I'll not address the whores verbiage, as it's been done and I agree with others' take on it.

I do want to speak to the increasingly frequent mention by Dean of John as a deadbeat dad, related to the comment upstream that Dean is making those adolescent breaks he never did in his actual adolescence. He revered his dad, but also he'd lost one parent in a traumatic way. Circumstances bound him tighter than normal to his remaining parent, and in highly dangerous conditions. I'm sure he was too desperately clinging to Dad to have rebellious thoughts, or to act on any he did have, for fear of actually losing Dad.

I think he's gained enough distance now to allow realization of all the harm the way he and Sam were raised did to them, and he's suffering rebellious backlash. I do think if he lives beyond the current crisis and is allowed to settle into some kind of norm, that he will eventually come back to center, with a more honest perspective on his dad, with all the love and affection tempered by an acknowledgement of how badly John managed fatherhood--aside from the fact that they did actually survive to adulthood.

All the clips are amazing.

But damn, the crackle in the room in the second one; all eyes on Jim, all focus on Bobby. And man, does he deliver. I'm almost sorry I didn't see it first time in situ. The third one is equally amazing, for all of us who've bemoaned the lessening of Castiel to a shattered and ruined doormat. Apparently? NSM.

As for Lisa, it never occurred to me she was anything other than a symbol for Dean of what normal could have been, had he lived another life. A real-life avatar for the Carmen of his dream-life (who I believe may have actually been an avatar for Lisa. It's complicated). I don't believe Ben is his, and I don't think I want him to be; he works just fine as a could-have-been. I'm not ready to see Dean settle down, and if he does, I don't think I want it to be with somebody who shares a history. He's earned a new start with a blank slate, both of the brothers have done. Not that I have any power of influence, but as long as we're stating preferrences....

As for raising kids, I think they would both be awesome fathers, having had both a fiercely positive and a grimly negative example in their own dad. But I'd be content if the bloodline stopped with them. So, ready-mades, adoption, or benevolent and/or courtesy uncles would be my choice.

I think he's gained enough distance now to allow realization of all the harm the way he and Sam were raised did to them, and he's suffering rebellious backlash. I do think if he lives beyond the current crisis and is allowed to settle into some kind of norm, that he will eventually come back to center, with a more honest perspective on his dad, with all the love and affection tempered by an acknowledgement of how badly John managed fatherhood--aside from the fact that they did actually survive to adulthood.

This. Thank you for articulating what I was thinking.

Amidst all of this, I'm still intrigued/bothered by the impression that Michael Shank's character and the hot bartender were lovers. The whole ep I was waiting for that "sin" to be proclaimed. Maybe my slash-goggles are a little too tight on my head, but the looks they gave each other at church seemed more than good buddy annoyance at praying. Of course, I was also expecting the fact that it was Michael Shanks to mean that his character was going to realize the craziness and stop his wife from setting fire to the "sinners" and that didn't pan out either!

If the source material wasn't so vast, and if I still owned an editor . . . I keep hearing SPN vid songs. I don't vid shows on my playlists often, but Supernatural is the one that comes up the most. First it was Gomez's "Bone Tired" [link] and now it's The Swell Season's "The Rain" [link]

I was also expecting the fact that it was Michael Shanks to mean that his character was going to realize the craziness and stop his wife from setting fire to the "sinners" and that didn't pan out either!

Someone on my flist addressed this very thing. In the first two seasons, the brothers were ordinary people dealing with extraordinary circumstances. As such, the society they moved through, the people they saved, often stepped up to help, to greater or lesser effect. Still, the focus was on saving people, one person, one family, one congregation at a time. Since S3 and the advent of demons in daily life, Sam and Dean have increasingly been portrayed as extraordinary "destined" people dealing with extraordinary events. They, and the show, have moved away from society, and those people whose lives they encounter aren't given any realism, any determinism, any agency of their own.

I like the present focus of the show much, much less than previously, and I wish somehow we could get back to that.

I agree the guest casting was completely wasted, and I think it's a bad thematic choice for the show.

I'm surprised that Michael Shanks didn't get the preacher role instead, since it seemed to have more prominence. But in interview he described it as small, so it was just a theoretical surprise.

I think they definitely teased our gaydar. "Covered Rob's ass" indeed. But I think the closeness between them, slashy or not, was to underscore the good people gone very very badness of the whole thing. They weren't just neighbours, they were compadres, but the promise of reunion with his son was just too much.

I do agree that the boys (Sam at first, then with S4.5, Dean) have been pulled out of society more, but I do still think that the people they encounter stick with me as much as they did before. There were duds before, and there are wins now. It's still a crapshoot. I mean, we got Sheriff Mills a couple weeks ago, reminiscent of Officer Kathleen from season 1.

I have no idea who Michael Shanks is, or where he's from, so it didn't ping me.

I think we're still getting good examples of Sam and Dean saving people, normal people. The family in Family Remains, for one. Even Gary in Swap Meat, and the pretty bartender from Free to Be You and Me.

I also don't think it's unusual that we don't get as much of that now -- while they're dealing less with everyday people and more often with bigger, badder evil, the focus is also turning inward, to *them* and what it means to do this job, to battle that evil, what their choices are when everyone is telling them their destinies have been already been determined.

I have no idea who Michael Shanks is, or where he's from,

He starred on about nine seasons of Stargate: SG1, so he's pretty huge in the Vancouver sci-fi community. Until I read the interview, it hadn't crossed my mind he'd have less than the largest guest role. He's Daniel Jackson!

The show and the characters have become more insulated though, from everyday life and the people who live it. They're more rarified creatures, heroes rather than blue-collar workmen, legendary figures rather than guys who can be flirted with, or engaged in conversation.

When was the last time we saw Dean flirt? Really, the last time he played pool? The last pool table I recall was Sam running a game in S4, when Ruby showed up.

I get that the writers are exploring the interior of their heads. I'm just saying that could happen without an apocalypse to set the Winchesters apart as saviors or the ruination of life on earth. The scope is too big to allow for identification with those characters, certainly carried over several episodes. Carried over three seasons? They're coasting on the good will and familiarity built in S1 and S2.

I just think they've taken entirely too long building up to and resolving the whole armageddon thing, if that's how they're determined to go. I'm bored with it. I want to know what happens *after* all the thrilling heroics, I guess.

I may regret these words, but I'm looking forward to the apocalypse ending.

Dean made eyes at Leah, or enough to set her father's radar off. I'm assuming they're still running game, because they're still spending money. We're just not seeing it. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Dean's not getting as much tail as he apparently got (because we didn't really see that much) because he's in a much more bummed headspace, and he's probably only getting his jollies when he's sleeping.

The scope is too big to allow for identification with those characters

Identification with Sam and Dean? I don't feel their plight any less keenly now than I did before. They still break my heart like they did in season 1.

I don't see them as heroes or legends, either. I see them as outcasts and outsiders who have to operate even further on the periphery of society than before, because they've been tainted by their apparent destinies. I don't see them as elevated in any way. I see them as dragged down by the weight of it all.