Supernatural / Jensen Ackles / Jared Padelecki [merged]

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

I thought tonight's episode blew big time. It was so painfully boring. The only thing that got me through it was all the My Bloody Valentine commericals.

Yeah definitiely one of my least favorite and NOT the one to come back on. I was particularly bothered by the plausability of these people so readily excepting two complete strangers who had lied to them once before and claimed to be "ghost hunters." I mean typically people are forced to take the brother's seriously because of the extremely odd circumstances that leave them with no other option but this time not so much. I'm not buying that there was no phone, no reception for anyone, no explanation for the brother's existance... and Dean's discussion with Sam at the end was poorly acted because it wasn't grounded in the material.

It makes perfect sense for Dean to be going through some sort of association problem realizing that these people are the result of their surrounding but it's a) not necessary b) reminiscent of SAM'S demon nature issues that have been dealt wiht AGAIN and AGAIN in the story c) It's not at ALL reflected in this episode. It's pulled out of the air at the end.

It seems to me like this is just bad writing. It was pitched in a way that just didn't pan out when it was written and worse yet it was written by Jeremy Carver!!! The guy who wrote "In The Beginning" one of the best episodes of the season if not the series!! It was just disappointing.

You'd think that they could use this as a way for Dean to RELATE to Sam's fears of becoming a demon and empathisize and apologize for being so stern in the past. If they want him to show remorse that would be, to me, a far better way than a random baseless confession at the end of a slow episode.

 

[gaybard]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Great episode and I have the hots for both brothers. They would be great to enjoy solo or together.

 

[aijalon18]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Yeah definitiely one of my least favorite and NOT the one to come back on. I was particularly bothered by the plausability of these people so readily excepting two complete strangers who had lied to them once before and claimed to be "ghost hunters." I mean typically people are forced to take the brother's seriously because of the extremely odd circumstances that leave them with no other option but this time not so much. I'm not buying that there was no phone, no reception for anyone, no explanation for the brother's existance... and Dean's discussion with Sam at the end was poorly acted because it wasn't grounded in the material.

It makes perfect sense for Dean to be going through some sort of association problem realizing that these people are the result of their surrounding but it's a) not necessary b) reminiscent of SAM'S demon nature issues that have been dealt wiht AGAIN and AGAIN in the story c) It's not at ALL reflected in this episode. It's pulled out of the air at the end.

It seems to me like this is just bad writing. It was pitched in a way that just didn't pan out when it was written and worse yet it was written by Jeremy Carver!!! The guy who wrote "In The Beginning" one of the best episodes of the season if not the series!! It was just disappointing.

You'd think that they could use this as a way for Dean to RELATE to Sam's fears of becoming a demon and empathisize and apologize for being so stern in the past. If they want him to show remorse that would be, to me, a far better way than a random baseless confession at the end of a slow episode.

I agree completely it was a fuckin mess. They didnt really add anything new with Dean's experience in hell. He basically covered this in the last episode. Plus I just can't get over the fact that there was nothing really supernatural in the episode. This "people under the stairs" bullshit is not gonna cut it. And Dean randomly repeating that phrase about how "humans/people are bad." It was almost like a different show.

 

[Fucker29]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

IMO, they're ruining this season...and, mind you, this season had the potential to be the best season so far. I don't know what's wrong with the writers of the show...the season started with a bang and now it's a mess.

For this season, they REALLY should cut back on the stand alone episodes. Considering how they started the season, the storyline and character development...stand alone episodes don't make sense anymore.
This season has a very powerful background storyline, very different from the previous seasons, has a bigger picture to it, and, IMO, all episodes should be somehow related to it. It's just that this season's storyline has a gradual development and growth type of feel to it...and the stand alone episodes interrupt and get in the way of that development...they simply don't make sense now. It's just bad writing. Period.

 

[aijalon18]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Wow tonight's episode kinda sucked too. I've never disliked 2 in a row before. Are they trying to get canceled?

 

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

I didn't have any problem with tonight's episode. It wasn't an amazing one but it was good for me. I think it was fairly good at manufacture the proper emotional response.

Perhaps you might've disliked it because it wasn't as much about the brothers as it was about the magicians. There was very little Sam/Dean brother time, you know the light banter kind that works as a sort of hook for the series not the serious heavy brother time. I don't have a problem with it being dialed down now and then but I know some people do. They needed to give proper emotional grounding for evil Sam to come.

The magic thing reminded me a bit of the reaper episode only with a gimmick slapped on top but I'm chill with that because if you can have more than one vamp episode or more than one Trickster episode I think you can revisit a similar MO.

 

[aijalon18]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

I feel like I'm pretty open minded with the show. I do like standalones. I even like Ghostfacers which a lot of people didnt like. This one was so boring to me. I actually fell asleep. I never fall asleep during supernatural.

