That still annoys me. In the beginning of S4, when Castiel is talking to Dean in Bobby's kitchen (in his dream), he says that several of his fellow angels had been killed in battle. So a) he knew angels could die, and b) if they were killed in battle, wouldn't he know *how* they were killed? The whole "we don't know how angels are being murdered" was so clumsy.

I thought that last part was referring to angels being picked off individually while not having been in battle at time preceding their death. That this was Uriel killing those who refused to join him during a private chitchat.

But yeah, the whole angels-dying thing did not mesh with the statement that only angels can kill other angels, so unless Cas and his garrison and the other Heavenly folks were battling a whole bunch of "fallen" angels openly on the side of Lucifer . . . ugh.

I don't think there was any evidence that angel swords were just manifestations--didn't we see more than one of them together (or in the hand of someone other than an angel) even before Dean took one and stabbed Zachariah?

I don't think there was ever any confusion about whether or not angels could die, but the fact that they'd ever stated only angels could kill each other was clearly at odds with the idea that anyone other than Uriel was killing them, which was an issue.

That's what I meant, but probably didn't articulate clearly -- Cas mentions right off in the second episode that angels have died (and I presumed in battle, because he was talking about battle at the time), but when angels are showing up dead later, they're all, "How?! What can kill an angel?" Which makes no sense.

Look! Is baby: [link] ! And some adults, but who cares, in comparison?

As someone on Tumblr pointed out: the difference between Misha and Jared.

Wow, so true. And it's not just the outfits -- West looks skeptical and cynical, and Thomas is like, "Hi! HI, PEOPLE! I LOVE YOU! YAY!"

Whoa, double posting. Stop that.

Okay, I'm having a million confusions. I saw this movie poster on Tumblr, but not only does it look ridiculous, it has lots of familiar names, but no entry in IMDB. When I look up Lee Ehlers (I swear that name is familiar, but only 2 credits? Okay...), he has a Matt Cohen title to his name, but not this one. But one with this guy, who looks familiar, but I don't recognise any of his credits. And he doesn't seem to have a twin brother.

He does remind me of the demon who told Dean he doesn't speak "little bitch". Anyone remember who played him?

But the names of the actors aren't even spelt right, so I shouldn't worry about it.

And, man, Katie Cassidy looks both older and more sultry as a brunette. I didn't recognise her at first.

I'd be surprised if they were the leads in a movie, unless it was very very indie, but the poster is pretty funny.

I liked Katie Cassidy better as a brunette in Harper's Island. I think she's naturally brunette, too.