spnanonhaven | #91

Entry tags:

show & fandom

#91 - honc

This post is for show discussion and fandom gossip only. NO ACTOR GOSSIP, NO ACTOR BASHING!!
THIS JOURNAL LOGS IPS.
Backup location:

spnanonhaven

RULES:
1. No posting f-locked content.
2. No linking between RL and online identities.
3. Keep the actor gossip to these posts or take it to

spn_gossip.
4. Keep spoilery information out of thread titles.
5. No embedding music.
6. Embedded images must be SFW.

ACRONYM KEY:

AYRT = "I am the anon you're replying to." | DA = "I am a different anon from the one you're replying to, and already commented somewhere else on this thread." | NA = "I'm a new anon who has not commented on this thread before." | SA = "I'm the same anon, replying to my own comment to edit/elaborate." | AIRT = "The anon I replied to." | ITT = "In this thread." | OP = "Original post / original poster."

Off-Topic | Fanworks Discussion | Reference | Flatview

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

ayrt

Thank you. So they crapped all over werewolves, totally ruined Madison's death, and cemented Dean's position as the most hypocritical person in the SPN universe? Wow. That's a lot of suck.

The gal hadn't killed any humans. Letting her go was pretty mandatory, by the way they do things.

ayrt

So all the arguing they did over Jack the rugaru was just for show? Dean has intended to take monsters down before they killed in other cases. He was in favor of taking out Lenore, at least initially. And they have let monsters go that have killed people too, with the witches in S7. It was far from mandatory.

Don't remember Jack the rugaru all that well, but I'm pretty sure Dean didn't believe Lenore wasn't killing humans. Once he did, he let her go. Correct? The question wasn't whether a vamp who doesn't kill people should be let go, but whether it was possible that a vamp was not killing people.

The witches in S7... hm. What was that story? Was that the one with the insta-daughter? I think I missed that one.

In any case, it's still quite standard on their part to let monsters go if they haven't killed people. It may not be precisely mandatory, but I don't think it's far from it.

ayrt

You're telling me what is standard about the show when you can't even remember most of what I'm talking about? Seems kinda off to me.

Metamorphosis? The rugaru? He's gonna turn into a monster and he's gonna kill and we have to kill him first? It was early S4. Episode 4 or 5 maybe?

The witches was the one with the guest stars from Angel.

I don't have to keep talking to you about it, if it's bugging you that I've forgotten a detail or two over the years. Just let me know.

Anyway, I remember Metamorphosis, just not much about Jack the rugaru. I cared less about the monster of the week and more about the brother drama at the time. (And yeah, it was 4.04.)

So cool, there's one exception to the rule.

Second exception... ah, the guest stars from Angel. Weren't they too powerful for the boys to kill? Not sure I'd count that. If you can't kill something, you can't kill it.

ayrt

When the details you've forgotten directly relate to what you're talking about, yeah, I kinda expect you to know about them. Plus you admitted you didn't remember, but still maintained your position that not killing them before they killed was standard. That's why it was frustrating.

There's one giant, honking, Dean was going to kill the guy before he did anything wrong exception. The witches, IIRC, Sam and Dean didn't even give a good try to killing them, power or not. And it's not like they haven't taken out powerful beings before. Gods, even.

ayrt

Not remembering details of one or two episodes means that I can't make a statement of the overall standard of how their hunts have been conducted? Oh, nonnie, I really don't think so, over 8 years of episodes. That's just ridic. And considering what the nonnie below says, I don't think you're discussing this in good faith anymore, so you and I are done.

Good night.

ayrt

When it's a point that big? It does seem a bit odd to keep arguing that you know what is standard without remembering it.

Not in good faith? Since when is presenting accurate facts not arguing in good faith? I never said Dean killed the rugaru. But he intended to, and would have if Sam hadn't intervened. In the end it was Sam who killed Jack, but by that point he'd killed, or been goaded into killing depending on how you look at it. You've just decided that doesn't count as good faith because it contradicts what you're saying.