 

[VaseFace808]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

So I totally watched this past episode for the title alone "Criss Angel Is A Douche Bag" & I thought it was an ok episode.

Though I don't really follow the show on a regular basis, the thing that stood out for me was at the end of the epi - the older magician they helped said something like "I killed my best friend because it was the right thing & now I'll die old & alone" (or something close to that right?)

That seemed like the most progressive dialog story-wise with whichever brother may/will go evil eventually - which I just noticed some have already pointed out LoL

Saw my first Friday the 13th commercial on tv as well watching tonight so yay...

 

[StlKj]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

I haven't had a chance yet to watch either of the two new eps, but from the sounds of them, do you think they might be trying to avoid getting too heavily into the mythology after two months off in case new viewers are jumping on? It seems like some of the television series that have often relied on story arcs are a little gun shy this season after so many people jumped ship from the major networks after the writer's strike, and with a possible SAG strike coming, maybe they didn't want to get too heavily into the ongoing storyline right off the bat.

Just a thought.

 

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

I haven't had a chance yet to watch either of the two new eps, but from the sounds of them, do you think they might be trying to avoid getting too heavily into the mythology after two months off in case new viewers are jumping on? It seems like some of the television series that have often relied on story arcs are a little gun shy this season after so many people jumped ship from the major networks after the writer's strike, and with a possible SAG strike coming, maybe they didn't want to get too heavily into the ongoing storyline right off the bat.

Just a thought.

Well if they are just going to run three or four episodes and then go on another hiatus it wouldn't make too much sense for them to get deep into the mythology but that's fine with me. I miss the good old days when you'd have a premise that would give rise to weekly episodes and maybe 5 or 6 episodes a season that contribute to a major storyline... you know like Buffy would kill some sort of vampire/monster/thing everyweek or Mulder and Scully would solve a case a week and every now and then throughout the season OH SHIT stuff. Without the episodic stuff you just don't get the same depth of character. Everyone's all running around on adrenaline. That's what I hate about the modern concept of drama.... every week is fucking sweeps week! They just need to calm down because the end result is a cluttered storyline full of twists to nowhere and poorly drawn characters who after a few seasons just come off as whiny, obnoxious, and annoying. (I'm looking at you Lost and Heroes)

 

[StlKj]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Well if they are just going to run three or four episodes and then go on another hiatus it wouldn't make too much sense for them to get deep into the mythology but that's fine with me. I miss the good old days when you'd have a premise that would give rise to weekly episodes and maybe 5 or 6 episodes a season that contribute to a major storyline... you know like Buffy would kill some sort of vampire/monster/thing everyweek or Mulder and Scully would solve a case a week and every now and then throughout the season OH SHIT stuff. Without the episodic stuff you just don't get the same depth of character. Everyone's all running around on adrenaline. That's what I hate about the modern concept of drama.... every week is fucking sweeps week! They just need to calm down because the end result is a cluttered storyline full of twists to nowhere and poorly drawn characters who after a few seasons just come off as whiny, obnoxious, and annoying. (I'm looking at you Lost and Heroes)

Agree wholeheartedly, ff. I like a series where the characters get wiser and grow in depth over time, rather that concept dramas where the plot gets more convoluted over time, but the characters either don't change, or get worse.

 

[jasonnormans]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

This is my favourite show of all time!

 

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

A. HORRIBLE NEWS

Kim Manners, frequent director, co-executive producers, and one of the most influence voice in the series has passed.

B. On a much lighter note, I was very pleased with tonight's episode. A good Sam episode was long overdue. (As is Ruby... she needs to pop back in soon). There were a couple scenes that I think crossed the we playing off the cheesiness inherent in the story/we're actually being cheesy line. I'm specifically thinking about the chanting after Sam beat up the kid and the scene after where he walked down the hall. I think there were better ways to communicate the sentiments those scenes were trying to without being so hyperbolic. That being said I think the base story was very good. Not many bump in the night moments but I enjoyed it. The youth acting was actually pretty good and they managed to find kids that really did resemble Jared and Jensen.

 

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

I really liked this episode! It makes me a little sad because I had a similar spec script in mind about a leanan sidhe but I guess I should be happy I'm thinking on the same wavelength as paid writers (even if mine would've been more hilarious)

It was fairly action packed, had enough mystery to really keep you unsure. But what I love most about this episode is that they didn't pussy out. It would've been SO easy for the writer to pull some weak crap about the boys just breaking free of the spell through the power of their emotional bond and knifing the siren. But they DIDN'T!!!! I couldn't be more happy. And the way bother characters still refused to address their issues at the end of the episode... SO perfect, so in character, so not a cheap horrible way out.

