But I very much agree that he set the tone of the show and had a huge influence on it. I think that he's noticeably missed on the show regardless. You might be right that he helped guide the writing, and it would be really interesting to know if bringing Dean in as an actual mytharc counterpoint to Sam was his influence.
Yeah, I know he wasn't the writer, but he had such a long-standing influence in the genre field that Kripke was blessed to have snagged him in the first place. In fact, one wonders if Kim would have moved onto another project by now, like almost all the talent they once had have done? Even Edlund has one foot out the door this year. Hm.
But I do think Kim was the "adult" voice on the show, probably kept Kripke and Gamble in line a lot of times. Kripke said more than once in commentaries that he was pulled back from some really bad Dean choices, and I believe the person who likely pulled him back was Manners. Considering Dean's role in the mytharc began falling apart after Kim died and even before season four ended, I have to think that it was Kim who may have pushed for treating Dean and Jensen like the co-lead he was supposed to be in the first place.
One interesting thing I remember thinking during S4, especially in OTHoaP, was, "Huh. So they're making Dean the hero of the mytharc? How's that going to play against the original premise of Sam being the hero? Hm . . . . " I guess they never truly found a completely satisfactory way of working through that particular challenge.
I don't cut them that slack - it would have been easy if they honestly employed the "symmetry" they claim they like, except never end up doing (I don't think that word means what they think it means). No Dean fan ever asked them to cut Sam out of the hero moments - but it was always easy enough to put both brothers on equal footing and make them an actual team that they never really seem to be in reality. Kripke and Gamble overtly made the choices they did to cut Dean out.
IA with you about how the angel story line devolved into a stupid family squabble. Such a waste - it all started out with such lofty ideas.
I have a soft spot for Dean (and Jensen) too, of course, no question about that. It's why I've hung on the last two seasons even though he's being sidelined more and more. I just haven't decided if I can continue to do that this year. But even if I stop watching entirely, I'll never stop loving Dean Winchester. He'll always be one of my all-time favorite characters, thanks to Jensen's portrayal of him. :)
But I do think Kim was the "adult" voice on the show, probably kept Kripke and Gamble in line a lot of times.
Kim and Bob Singer. IIRC, during the first PaleyFest, Kripke and Bob both talked about the studio pairing the young whippersnapper Kripke, who was all about the blood and gore, with the more mature, character savvy sensitivities of veteran Robert Singer. It made for a nice balance in the early seasons, and it is pretty evident to me that Kripke didn't have carte blanche to do whatever *he* wanted to do in those early seasons.
Kripke said more than once in commentaries that he was pulled back from some really bad Dean choices
Oh, very much WORD to that. The two that stand out in my mind was what he wanted to do with Dean in WIaWSNB, and in DaLDoM. Sometimes it's the other writers/producers that pull him back, and sometimes it's the serendipitous way things work out.
Then there's the scene that Jensen touched on at a convention, where he felt he wasn't in a position to tell the creator of the character when the character felt OOC, but you could kind of tell he was really frustrated with it. And I think I know exactly which scene he was referring to.
it would have been easy if they honestly employed the "symmetry" they claim they like, except never end up doing
A lot of times, the writers talk a good game, but they're obviously trying to tell us what they think we want to hear. Kripke originally compared the show to Star Wars. And ya know? Luke (Sam) is the central figure in that mytharc. No two ways about it. (Until the prequels, which I refuse to acknowledge. *g*) If Sam is Luke and Dean is Han, then it's very clear that there actually is a hero and a sidekick (I do not use that term as a derogatory. I usually gravitate toward the sidekicks). Or perhaps hero and supporting roguish character (I never really considered Han a "sidekick"). The writers can claim as much "symmetry" as they like, but the model they originally compared the show to was not "symmetric." An ensemble cast, yes. But the story clearly revolved around one character.
So their whole thing about "it's about two brothers"--that I believe. But if they're using "symmetry" to describe the mytharc, then no. (As I've always said, I see Sam as the center of the mytharc, and Dean as the center of the emotional arc. And though the mytharc and the emotional arc are connected, they're still two separate things. And I find Dean's emotional arc to be more interesting and accessible than the mytharc. I hope that makes sense.)
(I don't think that word means what they think it means)
Incontheevable!!!!
*awards bonus points for Princess Bride reference* :-D
Going back to S1, I actually would say things were more of an even split in the hero moments. (I've touched on that a while back in my early S1 reviews.) Very early on, whichever character had the peril moment, that's the character who had the hero moment in that ep. Sometimes there were multiple hero moments, with each brother taking one.
But the mytharc has always been Sam's.
