Mal: How drunk was I last night? Jayne: Well I dunno. I passed out.

'Our Mrs. Reynolds'


Supernatural 2: Why is it our job to save everybody?  

[NAFDA]. This is where we talk about the CW series Supernatural! Anything that's aired in the US on TV (including promos) is fair game. No spoilers though — if you post one by accident, an admin will delete it.


Amy - Jan 24, 2012 9:23:50 am PST #23716 of 30002
Because books.

can you imagine how Dean would handle Sherlock?

I've never seen Sherlock (I know, I know, but I'm not interested), but I can imagine it would be funny. But Dr. Who exists in the same type of paranormal universe Supernatural does, and Sherlock doesn't, so I'm not sure how that would work.

The posters and the tumblr are great, though.


tiggy - Jan 24, 2012 9:32:03 am PST #23717 of 30002
I do believe in killing the messenger, you know why? Because it sends a message. ~ Damon Salvatore

I've never seen Sherlock (I know, I know, but I'm not interested)

I see the words and yet...i can't understand them!


§ ita § - Jan 24, 2012 9:33:14 am PST #23718 of 30002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

Daunt put Sherlock and SPN together before it was cool.

I'm going to write lots of filthy Giles/John just for spite

You'll be back to Dean and Cas soon enough. You can't stay away.


Amy - Jan 24, 2012 9:35:11 am PST #23719 of 30002
Because books.

I see the words and yet...i can't understand them!

It's what Jessica said in Movies about the Hunger Games. Everyone talks about so much, I now have no desire to ever watch it. And I don't see the appeal of Cumberbatch at all. He looks like a kid who ate paste.


tiggy - Jan 24, 2012 9:37:17 am PST #23720 of 30002
I do believe in killing the messenger, you know why? Because it sends a message. ~ Damon Salvatore

Everyone talks about so much, I now have no desire to ever watch it.

again something i've never understood.

And I don't see the appeal of Cumberbatch at all.

I don't watch because i think he's attractive(i really don't think he is). i watch because he makes laugh(and cry).


§ ita § - Jan 24, 2012 9:41:30 am PST #23721 of 30002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

I think that Sherlock is interesting enough, but I am not in love. It's a bit overwhelming to care a bit, but nowhere near as much as most of the people commenting. I feed like an odd sort of wet blanket. More so than if I didn't watch the show, or if I didn't like it.

But I have decided to not avoid things just because other people talk about them all the time. Not least of all because finding out I dislike them, which happens sometimes, is a weird rush.

Yeah, that's mature of me.

I'm in a discussion with someone who's sad at the idea that Bobby might not come back as Bobby. Like, the idea that Jim Beaver might be back on the show in a way that's not Bobby's resurrection is upsetting to them.

I don't mind if Jim comes back, in general, but the least happymaking way of that happening is Bobby being alive again. It's just the worst of the ways I can conceive of the actor returning. I like him having died the way he died, and resurrecting him would retroactively erode that. Ghost or flashback or revenant would be much better.


Amy - Jan 24, 2012 9:45:58 am PST #23722 of 30002
Because books.

I'm usually curious if everyone else is talking! But this time there was a bit too much of the "this is the best thing EVER IN THE HISTORY OF TIME" and "IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE," and it made me irrationally resentful and uninterested. Now I'm just plain uninterested.

I like him having died the way he died, and resurrecting him would retroactively erode that. Ghost or flashback or revenant would be much better.

Exactly.


Matt the Bruins fan - Jan 24, 2012 10:14:11 am PST #23723 of 30002
"I remember when they eventually introduced that drug kingpin who murdered people and smuggled drugs inside snakes and I was like 'Finally. A normal person.'” —RahvinDragand

Yeah, Bobby got to go out swinging, I don't want to see that overturned and diluted the way just about all the meaningful deaths in comic books have. Ghost or Heaven-dwelling soul is fine, flashback is fine, an Old One being played by Jim so as to mess with the guys' heads is fine (if painful), but I don't want Bobby to get better.

I just realized that things weren't necessarily as dire for Dean in "Time after Time after Time" as Sam and Jody Mills assumed. Back in 1944 Castiel definitely exists with the power to transport people through time.

Which would make for some excellent angst if the thought were to occur to Dean now, after the fact.


§ ita § - Jan 24, 2012 10:32:17 am PST #23724 of 30002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

Sherlock isn't all that. I mean, it's not like it's Community or anything (which I'm pretty sure we must have put someone off by now).

Back in 1944 Castiel definitely exists with the power to transport people through time.

But I think that's off the plate for a number of reasons, including the fact that they could theoretically go back in time anywhere before 2010 and get a "good" Cas, bring him forward and use his juice. And by juice I mean...no, never mind. 1940s Cas has no vessel, isn't on Earth, doesn't necessarily have his "save Dean" papers yet, all sorts of stuff. I think tapping into his past opens up so many wormholes that it's best they (the writers) don't go there at all.


Matt the Bruins fan - Jan 24, 2012 11:36:13 am PST #23725 of 30002
"I remember when they eventually introduced that drug kingpin who murdered people and smuggled drugs inside snakes and I was like 'Finally. A normal person.'” —RahvinDragand

I suspect a pre-show Castiel could be intrigued into answering a prayer from someone who is otherwise invisible to him (it?), and upon finding an anachronistic Dean with masking spells engraved on his ribs by Castiel's own power might be inclined to help. But it probably was best for the story to avoid going that route.