 

[StlKj]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

I was so excited to get a $50 Visa gift card for Christmas, and I finally spent it--on Season 3. It was $48.00 bucks at Best Buy, one of the best prices I've found locally. I got it home and watched it all weekend--then was pissed when I realized there were only five discs instead of six because of the writer's strike.

I spent a full DVD series price for a five disc set, and I didn't even get the version that had the episodes digitally so you could put them on a portable media player.

I feel screwed. It's a good thing most of last season was good.

Oh--and I hated Ghostfacers. Not because it was lame; I actually enjoyed it mostly. No, I hated it because of how they treated one of the few gay characters the show has had in its four season run. If his final act had been in a serious episode, it would have had impact, but as it was, he was just part of a big joke. And gay is used as a joke quite often with the show.

 

[aijalon18]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

^I did like Ghostfaces but did hate how the gay character was treated.

But how bout the homoeroticism of tonight's episode. This is the first one I've liked since they started showing new episodes again. Although i did suspect the guy was the Siren as soon as he started getting moist over Dean's car. It was pretty funny and hot how the bros were fighting over a guy and whoever survived would be his forever. Supernatural creators are quite aware of their big gay following and I think they sometimes like to tease those fans. Jared and Jensen have mentioned their awareness of "Wincest" in a few interviews. My only complaint was that Ruby wasnt in the actual episode. But now I'm sad I dont think there will be a new one for a while.

 

[Fucker29]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

The show is terrible right now. If it continues on this pitiful path, I'm giving up on it. I don't know what the FUCK they're thinking.

 

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

The show is terrible right now. If it continues on this pitiful path, I'm giving up on it. I don't know what the FUCK they're thinking.

I have no idea what you're talking about. I like the past two episodes. The one they returned on was particularly weak but there wasn't anything wrong with this week or last week.

If I recall from you're early post it's the fact that the show isn't dealing with teh major story arch directly that upsets you? If that's the case well look at the X-Files or Buffy, amazing sci-fi shows, touched on the major story arch directly in maybe 5 or 6 episodes a season. Now look at Heroes, horrible sci-fi show, does nothing BUT deals with the major story arch and has become horribly convuluted, full or maddening characters, and terribly uninteresting character archs.

For years and years before the dawn of the super-drama with 24 and Desperate Houswives quickly after. And the result of a slow build of characters who show genuine change and emotion. Who you can relate to and storylines that are intensely interesting. Now shows get bloated by season two. Sophmore slumps have never slumped further down. With shows like Lost and Heros characters are QUICKLY ruined because they're forced to make DUMB decisions to keep these stupid plot archs constantly running instead of building to a climax. It's a horrible trend in television and I for one I'm glad there are shows that still follow a classical format.

What I don't get though is why this would be a problem in season 4? All 3 season followed a classical dramatic set-up wiht myth-arc episodes sprinkled amongst weekly adventures that build characters. If you look at the episodes that deal with major plot from the past it's about

Season 1 (7/22): Pilot (1), Home (9), Scarecrow (11), Shadow (16), Dead Man's Blood (20), Salvation (21), Devil's Trap (22)

Season 2 (6/22): In My Time Of Dying (1), Simon Said (5), Croatoan (9), Born Under A Bad Sign (14), All Hell Breaks Loose Pt.1 (21), and All Hell Breaks Loose Pt. 2 (22)

Season 3 (4/16): Magnificent Seven (1), Malleus Maleficarum (9), Jus in Bello (12), No Rest For The Wicked (16)

Season 4 so far (5/14): Lazarus Rising (1), In The Beginning (3), It's The Great Pumpkin, Sam Winchester (7), I Know What You Did Last Summer (9), Heaven and Hell (10)

Depending on whether you count the Halloween Episode (I do because it's got the reveal about Castiels orders being listening to Dean) or not than they're actually ahead of the normal pacing for myth arc episodes. The middle of hte season is always when it's been most episodic.

 

[falconfan]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

As for Corbett, I really was never offended by the way it was portrayed. I think it was all done in a kind of cute way. In fact that episode was nominated for an award from GLAD so I doubt I'm the only one who felt that.

 

[aijalon18]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

As for Corbett, I really was never offended by the way it was portrayed. I think it was all done in a kind of cute way. In fact that episode was nominated for an award from GLAD so I doubt I'm the only one who felt that.

I dont think Corbin's portrayl was offensive or prejudiced, it was just disappointing that creators, who are aware of their large gay fan base treated the first gay character so carelessly imo. Sure he wasnt gay bashed. But he was kinda treated in a childish Beavis and Butthead, "that gay kid likes you" sorta way. And GLAAD is kinda pathetic in a way. They give awards to sstraight people for doing anything remotely gay, like having a gay makeup artist. A couple years back they gave Jen Aniston some kinda person of the year award. WTF does she do for gay people?