I think I may have not responded at the correct comment thread. A lot of very good discussion. :)
I just wanted to observe that this --> "Castiel was obviously not intended to be Dean's love interest, no. Anna was." Is a good, interesting point.
While I'm not a D/C shipper, it is interesting that the character of Cas did take over and more or less "replace" Anna in the writer's original storyline. It is interesting. I made a comment below wondering if "Anna as a love interest" (not sure I'd heard that before, perhaps I had, not sure), may have been a small part of the whole Dawn campaign to get some "normal" female love interests for the brothers. Lol. If so, did that ever backfire on her. In a way I like. :)
I like hearing other points of view. Thanks for all your observations.
Yeah, this is a great conversation! It's really interesting for me to get perspectives I don't usually come across.
Finding out that Castiel took Anna's intended storyline was like a lightbulb moment for me. It explained certain things about Dean and Castiel, like the intensity of Castiel's disappointment in Dean when Dean intended to say yes to Michael, and the extent really of what he was willing to do for Dean ("I killed two angels this week, I rebelled, and I did it, all of it, for you" - powerful stuff).
I think it's quite a shame that Anna's character was not given more scope to develop. Though, when I rewatched seasons 4 and 5 recently, it was really obvious that Dean and Anna (and/or Jensen and Julie) had little to no chemistry. It worked as a one night stand but it was difficult to see how they might have made more of it. Whereas Dean's chemistry with Cas, however you read it, is pretty palpable.
Dawn Ostroff (I think??) had some weird ideas about what Supernatural needed. I like how it backfired too! While I do wish we could have more female characters, we don't need love interests. FYI, CW.
no subject
Date: 2013-05-11 06:37 pm (UTC)I just wanted to observe that this --> "Castiel was obviously not intended to be Dean's love interest, no. Anna was." Is a good, interesting point.
While I'm not a D/C shipper, it is interesting that the character of Cas did take over and more or less "replace" Anna in the writer's original storyline. It is interesting. I made a comment below wondering if "Anna as a love interest" (not sure I'd heard that before, perhaps I had, not sure), may have been a small part of the whole Dawn campaign to get some "normal" female love interests for the brothers. Lol. If so, did that ever backfire on her. In a way I like. :)
I like hearing other points of view. Thanks for all your observations.
no subject
Date: 2013-05-11 08:17 pm (UTC)Finding out that Castiel took Anna's intended storyline was like a lightbulb moment for me. It explained certain things about Dean and Castiel, like the intensity of Castiel's disappointment in Dean when Dean intended to say yes to Michael, and the extent really of what he was willing to do for Dean ("I killed two angels this week, I rebelled, and I did it, all of it, for you" - powerful stuff).
I think it's quite a shame that Anna's character was not given more scope to develop. Though, when I rewatched seasons 4 and 5 recently, it was really obvious that Dean and Anna (and/or Jensen and Julie) had little to no chemistry. It worked as a one night stand but it was difficult to see how they might have made more of it. Whereas Dean's chemistry with Cas, however you read it, is pretty palpable.
Dawn Ostroff (I think??) had some weird ideas about what Supernatural needed. I like how it backfired too! While I do wish we could have more female characters, we don't need love interests. FYI, CW.