It just seems to me that Jensen turned Dean into a richer character than they were anticipating, and that he, in some ways, has become the . . . I'll say unsung hero . . . of the show. Dean is the constant source and representation of good. Yes, he's got his flaws, and there are certain things to which he has blinders, but he's the regular guy (meaning, sans "powers") who's fighting the good fight and trying to keep things together as best he can.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2011-08-22 12:18 pm (UTC)Yeah, I know he wasn't the writer, but he had such a long-standing influence in the genre field that Kripke was blessed to have snagged him in the first place. In fact, one wonders if Kim would have moved onto another project by now, like almost all the talent they once had have done? Even Edlund has one foot out the door this year. Hm.
But I do think Kim was the "adult" voice on the show, probably kept Kripke and Gamble in line a lot of times. Kripke said more than once in commentaries that he was pulled back from some really bad Dean choices, and I believe the person who likely pulled him back was Manners. Considering Dean's role in the mytharc began falling apart after Kim died and even before season four ended, I have to think that it was Kim who may have pushed for treating Dean and Jensen like the co-lead he was supposed to be in the first place.
One interesting thing I remember thinking during S4, especially in OTHoaP, was, "Huh. So they're making Dean the hero of the mytharc? How's that going to play against the original premise of Sam being the hero? Hm . . . . " I guess they never truly found a completely satisfactory way of working through that particular challenge.
I don't cut them that slack - it would have been easy if they honestly employed the "symmetry" they claim they like, except never end up doing (I don't think that word means what they think it means). No Dean fan ever asked them to cut Sam out of the hero moments - but it was always easy enough to put both brothers on equal footing and make them an actual team that they never really seem to be in reality. Kripke and Gamble overtly made the choices they did to cut Dean out.
IA with you about how the angel story line devolved into a stupid family squabble. Such a waste - it all started out with such lofty ideas.
I have a soft spot for Dean (and Jensen) too, of course, no question about that. It's why I've hung on the last two seasons even though he's being sidelined more and more. I just haven't decided if I can continue to do that this year. But even if I stop watching entirely, I'll never stop loving Dean Winchester. He'll always be one of my all-time favorite characters, thanks to Jensen's portrayal of him. :)
no subject
Date: 2011-08-22 02:36 pm (UTC)Kim and Bob Singer. IIRC, during the first PaleyFest, Kripke and Bob both talked about the studio pairing the young whippersnapper Kripke, who was all about the blood and gore, with the more mature, character savvy sensitivities of veteran Robert Singer. It made for a nice balance in the early seasons, and it is pretty evident to me that Kripke didn't have carte blanche to do whatever *he* wanted to do in those early seasons.
Kripke said more than once in commentaries that he was pulled back from some really bad Dean choices
Oh, very much WORD to that. The two that stand out in my mind was what he wanted to do with Dean in WIaWSNB, and in DaLDoM. Sometimes it's the other writers/producers that pull him back, and sometimes it's the serendipitous way things work out.
Then there's the scene that Jensen touched on at a convention, where he felt he wasn't in a position to tell the creator of the character when the character felt OOC, but you could kind of tell he was really frustrated with it. And I think I know exactly which scene he was referring to.
it would have been easy if they honestly employed the "symmetry" they claim they like, except never end up doing
A lot of times, the writers talk a good game, but they're obviously trying to tell us what they think we want to hear. Kripke originally compared the show to Star Wars. And ya know? Luke (Sam) is the central figure in that mytharc. No two ways about it. (Until the prequels, which I refuse to acknowledge. *g*) If Sam is Luke and Dean is Han, then it's very clear that there actually is a hero and a sidekick (I do not use that term as a derogatory. I usually gravitate toward the sidekicks). Or perhaps hero and supporting roguish character (I never really considered Han a "sidekick"). The writers can claim as much "symmetry" as they like, but the model they originally compared the show to was not "symmetric." An ensemble cast, yes. But the story clearly revolved around one character.
So their whole thing about "it's about two brothers"--that I believe. But if they're using "symmetry" to describe the mytharc, then no. (As I've always said, I see Sam as the center of the mytharc, and Dean as the center of the emotional arc. And though the mytharc and the emotional arc are connected, they're still two separate things. And I find Dean's emotional arc to be more interesting and accessible than the mytharc. I hope that makes sense.)
(I don't think that word means what they think it means)
Incontheevable!!!!
*awards bonus points for Princess Bride reference* :-D
Going back to S1, I actually would say things were more of an even split in the hero moments. (I've touched on that a while back in my early S1 reviews.) Very early on, whichever character had the peril moment, that's the character who had the hero moment in that ep. Sometimes there were multiple hero moments, with each brother taking one.
But the mytharc has always been Sam's.
It just seems to me that Jensen turned Dean into a richer character than they were anticipating, and that he, in some ways, has become the . . . I'll say unsung hero . . . of the show. Dean is the constant source and representation of good. Yes, he's got his flaws, and there are certain things to which he has blinders, but he's the regular guy (meaning, sans "powers") who's fighting the good fight and trying to keep things together as best he can.
And now I'm just babbling.