The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Supernatural / Jensen Ackles / Jared Padelecki [merged]

Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

I thought it was another serviceable episode. I've yet to have any OMG! moments yet. Agreed about the earlier shirtless Sammy comments, in interviews he's indicated he is shirtless more often this season btw. The Dean with the baby humor didn't really hit it for me. I'm glad we have some sense of what direction they're going but it would be nice if they gave our boys some sort of objective. I don't think anyone is as shocked by the actions of Grandpa as we're supposed to be. Still kinda wish someone would express a concern that Sam isn't you know... SATAN.

I'm satisfied with how they dealt with Dean. I felt it would be difficult but they've managed to extricate him from the family in a Dean like fashion. It will odd seeing him a taken man though.
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Well I'm glad to hear Sammy will have a very topless season. I didnt like the humor part of the baby hijinks. like all the "what should we do with a baby?" "OMG the baby just pooped" I just liked seeing Dean holding them. I just love the image of guys, who are typically very rough, softening up and being gentle with a baby.

Yea I dont get how no one is thinking about Sam being Satan and normal demon tests not working on him. That's why I found the premiere lackluster. it was like "I'm gonna splash myself with holy water. Now it's settled I'm not Satan."
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

aijalon18 said:
Well I'm glad to hear Sammy will have a very topless season. I didnt like the humor part of the baby hijinks. like all the "what should we do with a baby?" "OMG the baby just pooped" I just liked seeing Dean holding them. I just love the image of guys, who are typically very rough, softening up and being gentle with a baby.

Yea I dont get how no one is thinking about Sam being Satan and normal demon tests not working on him. That's why I found the premiere lackluster. it was like "I'm gonna splash myself with holy water. Now it's settled I'm not Satan."
Click to expand...
well he did more than one test on him and determined he was the real thing. and i doubt Lucifer of all people would go through the process of decieving. He doesn't have to for one, he is Lucifer.

One thing he told his weak vessel and Sam is, he would not lie, or trick. Unless it is a powerless Lucifer, I don't see the point. And the new show runner already said, that the Lucifer stuff is done.
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

There's plenty of reason for one to be covert and not go in guns ablazing. It depends on what his plan would hypothetically be.
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Gotta love a Dean and Castiel "special, profound bound" episode. Glad to see a shirtless Sam. But why the random hair only in the middle of his chest? I know for a lot of people hair is in. But I don't like chest hair.

Anywho, I love the heaven in chaos and angel civil war. I can't wait to see where this goes and what one-stand having, obnoxious kid-torturing Sam is really about. I was a little confused y the big coming soon preview. I hope they're not trying to show a repeat or go on some kinda hiatus laready.
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Jumped. the. Shark.


:(
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

very good episode. seems like this episode established what the main storyline of the season will be. that and the monsters are acting different than normal...complicated perhaps?
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

This felt like the actual beginning of the season and with the bizarre placement of the mega-teaser I can't help but wonder if the producers knew that too. I really think that the storyline about civil unrest in heaven flows far more naturally and plays better than this quest for the alpha monster. Why they choose to make that the seasons B arc IDK. I guess they couldn't figure out how to resurrect Sam with just the Heavenly Civil War.

Shirtless Jared working out is always a positive. Confused as to why he'd need to pay a hooker though. I mean REALLY. That's just wasteful spending. I do always love Cas and his homoerotic undertones with Dean. I was a little bothered that when Dean was a like YOU'RE GOING TO HURT AN POOR INNOCENT HELPLESS KID! Neither of them made a point to mention that said kid murdered three men in horrific fashion. Up to this point Supernatural has been able to dispose of humans who did wrong Supernaturally without getting blood on the boys hands by having their own dealings work against them. But this time was not the case and it bothers me that it didn't take the time to recognize or address it.

Also there was mention of Raphael needing a new body... I thought the archangels had predestined hosts. No?
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

falconfan said:
This felt like the actual beginning of the season and with the bizarre placement of the mega-teaser I can't help but wonder if the producers knew that too. I really think that the storyline about civil unrest in heaven flows far more naturally and plays better than this quest for the alpha monster. Why they choose to make that the seasons B arc IDK. I guess they couldn't figure out how to resurrect Sam with just the Heavenly Civil War.

Shirtless Jared working out is always a positive. Confused as to why he'd need to pay a hooker though. I mean REALLY. That's just wasteful spending. I do always love Cas and his homoerotic undertones with Dean. I was a little bothered that when Dean was a like YOU'RE GOING TO HURT AN POOR INNOCENT HELPLESS KID! Neither of them made a point to mention that said kid murdered three men in horrific fashion. Up to this point Supernatural has been able to dispose of humans who did wrong Supernaturally without getting blood on the boys hands by having their own dealings work against them. But this time was not the case and it bothers me that it didn't take the time to recognize or address it.

