Lorne: You know what they say about people who need people. Connor: They're the luckiest people in the world. Lorne: You been sneaking peeks at my Streisand collection again, Kiddo? Connor: Just kinda popped out.

'Time Bomb'


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 - Dec 10, 2012 3:08:21 pm PST #27156 of 30002
Because books.

I think she's pretty enough. And now that I know more of her story, I sympathize with her a lot more. She's not any more prickly than Dean probably comes off to most people, in my mind. Some women are brusque sometimes. She's not wandering around hitting people and drowning kittens.


Juliebird - Dec 10, 2012 3:10:12 pm PST #27157 of 30002
I am the fly who dreams of the spider

I don't know about the pretty and the being a fan, and how relevant that is. But I found both Ruby's to be more attractive, as well as both Meg's, and for those who I don't find attractive (Bobby) their personality and role more than made up for it (I was not expected to be physically attracted to Bobby, but his loyalty and friendship makes up for that).

I guess, there's a character the show wants you to like, and so provides the viewer with traits like loyalty and comradery and paternal emotions. And there's longevity there, too. And then there's a character that another main character seemingly loves, so you'd expect to see traits that make you feel affection, attraction, trust, lust, devotion . . .

I dunno, I see a difference in the physical. But also . . . I've been able to get over characters physical unattractiveness by sheer force of personality (Rory on DW, for example), so I don't base my bias on bias. You can be ugly as sin as long as your heart shines through, and this Amelia does not have that, even if her latest ep didn't make me despise her for once.

Again, that may be a "screentime" thing, that if she had her lead I'd eventually find her beautiful and worthwhile, but as it stands, no.


brenda m - Dec 10, 2012 3:49:05 pm PST #27158 of 30002
If you're going through hell/keep on going/don't slow down/keep your fear from showing/you might be gone/'fore the devil even knows you're there

She's not wandering around hitting people and drowning kittens.

No, just pushing injured, lost dogs off on creepy drifters.


P.M. Marc - Dec 10, 2012 3:53:43 pm PST #27159 of 30002
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear

Dude, Mrs Tran is a total MILF. I find her way hotter than Amelia. Amelia's cute, but doesn't do it for me at all.


Amy - Dec 10, 2012 3:54:09 pm PST #27160 of 30002
Because books.

But we know Sam isn't a creepy drifter. And I'm not sure any of us should be surprised by slightly unrealistic plot twists, or the awkward idea of the dog later reuniting them.


§ ita § - Dec 10, 2012 4:16:12 pm PST #27161 of 30002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

I'm not talking about hot. I'm talking about pretty. And no matter how cool or fuckable Mrs Tran is, I don't think "pretty" is a good adjective for her.

Current Meg I think is as plain as TV rules go. Her character's great, I like her a lot, she's probably a riot in the sack, but I do think Amelia's features are prettier. Both Ruby's are very pretty, but I think Meg is more popular than they were, based on reading random other anonymous people.

But I don't look at character's personalities making up for their lack of looks, it's probably the other way around, if possible (still haven't come round on an Ian Somerhalder character yet, although I dig he's pretty as fuck).

So our twains may never meet.

Speaking of meet--I am astonished at how tone deaf all of Amelia has been so far. Their meet cute wasn't cute--I found her pushy and demanding (and that's aside from "that's now how you find a dog's home" issues--those never occur to me--I just thought she was giving him shit for no clear reason), and I never got from her what Sam was supposed to like, other than she had sex with him. I got Jess and Sarah and Madison and Cara and Ruby--I don't actually have to like his partner. But I want to understand it, and from the meet awkward through the vaselined lens...0 idea.


Matt the Bruins fan - Dec 10, 2012 4:51:03 pm PST #27162 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

All I can think is she managed to sort of knock him out of his Dean's disappearance-caused tailspin briefly through sheer unexpected hostility and bitchiness (kind of like squrting a cat with water to make it stop a certain behavior), and then he ran into her again soon enough that she became someone familiar to latch onto before he had the chance to meet anyone actually appealing.


Beverly - Dec 10, 2012 5:01:58 pm PST #27163 of 30002
Days shrink and grow cold, sunlight through leaves is my song. Winter is long.

Matt makes the most sense I've heard about Amelia, actually. She shall be henceforth known (to me) as Squirt.


P.M. Marc - Dec 10, 2012 6:44:29 pm PST #27164 of 30002
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear

I'm not talking about hot. I'm talking about pretty. And no matter how cool or fuckable Mrs Tran is, I don't think "pretty" is a good adjective for her.

Pretty, no. But I'd call her beautiful.

I think Rachel Miner either looks astonishing or she looks meh, but her good angles are very good. Her bad angles are... [link]


§ ita § - Dec 10, 2012 6:52:45 pm PST #27165 of 30002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

Pretty was the adjective Julie used, not beautiful, so it was what I was responding to.

I think Miner is quite plain, but that picture you don't like is prettier than normal. Shit weird like that.