is stalking the brothers or if they have to fight hundreds of zombies each week, that's virtually impossible.  The boys would literally have much bigger fish to fry.

I think you're right.  It'll look big and epic and then something will happen.  God will disappear again and no one will be able to find him.  Or something big will scare him away.  Or something.  And the boys will sit around the bunker, drinking beer, deciding that it's best that they go hunt a wendigo or something while they wait for Chuck's next move.  And then, like in previous seasons, Chuck will show back up in November and cause problems.  Then he'll disappear/leave again.  Then show back up when it's finale time.