Also there was mention of Raphael needing a new body... I thought the archangels had predestined hosts. No?
Click to expand...
I agree the uber-Monsters seemed interesting but isn't something that would be cohesive. This much better.

The hooker thing was odd. But imo their interactions with women are all so odd that it didnt really phase me.The boys have given many interviews about how female characters are hated so much but now I'm starting to think someone is planning it that way. Save Katie Cassidy's Ruby all the female characters have been horribly written and acted. Don't get me started on the actress that plays Lisa. She just cannot sell the "wholesome single mom" routine.

Dean caring about that brat bugged me too. But I kinda chalked it up to him being a dad to a boy that age that made him soft. But still bitching to Sam about it later was dumb.
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Yeah I hope Dean not crying all season over that kid, they should go ahead and kill off the kid and his mom that storyline is kinda lame. But for the most part the season's been okay so far .I love fine ass Cass
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

It's not females that are the problem it's love interests. Ellen was loved by all while Jo was bitterly rejected. Pamela hit it off because she didn't pose any serious threat to segueing into anything resembling a love interest. To this day I wish they had made more out of Missouri and occasional one off love interests get out of things OK. Amy Ackers character and Sarah from season one or Madison in season two and Dean's fantasy chick also clicked with him nicely. I'd also say that Anna, despite getting an unceremonious kill off in the 'everything must go' season five deathfest. I think a lot of the problem is that any love interest threatens to skew the focus from the brothers. It's difficult for them to have a love interest when they have no set location.
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Pianist said:
After all is said and done, I'm pretty much finished with the series I think, and really have little desire to continue watching.
Click to expand...

Motivation?

supernatural6x03--20.jpg
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

falconfan said:
It's not females that are the problem it's love interests. Ellen was loved by all while Jo was bitterly rejected. Pamela hit it off because she didn't pose any serious threat to segueing into anything resembling a love interest. To this day I wish they had made more out of Missouri and occasional one off love interests get out of things OK. Amy Ackers character and Sarah from season one or Madison in season two and Dean's fantasy chick also clicked with him nicely. I'd also say that Anna, despite getting an unceremonious kill off in the 'everything must go' season five deathfest. I think a lot of the problem is that any love interest threatens to skew the focus from the brothers. It's difficult for them to have a love interest when they have no set location.
Click to expand...
I disagree. It's the actresses. All the actresses who worked well were good seasoned actresses. Ellen, Katie Cassidy's Ruby, Amy Acker, Adrianne Palicki (Jessica), and even Madison are all have chops.

The other girls are skanks that you'd see in a Skinamax porn. Plus the other girls usually look so cheap and slutty. That hooker last episode looked like she shopped at Ross. the horrible actresses come cheap.

People actually want characters to be in couples. In every other show people are constantly shipping for male/female leads. They just want girls who are up to par with Jensen and Jared. If they could afford someone like Eliza Dushku, I'm sure people would love for her to be with Dean and dominate his ass.
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

I think lastg nights episode of supernatual proves why this is one of the best shows on television, with some of the best writers. They just made a season that, to me at least, seems more interesting than them fighting lucifer, and that season was damn amazing.
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Late nights episode was great, I love how they incorporate Cass, Sam and Dean in the storyline. Plus fine ass Cass got a boner watching a porno.
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Apollo said:
I think lastg nights episode of supernatual proves why this is one of the best shows on television, with some of the best writers. They just made a season that, to me at least, seems more interesting than them fighting lucifer, and that season was damn amazing.
Click to expand...
Loved it too,just killing off Crowley as it appeared had been done this early left me a little flat....he's a bastard but a fun one....loved how he refered to Castiel this was the first time he's seen him this season,but it appears the overachieving king of the crossroad demons was just a wee bit too clever by half.Awesome though how it was Castiel that coldly torched Crowley's human skull and burned the demon and the host to a crisp.
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

This season is starting off slow for me, but I love the series so much it's impossible for me not to watch. Plus Jared and Jensen are my dream come true.
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Well I am catching up on the winter break episodes, and the introduction of Mother is fucking awesome. Supernatural once again shows they have some of the best writers in the game. They somehow figured out how to top Lucifer and the Apocalypse.
 
Re: Supernatural's back, baby!

Just my opinion, but I don't think they are done with Lucifer. I mean he's just trapped back where he started. If that was the end of it then this whole series would be pointless. And I would be pissed.


And by the way, who is this "Mother," anyways? Is there some actual lore about her that I have never heard of?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top