3x06 Blatherings
More than anything, this episode left me uneasy. Plot changes I can handle. New characters I can handle. Brother angst I can handle. What seem to me like changes in fundamental characterization and show ethos, I apparently can’t.
Perhaps it’s the fact Raelle Tucker (who, IMHO, was one of the strongest writers for S1/2) has left the writer’s room and there’s a new crop of writers pulling Sam and Dean’s strings. Perhaps it’s the general unease about how the rest of the season will play out and the likelihood of a S4 renewal with the WGA strike. Perhaps it’s actually seeing Sam and Dean’s brotherly bond begin to unravel. Perhaps it has to do with how different Dean acts when Bela is around. But this is the first time I’ve been left confounded and slightly anxious after watching an episode. And I’m not talking about perplexed and worried in a mytharc plot direction sense or in an “oh, boys *smooshes*" way, but in a much more fundamental what-is-happening-overall-to-the-show way.
Let me first say that there were many good things about this episode. I laughed; I drooled; I made my “oh, boys” *squishes* face a bunch of times. Win. :) The special effects are getting better every week. I thought the MotW was interesting, in fact, I would’ve been quite happy if it had more screen time in lieu of other subplots. The second reference this season to the brothers, Cain and Abel, caught my attention and had me waiting for more, which unfortunately didn’t happen, but that’s fine. Overall, it was a good episode. So don’t think that what follows is me dumping on 3x06 because my knee jerk reaction was “I HATED EVERYTHING ABOUT IT” because that’s not true (I think it might be impossible for me to hate an episode). This is just me wondering out loud what is going on and if I’m the only one who feels this way.
I guess what worries me is that I’m sensing a diversion from what’s rooted the show since day one. The building of Sam and Dean’s bond has been the undercurrent moving around the surface plots and has persisted in a roughly upward trajectory regardless of the MotW, the failed exploratory subplots (the Roadhouse), romantic interests (Jo, even Cassie and Sarah), and even death (Mary, John, Sam’s). Although I’ve been gleeing over this since last season and maintaining that it’s going to be an angst ball of awesome (which I still think is true), finally seeing Sam and Dean’s relationship begin to fall apart is unsettling and disorienting. And my immediate reaction is to suddenly want familiar ground (S2) back. But maybe it’s good that S3 is moving out of viewers’ comfort zones because at least it won’t be the same old thing. And trying new things can’t be bad, can it?
Well, maybe it can…
So far we’ve seen a lot more humor this season, which I think is important to help off set the dark themes and uber angst. However, it seems like the nature of some of the humor has changed. We still get silliness at the expense of Sam and Dean (which is great) and Dean’s one-liners (also amusing), but a couple of remarks have struck a sour chord with me. Dean’s derogatory gay comment last episode rang untrue to me, but no big deal; it was one “joke”. But now, one episode later, we’re treated to Bela saying to Dean, “What? Are you a woman?” which was clearly meant to be demeaning. This has me wondering if this derogatory humor is finding a more permanent place in the show. I don’t know if it was supposed to soften the blow because it was said by a female character or not, but, Laurence Andries (the writer for this episode), I’m not amused.
You can argue that my pants are too tight. But despite all of the women-in-white-distressed-damsels we’ve seen over the last three seasons and Dean’s horn dog, oogling ways, I’ve never got the impression that women were being insulted or grossly objectified. Rather I got the opposite impression. I felt like women were sometimes held to a higher ideal, like they belong to this almost unobtainable life that Sam and Dean, more than anything else, longed for but wouldn’t let themselves become a part of. So instead, Sam and Dean got as close as they could without immersing themselves by helping and protecting them (like hungry people gazing though a window at a Christmas dinner they refuse join). Although to be fair Sam and Dean also helped men, but the majority of their cases involved single women, or single mothers. So, to me, these derogatory jokes seem contrary to what I always felt was part of the foundation of the show, and them repeatedly creeping into the show under the guise of humor worries me, makes me wonder where our show went and where things are headed.
