Actually not needing validation right now, but thank you.

Buffy ,'Lies My Parents Told Me'


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.


EpicTangent - May 02, 2014 8:11:16 am PDT #29576 of 30002
Why isn't everyone pelting me with JOY, dammit? - Zenkitty

I'm thinking none of you guys watched CSI this week? That ep was also what appeared to be a backdoor pilot and was so painful that I really, really enjoyed this one by contrast. Though that is perhaps not really a glowing recommendation.

I will say the Romeo & Juliet subplot with the "I won't tell him why I broke his heart beacuse I'm so Beautifully Nooooble," thing was annoying as hell - so sick of, "we'll never be happy together because we're too moronic to have a flippin' conversation," plots.

So, interesting concept, weakly executed.


JenP - May 02, 2014 11:29:33 am PDT #29577 of 30002

Didn't like Chicago Monster Wars. I mean, besides everything else, the acting by several of the leads was just not good. And I'm no expert or connoisseur, so.

I'm wondering what Charlie and Dorothy are doing in Oz. Just one season, maybe. That would be fun.

I feel like I just want this season to end. I'm not sad there's another season, I just hope it's... enjoyable and that they let the boys go out with a bang.


Amy - May 02, 2014 11:40:25 am PDT #29578 of 30002
Because books.

I'm not sure if I'm sad there's another season at this point, which I never thought I'd say. I feel like I need to rewatch, too -- I started the season with such high hopes, and I remember loving the first few episodes, and then it all went to shit.

It's petty and not even necessarily true, but I feel like Jared's tweets are sort of painfully gung-ho now, too. Like, he really thought that episode was a standout? Seriously?

I liked the accidental!werewolves episode, and I would love to see/read more about that girl as she travels. That would have been an outstanding backdoor pilot, like Matt said. When it ended, I was bummed I wouldn't see her again.


§ ita § - May 03, 2014 5:03:20 pm PDT #29579 of 30002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

Why would SPN and Bloodlines be a zero sum game? People who like Bloodlines (which I'm sure will get lots of network attention, since it's a true CW show) can have it. And I can keep watching SPN alone with the people who still like it.

None of the suggested backdoor pilots are shows they want to see. They're shows that an audience, a small audience, they already have would also see, and go to the same conventions and buy about the same stuff.

I am zero interested in Bloodlines, but it makes perfect sense, and the only thing that bothers me is losing writing staff. It would have been great to have another show, but I don't think anyone's making another SPN any time now. Certainly not the CW. They have one.


Amy - May 03, 2014 5:39:33 pm PDT #29580 of 30002
Because books.

I didn't expect them to make another SPN. I did hope whatever the pilot was would be a lot more imaginative than Bloodlines, though, and Andrew Dabb certainly wrote better scripts for SPN.


SuziQ - May 03, 2014 5:44:21 pm PDT #29581 of 30002
Back tattoos of the mother is that you are absolutely right - Ame

I think what bothers me about it is that it is being billed as Supernatural: Bloodlines. Yet it is it's own thing, only barely borrowing from SPN. Make the show, sure, but quit billing it as being related to SPN. Plus it wasted an episode of SPN.


§ ita § - May 04, 2014 7:16:25 am PDT #29582 of 30002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

I did hope whatever the pilot was would be a lot more imaginative than Bloodlines

I guess if someone told me the CW was airing a pilot for a new monster show, related to whatever, I'd expect something like this.

Maybe it's because I gave up/adjusted when they mentioned "all new characters" and I realised the business plan was like the rest of the station.

It's kind of similar to how I expected nothing of Revolution(s?) even though Kripke moved to it. I'll try anything Joss once, but it didn't occur to me to follow Kripke. My relationship to the show is all about the show, although I'll certainly follow Jensen anywhere, since he brought me here, and am hopeful about the other regulars.

it is being billed as Supernatural: Bloodlines

I did not know that. The Originals has much more durable ties with TVD than this to its progenitor. That's false advertising.


le nubian - May 04, 2014 10:39:46 am PDT #29583 of 30002
"And to be clear, I am the hell. And the high water."

You know what this episode kind of felt like to me? One of the lesser Amazon original pilots.


§ ita § - May 05, 2014 1:49:09 pm PDT #29584 of 30002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

Why Does Supernatural Have So Many Female Fans (at this convention the author went to) is a mildly irritating IO9 article with more irritating comments (girls like it because it's crap and they're pretty). Oddly, though, this piece of quoted revisionist history irked me the most:

The first female characters they brought in were your stereotypical, "let's sex this up and maybe we'll pull in that demographic we're still looking for" characters… So yeah, fans didn't like them and they went away.


Matt the Bruins fan - May 05, 2014 2:28:40 pm PDT #29585 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 suppose I can see a show that's clearly made for and marketed to women having a chilling effect on potential male viewership. However, I'm somehow skeptical of a lot of men enjoying the guns, cool car, and hunting monsters for a couple of seasons and then dropping it over the sudden realization that lots of women watch too.