DA

But Dean didn't kill the Rugaru. Sam made his case for the guy and Dean agreed to wait it out and not kill him unless he killed a human and became a threat. Just like with Lenore, Dean deferred to Sam's opinion.

the anon they were replying to

Thanks, nonnie. Ah, the vulnerabilities of my old age and faulty memory. I conceded a point that was clearly being made in bad faith.

ayrt

Dean agreed to wait after Sam argued himself blue in the face over it. That's irrelevant anyway. The point was, Dean was more than willing to kill Jack before Jack killed anyone else, until Sam protested. In Dean's mind, killing Jack then was perfectly acceptable.

But then Dean changed his mind because Sam asked him to defer to his POV and give the Rugaru the benefit of the doubt. Which Dean did! Dean's struggles with seeing the gray in the supernatural is an essential aspect of his storyline and apparently it will be an ongoing struggle for him. He made a decision which he felt was right. So did Sam. There was no arguing. They both agreed to give her the benefit of the doubt since she hadn't killed a human.

ayrt

The original point being made, and argued, was a contradiction of what you say here, and was a flat statement that letting monsters go in this situation is standard operating procedures for Sam and Dean. Which it isn't, which is why Dean struggles with it.

So if Dean had decided she needed to be killed, despite the fact she hadn't killed a human and said she wouldn't, that would have been okay?

ayrt

Based on what they know about werewolves from dealing with Madison? I think it would have been a reasonable decision, yes. Madison didn't want to, mean to, or intend to kill those people. She didn't even know she was doing it. Why is this girl going to be so different?

DA

Because she was less than 4 people away from the Alpha, apparently. They explained it in the episode. She didn't need human hearts to survive, she'd be totally lucid during her transformations, and she wouldn't be governed by the cycles of the moon. She also killed the werewolf who had gone all power-mad, indicating she had morals and values she would adhere to.

ayrt

Then it was lazy, inept writing that caused it. That's not any better, but it's nice to know what's causing it. Also, how is that being a werewolf if she isn't governed by the cycles of the moon and is exempt from all the other rules? I think this episode is too stupid to live, so to speak.

AYRT

how is that being a werewolf if she isn't governed by the cycles of the moon and is exempt from all the other rules?

They explained in the episode, that if a victim of a werewolf bite was less than 4 werewolves away from the alpha (meaning they were bitten by an Alpha, or someone who had been bitten by an alpha, basically), that they were ~different than ordinary werewolves, not governed by as many rules. It's a silly retcon, but it's canon now.

ayrt

I get that it's what they said in the episode. What I'm saying is if she's not governed by the moon, she doesn't need to kill, and she can control herself during transformation, how is she even a werewolf? She's essentially just a really hairy being who looks like a wolf. If you dilute things down that far, you've taken the whole point out of it. That's a problem with the writers, not with how you're relaying what they said. It's an even stupider retcon than the vampire one in S6.

She's a fufly puppy.

Poor Lupin, why couldn't he be bitten by a a whatever whatever fourth line alpha and be just a puppy?

AYRT

She's essentially just a really hairy being who looks like a wolf.

LOL SPN werewolves aren't even hairy! They're just people with glowly eyes, fangs and claws (because they're cheap)! LOL.

Anyway, my bad, I thought I wasn't making my explanation of the 'new' werewolf process clear. I wasn't trying to be condescending or anything :)

Re: S8 Ep4 Discussion Thread

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-25 05:08 (UTC) - Expand

SPN new werewolf

Next episode Benny will sparkle.

In my world, nothing Carver is doing is canon.

Because Madison had already killed a human. And because she made the decision for herself that she didn't want to live as a werewolf and wanted to die. She asked Sam to kill her.

Isn't Dean making the same decision here as Sam asked him to with Lenore?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only