![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
This is why I don't do spoilers . . .
Yes, my laptop is turned off and getting ready to be put away. I'm at the big computer. :-)
I started to read a TV Guide article that my mom sent, and I couldn't finish it. I am really disappointed--like, phenomenally disappointed--with the direction said article indicates SPN is going to take things this season.
Per the article, Lucifer is going to be the most sympathetic character this season. He's all misunderstood by everyone. I . . . cannot get behind that. At all. Humans are the virtuous ones? If that's the case--and I understand this at the beginning of the series, where humans, with all their faults and flaws, are nonetheless championing the side of Good. But I always wanted them to have something bigger than themselves to help them fight an evil bigger than themselves--but if humans are the ultimately virtuous ones, I rather wish they'd never touched on angels at all. Because if angels and demons are equally detestable, what's the point? It makes the distinction between Good and Evil irrelevant. It means Dean is right--go down swingin', end bloody, that's it. End of story. And there's nothing hopeful or redeeming about that. What does it matter if Good triumphs over Evil, if Good essentially means nothing in the grand cosmic scheme of things? Which is exactly what this article is telling me.
"Get off our planet" works in Stargate SG-1. It does not work with SPN.
I just . . . am really, really disappointed. I don't find this exciting at all; I find this to be a cop-out. It is not original, it is not thought provoking, it is not fun. Lucifer is the genesis and instigator of all Evil. He plays sympathetic with the best of 'em. To the detriment of those who buy into the act. And if I thought Kripke & Co. were capable of playing that through, I might not be as bothered as I am. I might even be looking forward to watching it play out. But considering how wishy-washy they made Ruby, I'm not convinced. I'll hold onto the hope that he will do the storyline justice, but considering how he weakened Castiel during the course of S4, I'm not holding my breath.
Kripke has killed my squee.
*mutters mantra "Kripke always lies. Kripke always lies . . . "*
It is Kripke's story, it's true. And I am free to turn it off if I want to. (But for Jensen, I'll probably continue to watch.) And I'll be glad if Kripke proves me wrong. But I don't trust him. He was skating on thin ice with me last season. This might be the final crack.
This also means that SPN holds to my Rule of Five. It's my experience--from shows that I've watched from the beginning in first run--that a TV show cannot sustain itself and its interest level for me beyond five seasons. Indeed, it's lucky if it makes it that far. I might continue to watch, but it's with less interest and enthusiasm than before.
I started to read a TV Guide article that my mom sent, and I couldn't finish it. I am really disappointed--like, phenomenally disappointed--with the direction said article indicates SPN is going to take things this season.
Per the article, Lucifer is going to be the most sympathetic character this season. He's all misunderstood by everyone. I . . . cannot get behind that. At all. Humans are the virtuous ones? If that's the case--and I understand this at the beginning of the series, where humans, with all their faults and flaws, are nonetheless championing the side of Good. But I always wanted them to have something bigger than themselves to help them fight an evil bigger than themselves--but if humans are the ultimately virtuous ones, I rather wish they'd never touched on angels at all. Because if angels and demons are equally detestable, what's the point? It makes the distinction between Good and Evil irrelevant. It means Dean is right--go down swingin', end bloody, that's it. End of story. And there's nothing hopeful or redeeming about that. What does it matter if Good triumphs over Evil, if Good essentially means nothing in the grand cosmic scheme of things? Which is exactly what this article is telling me.
"Get off our planet" works in Stargate SG-1. It does not work with SPN.
I just . . . am really, really disappointed. I don't find this exciting at all; I find this to be a cop-out. It is not original, it is not thought provoking, it is not fun. Lucifer is the genesis and instigator of all Evil. He plays sympathetic with the best of 'em. To the detriment of those who buy into the act. And if I thought Kripke & Co. were capable of playing that through, I might not be as bothered as I am. I might even be looking forward to watching it play out. But considering how wishy-washy they made Ruby, I'm not convinced. I'll hold onto the hope that he will do the storyline justice, but considering how he weakened Castiel during the course of S4, I'm not holding my breath.
Kripke has killed my squee.
*mutters mantra "Kripke always lies. Kripke always lies . . . "*
It is Kripke's story, it's true. And I am free to turn it off if I want to. (But for Jensen, I'll probably continue to watch.) And I'll be glad if Kripke proves me wrong. But I don't trust him. He was skating on thin ice with me last season. This might be the final crack.
This also means that SPN holds to my Rule of Five. It's my experience--from shows that I've watched from the beginning in first run--that a TV show cannot sustain itself and its interest level for me beyond five seasons. Indeed, it's lucky if it makes it that far. I might continue to watch, but it's with less interest and enthusiasm than before.
no subject
I dunno. Milton managed to make Satan sympathetic enough ("better to reign in hell than serve in heaven") that scholars have been arguing for centuries over whether Milton was some brand of heretic--having read his text, I'd say Milton was pretty orthodox, but his treatment lent itself well to entertainment, and he never forgot that Satan was in fact evil.
Not that Kripke and Co. are anywhere near Milton's level of brilliance, but if they take a cue from him (rather than, say, from Phillip Pullman), we might end up all right in the end.
no subject
I know you love Sera. And I like her stuff, too. But my favorite of her stuff? Was done with Raelle, iirc. Do with that what you will.
Admittedly, I'm not familiar with Milton. (Yes, we established long ago that my knowledge of classic literature is, in a word, lacking.)
And apparently I tossed the article away in a fit of "I don't want to know this yet!" pique earlier this morning. Huh.
Anyway, while looking for said article on-line, so that I could show you exactly what set me off--it wasn't the Lucifer thing alone, but that combined with the whole "angels are dicks" mentality--I found Kripke saying something that makes me feel a little better. "But—we’ve always kept in our back pocket that despite these particular angels being the bureaucracy of Heaven, there are potentially higher and more benevolent forces in the universe." This makes me feel better, though I really, really don't expect Kripke to pull that out of his pocket.
Looks like I'll have to read Paradise Lost in the next week. Meh.
Why, yes. My previous experience with TV has taught me to expect the worst. Why do you ask?
no subject
But I laughed when Kripke actually referenced Paradise Lost. Ha. \o/
(Doesn't mean it will be likable by me--I'm not at all a fan of this angels vs. demons and humans caught in the middle thing. B5 already did it and did it better, but even then it was kind of a copout.)
no subject
Yahtzee! I don't know about B5, but they kind of did a similar thing with the Gou'auld (or however you spell it; I forget) and the Asgard on SG-1, if you want to look at the demons vs. saviors thing. (We won't even get into the problematic Ancients storyline on that show.)
I just . . . *sigh* . . . yeah. Meh.