I’ve read a couple of episode reactions. There seems to be a general dislike for Bela as a character. I can see where people are coming from; there are things about Bela that have me scratching my head, but I think it’s terrific that the show is trying to open up the world and explore beyond the hunter community. I think it’s gutsy to stick such an intelligent, cunning, and strong female character into a male-dominated show (and of course that’s going to create friction). I like the contrast of Bela’s posh upper class haughtiness with the boys’ working class grit. I think Lauren Cohen is good actress (much stronger and more polished than Katie Cassidy). I love the idea of Bela as a character, but bringing that character to life and integrating them into the existing cast of characters convincingly and seamlessly is something entirely different. It’s all about execution, which is so much more than creating a round character that looks good on paper.
In all fairness, it’s not Bela herself that bothers me, nor is it Lauren Cohan’s portrayal of Bela or her dynamic with JA. In fact, I probably would like Bela and Dean’s interactions if they were transplanted into a different show. My discomfort is more contextual than anything else; it’s the fact that Dean’s actions seem to contradict everything we know about him that has me cringing. I don’t understand why Dean tolerates her, keeps helping her, and expresses any form of respect toward someone who has repeatedly screwed him over by insulting, endangering, and abusing everything he holds dear. It’s that disconnect between Dean's beliefs and his behavior that makes their interactions feel contrived and forced. But Dean is here to stay and I’ve grown attached to him. He’s funny, loyal, all hard on the outside and a squishy marshmallow on the inside, a walking contradiction, which makes him an interesting character. However, he’s been a consistent contradiction. There were points in this episode where Dean was acting in a way that, to me, went against everything we know of him since S1. So the negative association falls on Bela’s shoulders by default. I want to like her, but it’s hard to accept her with open arms when I think Dean jumps characterization whenever she appears.
What’s Dean doing nodding his head in affirmative when Bela says she “barely grazed” Sam? Bela shot Sam, the one person Dean can’t live without, the one he traded his soul for, the only member of his family left, the one he has self-sworn to take care of and protect since the age of four. And beyond a few choice words and some jaw clenching, Dean didn’t do anything when Bela messed with his beloved car, the only thing he has left of John, the car that he’d probably marry if it was legal. Not only did she break into it and drive it, she got it towed and risked having their whole arsenal confiscated which, no doubt, would’ve lead Henricksen straight to him and Sam. Considering how wary the boys are around the police this season and how much we know Dean doesn’t want to spend the last year of his life in federal prison where there aren’t any Thai messages or cheeseburgers, his relatively mild reaction to the Impala getting impounded didn’t ring true for me. Furthermore, Dean doesn’t say a word in protest when Bela insulted John, his father, the man he molded his life after, the man he practically idolized. Is this the same Dean who defened John to Henricksen in “Nightshifter”? Dean’s entire story arc for the last two years has revolved around his love for his family, and to suddenly have him behave as if it’s not important had me frowning and shaking my head.
I know that the Winchester boys are forgiving and self-sacrificing and truly care about saving “people” but please tell me that my eyes and ear were deceiving me when Dean touched Bela protectively and said, “Stay close” in the graveyard. And after that, I didn’t hear Sam say, “She’s got style, gotta give her that” and Dean agree by saying, “I suppose.” And Dean didn’t smirk and look flattered when he realized Bela gave him a half compliment with her “Let’s have angry sex” line, right? *headdesk*
I’m also having a hard time seeing what purpose Bela’s presence serves in the broader story. I want her to fit, but the more I see of her the more it seems like she’s been brought in as merely a plaything to keep Dean occupied so Sam will be free to spin lies with Ruby. And while I understand the need to keep the show balanced to avoid the "third wheel pitfall" and create “reasonable” explanations to separate the boys, bringing in a character only to accomplish this is sloppy storytelling. Please, Kripke, give Bela a mytharc-related purpose, give her character more direction other than “yet another antagonist for the boys” because, with the exception of Bobby and Ellen, we already have a showload of them (Gordon, Henriksen, Kubric, Ruby, the RED’s boss, a hoard of demons and angry spirits, and the boys themselves). But more than anything else, please stop the derogatory humor. And please, please bring back our old Dean when Bela is around.
See why I shouldn’t write episode reactions? Oh, God, this is horrible. I swear, I still love the show *hugs the fictional show* and Dean *hugs Dean*.