The Fatal Attraction reference was a bad one. But I don't think that the premise of having a female character go against (or choose to go against) the brothers is gender fail without some specific points being hit. And I just wasn't feeling it here.
Unless it's that Dean's magic deep dicking couldn't keep her on the one true path.
The big surprise will be when an angel other than Castiel is for them. The rest will be actively against them. Anna would not have been that surprise. I expected nothing else of her.
Unless it's that Dean's magic deep dicking couldn't keep her on the one true path.
::splutters tea on monitor::
Heh.
But I don't think that the premise of having a female character go against (or choose to go against) the brothers is gender fail without some specific points being hit. And I just wasn't feeling it here.
I was kind of feeling it, mainly because her motivations were sloppily laid out and they threw the Fatal Attraction BS into the mix. More later. Have to catch my bus. It's not the premise, it's the execution.
Castiel has been the only angel that's been on their side (as in, putting the safety of the Winchesters above the "stop the apocalypse" agenda). I don't see how anything that Anna did is out of line with their general vibe up to this point.
Castiel has been the only angel that's been on their side (as in, putting the safety of the Winchesters above the "stop the apocalypse" agenda). I don't see how anything that Anna did is out of line with their general vibe up to this point.
Anna had been their ally in S4, and was acting as a free agent in this case if she is to be believed (and if Michael still wants to make with the brother-on-brother fight to the death, than Anna is probably to be believed as acting independently in her desire to stop it from happening). Sera and memefaultotherwriter did a poor job selling me on her motivation, by which I mean, I feel like I had to fill in motivational blanks and Anna should have made a more convincing argument with Castiel.
I find that allies-turned-antagonists work best when still somewhat sympathetic/understandable. So Gordon and Ava worked better for me, because Gordon's righteous belief was *sold*, as was Ava's trauma and desire to survive. Anna wasn't really allowed//written with the three dimensionality that would have put the episode over the top in the good way.
Anna wasn't really allowed//written with the three dimensionality that would have put the episode over the top in the good way.
But that's just writing fail, not gender fail, the way you're explaining it.
For me, given that Anna lived as a human, and purposely fell so that she could, her motivation to save humanity by preventing the apocalypse is pretty understandable.
Anna had been their ally in S4
Yeah, but an ally is not a friend.
But that's just writing fail, not gender fail, the way you're explaining it.
I would say that 99% of the time, gender fail *is* writing fail. Okay, maybe more like 75% of the time.
For me, given that Anna lived as a human, and purposely fell so that she could, her motivation to save humanity by preventing the apocalypse is pretty understandable.
Not enough callback to it here, after her torture/jail time. I mean, I knew that, but the text didn't *show* me that, and required that I remember it from S4,
Well, they do only have 45 or so minutes to work with.
I would say that 99% of the time, gender fail *is* writing fail. Okay, maybe more like 75% of the time.
Wait, what? Writing fail could be writing fail on any number of things. And yes, gender fail results from writing fail, obviously, but you're explaining why her lack of illstrated motivation here is a *gender* issue.
