This is why I don't do spoilers . . .

[feliciakw]

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.

Comments

[kimmer1227.livejournal.com]

I think you're taking that statement at face value, but missing the big picture. No. That's not what I mean. I don't know how to explain what I mean. Just because he's writing him as sympathetic doesn't mean he's not going to make him the ultimate evil. I kinda like Kripke's spin on this, and am excited to see it play out.

Let it play out on screen. Don't already decide you'll hate it, 'cos you probably will.

[mtee.livejournal.com]

I would just wait and see how it goes. You can't decide to be unenthusiastic just because of one article.
I think Kripke is going to show us a Lucifer that is not just evil evil evil. I believe he is trying to go beyond that -- delve into the fallen angel that is Lucifer.
He was God's favorite before he became jealous of man. That could be interesting. I for one don't want the cliche devil... but evil that developed from goodness? That's fascinating.

This is a character that was truly good, had God's love and then turned against all that. Went darkside. How do you portray that?

I have a degree in psychology, so maybe that's just my "thing" -- but I'm going to give it a chance. It's a huge undertaking and not everyone will like... but he's taking a risk and that's better than any "formula" show that's out there.

For me that's what makes SPN so special. It's not your fun of a mill horror/drama/sci fi show.

[izhilzha.livejournal.com]

The Rule of Five doesn't mean you're going to end up deserting N3, too, does it? Because that would make me sad. (SPN, if it does go in this direction, I could understand.)

[leelust.livejournal.com]

I say don't panic yet. For me making Luci sympathetic doesn't make him good it makes him worse evil so to speak. If you expect an evil guy and meet a sympathetic one who tells you sad story or points out unfairness of the world you tend to believe him or feel for him - that's when you catch you - very good tactic.
As for angels are dicks - i cringe every time they use that word but it seems they use it to describe everyone with it. hunters are dicks, demons are dicks, angels are dicks and even Dean was a dick once. I stopped pay attention to that word.

[sarcasticval.livejournal.com]

Everyone's pretty much said everything much more eloquently than I could hope to with the sleep I haven't had. Sometimes it pays being late to the party ;)

I really enjoy the dichotomy of the heaven/hell relationship that Kripke's built. I think it's just plain neat that the angels (from what we've seen) kind of suck, because to me at least, it's a new and interesting angle. The sympathetic role-reversal villain may not be the freshest of concepts anymore, but I still find it far less formula than the mustache-twirling bwahaha option, and mtee makes some great points about the psychological structure of a fallen angel, which sums up part of my squee nicely. (I love quoting others instead of having to formulate my own thoughts!)

[just-ruth.livejournal.com]

I am not watching. He is demeaning and belittling everything that has kept me putting one foot in front of the other since Jack died.

I'm sure your friends won't approve of that statement; I'm not sorry.