A query about 9.02 and other bits
Oct. 17th, 2013 08:11 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ash48Watched the ep again. :))
There was a LOT of sexual innuendo in the latest episode. From Crowley's " Can't wait to see Sam in stilettos and a leather bustier- really putting the S.A.M into S and M." to Sergeant Bates saying "I will spank your ass raw" (and D/s stuff that Abaddon said...).
I'm curious about this section:
Abaddon: So go ahead and play hard to get, and I'll peel off this "no demons allowed" tattoo and blow smoke up your ass.
Dean: ...I gotta tell ya, between you and me it's a horror show up there.
Abaddon: It can get worse. Because once I'm on top I'll make you watch - and I'll use your body.
I really wondered where they were going with this and then Abaddon seemed to change direction and started talking about killing babies.
Um...what exactly was Dean talking about? My first thought (and continuing thoughts) didn't go to a very nice place at all. A bit like the way Lucifer referred to possible experiences Sam had in the cage ("bunk buddy, "you are my bitch in every way"), was Dean referring perhaps to his time in Hell? Being, quite literally, fucked up? Or was it simply referring to how dark his soul and inner being is? I'm just curious about the choice of words. It's seriously dark if it's the former - which, when offering a demon and angel universe makes sense. (The reason for asking is because I was going to list all the sexual references in the ep and wondered if that should be included).
Speculation ahead....
I am also thinking that as we missed out on the (apparently) planned showdown between Michael!Dean and Lucifer!Sam - maybe we are heading for a showdown between Ezekiel!Sam and Abaddon!Dean? Now THAT could be very cool. Oh man...just thinking about how Jensen would play Abaddon...*thud* (I wonder if they'd even dare do that...).
And the more I ponder it, the more I really hope Zeke is "good" (using the term loosely as the interpretation of what is good is murky - especially we haven't really seen a "good" angel as such). We've already had "evil" not!Sam so "good" not!Sam would be a potentially fascinating contrast. The lines would be blurred and that would be interesting I think. And I honestly don't know how Sam would cope with another being using his body to do evil crap to other people. Doing "good" for other people would provide an interesting comparison - and maybe reverse the (potential) situation of Sam wanting to get rid of him. If Sam wanted to keep Zeke on board (and Zeke was happy to stay) how would Dean deal with that. What would the fall out be...
Zeke being able to tap into Sam's memories and thoughts is full on creepy - which would add to that exploration of the difference (or lack of) between being possessed by an angel or a demon. *guh* so many possibilities with this storyline. I love it.
Also:
Cool. I wondered why the first poster had Sam looking down. Now it's clear - this time it's Zeke. Hee...a poster for both the characters.
no subject
Date: 2013-10-17 09:39 pm (UTC)It would have been okay if Michael non-con possessed Dean? It's okay that Castiel blackmailed Jimmy into being possessed because he eventually tried to choose the good side?
The more I see of this storyline, the more fandom's reaction really squicks me out.
no subject
Date: 2013-10-17 11:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-10-18 12:15 am (UTC)So it would be okay that Sam was non-con possessed by an angel as long as that angel turned out to be good
Nope, didn't say that. I said it would make the situation more interesting and complex.
It would have been okay if Michael non-con possessed Dean?
Nope. It would have been horrible. Just like Lucifer possessing Sam was horrible.
It's okay that Castiel blackmailed Jimmy into being possessed because he eventually tried to choose the good side?
Nope. Horror shows have a way of doing horrible things to people.
The more I see of this storyline, the more fandom's reaction really squicks me out.
I'm more puzzled by the perception that because a fan is enjoying this storyline that it is assumed they condone non con or that there is something wrong with them. I enjoy watching them do all sorts of things on the show (including the violence and gore), doesn't mean I'm going to stop protesting about gun control or stop talking to my students about respect and choice.
I suspect the season's going to get even worse in terms of this issues (or better, depending on how you look at it), so I figure for those people now be the time to bale.
no subject
Date: 2013-10-18 08:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-10-18 10:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-10-18 10:35 am (UTC)- I don't think this is a horror show anymore. It's pretty firmly in the Urban Fantasy camp now to me. Too many angels and demons, not enough monsters and folklore and scary stuff.
- The writing staff has gone steadily downhill since Kripke left and I don't think they understand or care about all the consent issues. They can't even keep continuity and characterization all that straight.
- Good Ezekiel would just make Dean justified in what he did-- there's even someone in the thread above saying that Sam should be "proud" to be non-con angel vesseled if it's a good angel. (That's where my Michael and Castiel comparisons come in-- should Dean be "proud" to be Michael's vessel? Jimmy/Castiel?)
- I was making a general comment about things I've seen in fandom (mostly tumblr) and not specifically directed at you. I apologize if it came off that way.
- It's past time I bailed, yet I can't seem to quit. Can you actually be addicted to a TV show?
The idea of "good Ezekiel" bothers me. It's not about non-con or that you're enjoying the show. Have we ever had a good angel? And Dean just put him in there without knowing anything about him? I mean, what are the odds that he'd actually be good? Dean's luck must be phenomenal if that were the case. (And insert what I said to you on twitter in here. ;)
no subject
Date: 2013-10-18 11:56 am (UTC)Sorry to hear you lost the comment. That's always a pain.
Ok. I feel like I have a better understanding of what you are saying. It at least give me a chance to clarify what I was trying to say. It seems I didn't express myself as clearly as I could - I tried to imply that interpretation of "good" will be murky and that in itself will be interesting and complex. I didn't mean I'd like to see it so Dean has an "out" for what he did - at all. It's purely a personal desire to see something different from this scenario. The natural conclusion is that Zeke will be evil - that that will be the twist. I think it will be more twisty if he turns out to not want to harm people and instead offer Sam a chance to do "good". Now - of course that wouldn't actually be good because it's fraught with all the issues of making a choice like that (especially in light of the choices have made before). It would also pull into focus what Dean has done - well, potentially. If Dean's all "but look, he kept you alive and he's helping people" Sam would probably be even more pissed than if he turns out evil and Sam says "you didn't know it was going to turn out this way - it's ok". I don't know. I just think "good" Ezekiel would be more interesting. We've seen evil not!Sam - what, at least 3 times now? "Good" (read, not really that good) not!Sam would be a change. And there maybe a chance to say - I just want to be myself and I want you, Dean, to accept me for who I am and let me make those choices. Or something.
Man, I wish I could be more succinct. /o\
I agree the show has issues with consent issues. No doubt.
And YES you can be addicted to a show. I am. Totally!
Ha...I wrote baled...man, I was having a weird morning.
*hugs*
no subject
Date: 2013-10-18 10:38 am (UTC)