Supernatural Round Table: A Poorly Handled Death

Pretty quiet around here. Thought I'd add this.

https://www.tvfanatic.com/2017/05/supernatural-round-table-a-poorly-handled-death/

Lucifer breaks free. Eileen is killed. Sam and Dean left to die? A lot happened on Supernatural Season 12 Episode 21, but was it handled the right way?

TV Fanatic staff writers Sean McKenna and Christine Laskodi and The Winchester Family Business' Alice and Nightsky were disappointed by plenty of what went down on "There's Something About Mary."

And some moments were less forgivable than others... Join in the Supernatural Round Table to let us know your thoughts on the hour.

What was your favorite scene or quote?

Christine: I enjoyed the whole scene of Sam and Dean getting Eileen's letter, realizing what ACTUALLY happened, and then searching the bunker. It felt like something out of a spy movie.

Alice: Pass. I was even mad at the end credits roll, wondering how Robert Singer, Andrew Dabb, Brad Buckner and Eugenie Ross-Leming deserved jobs after this.

Nightsky: I’d honestly have to rewatch the entire episode to see if I could find one. I hated that they killed Eileen, I was physically disturbed by Mary’s torture, I was embarrassed by the predictable and trite conversations between Hess and Ketch, then Ketch and Toni, and I was annoyed by the Crowley/Lucifer debacle. I seem to remember laughing at one line, but it isn’t standing out for me anymore.

Sean: There was a lot to dislike about this episode. And that's disappointing. But I really enjoyed the short gun fight in the bunker. It was cool to watch, and seeing Sam and Dean kick some ass was fun. Even that slide by Dean was pretty awesome. It's too bad what followed, however.

Were you disappointed by Eileen's death?

Christine: What was the point of even introducing Eileen? She was one of the best new hunters the show had introduced in SUCH a long time! Even more disappointing was HOW she went out. That's how "monster of the week" stories start, not how you kill off an established character with connections to the story.

Alice: You know, I just want to throw my hands up in the air because I really, really think that people running this show think we’re stupid and can be easily manipulated. As soon as she was brought back and started making googly eyes at Sam I knew she was toast.

I’m so damn tired that these writers (notorious for killing strong female characters) think that a death of a supporting character with some actual personality is supposed to drive an emotional plot. They fall back on it way too much, and it’s freaking lazy! I just roll my eyes and go, “These writers are clueless.”

There should be a rule in the writers room that says, “Hey, let’s surprise people and actually not kill characters. Lets put some effort into actually developing and evolving them. That would be different!”

The way she died was just pure lazy writing as if there weren’t 800 different ways to evoke an emotional reaction out of Sam. Bottom line, I’m tired of being treated like an idiot. This used to be a smart show.

Nightsky: Yes, incredibly. I felt betrayed by the show. It’s almost a joke now that they bring back characters that they know we love simply to kill them. Is this a game to them? Let’s see how far we can push fans’ emotions?

Eileen was not a disposable character to us – she was treasured and had so much promise. It was Charlie all over again.

Sean: I don't really get it. Her death was handled poorly, and there seemed like so much more that could come from her story. Having her killed like she was the random character to kick off the show was just disappointing.

What did you think of Mary being brainwashed?

Christine: At first I was annoyed, but then I remembered that it was exactly what Toni had tried to do to Sam earlier in the season, so it made sense. That being said, I still hate it. Much like Eileen, I feel like we were sold something different with Mary than what we've actually received.

If they wanted to brainwash Mary, why not do that straight from the get-go? Did they think she'd willingly do their dirty work? The plot holes in this story give me headaches.

Alice: I called it in my review last week. I should be bragging, but I really, really wish I was wrong. These plots are getting too damned predictable. I’m with Christine. If that was the purpose, why didn’t they do that when she first started working with the British Men of Letters?

From what we’ve learned from their rather bizarre (and totally inconceivable) backstory, the British Men of Letters are into that manipulation and obedience thing. I would think they would want that kind of obedience right away.

I’m just still mad that it’s episode 21 and the writers just continue to butcher her character. It’s been a waste of my time, that’s for sure.