Supernatural: Season 10, Episode More Peril, Please. Open Thread.

5-Supernatural-Season-10-Episode-1-S10E1-title-card-600x337

Catch ya on the flip side.

This entry was posted in Television and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

151 Responses to Supernatural: Season 10, Episode More Peril, Please. Open Thread.

  1. Helena says:

    Hahahahahhaa!

    But seriously, yes to more peril – and easy on the worms, eh?

  2. mutecypher says:

    “The sex, the lasagna…”

    I seriously disliked all of Sister Mathias’ eye-rolling. And I realize that one nun doesn’t have to stand in for all, but having her enter the life because of a bad romance…. yuck. I didn’t care for the actress at all.

    I did like the “He ain’t heavy, he’s my brother – The Hollies and Jesus” on the sign in front of St. Philomena’s. Was that a sign that some aspect of Isabella was separate from her bones – some blood?

  3. Paula says:

    Perilless yes.

    Am I the only one who gets a thrill when they start talking Men of Letters? Hidden boxes and rooms thoughout the bunker that we haven’t seen is a world unto itself. How can the writers not explore this more? And how does Sam even leave for a case when there are dusty stacks of books or amulets or artifacts squirreled away in there? Now Olivette drops that there are bunkers all over the world. I envision Sam on some type of cultural exchange program, showing up with his duffel bag at the Vienna bunker, while Dean is making hamburgers in Kansas for Hans the hunter.

    • sheila says:

      // Am I the only one who gets a thrill when they start talking Men of Letters? //

      Yes!! I just wrote that in my own comment below. I definitely got a thrill – and also got a thrill at the idea that there were bunkers around the world. I love the image of Hans the hunter in Vienna – ha!!

      I definitely would never leave the bunker.

      A while back, we all were talking about the bunker – and someone mentioned that they should host writer’s retreats in the bunker.

      I need to finish my Elvis book. I would like to do so in the bunker. Where do I apply, please?

  4. Lyrie says:

    Those flashbacks, seriously? Ugh.
    And, I’m bored with Rowena. Funny how the hamster-witch made me think of Amy-the-witch-rat in Buffy, though.

    I could watch Dean hit on nuns and Sam’s reaction to it all day long. But I kept wondering where Father Gregory was.

  5. Barb says:

    Into every season a clinker must fall, or so it would seem. Maybe I’ll like it better on re-watch.

    I actually liked Sister Mathias–she felt real to me. Plus, a nun/ghost whisperer? I’d take more of that, if they’re offering. And I liked the confessional scene, how it turned, not quite on a dime, maybe on a quarter, into Dean’s realization that he does in fact, want more out of life than to die bloody. Nicely done. (But who is Gina?)

    As for the subplot with Crowley and Rowena, it feels like the wheels are finally starting to roll, however squeakily–but I was beginning to look forward to the Grand Coven’s entrance, and bored Crowley paired with over the top Rowena–yikes! I’ve decided that I like it better, and it feels more perilous, when the audience only gets glimmers of what the Big Bads are up to in the shadows. For a moment there, I thought I was watching Dynasty! I like the bringing it back around to the Men of Letters, but Rowena makes my teeth hurt. More menace, more peril, please!

    At least Dean had the grace to roll his eyes a bit when Sam launched into this week’s, “You’re not giving up!” refrain. Again, a nice note to hit.

    • Tatl Tael says:

      //But who is Gina?//

      I don’t think Gina is a real person. Sam and Dean decided that the ghost was targeting people who had confessed to infidelity, so he went and confessed to cheating on “Gina” in order to draw out the vengeful spirit.

      It’s not until the priest says, “Is there anything else on your mind, Agent Allman?” That Dean starts to genuinely confess (“What if I said I didn’t want to die yet, that I wasn’t ready?”). His tone completely changes and the music starts to indicate the change.

    • sheila says:

      // it feels like the wheels are finally starting to roll //

      hamster wheels, definitely, are rolling.

      I liked Sam being all fatherly and giving Dean a pep talk and asking Dean to say that line again, only with feeling and enthusiasm. It’s an interesting dynamic right now and I do like the exploration of it.

      Repetitive yes, but not AS repetitive as Dean giving Sam pep-talks which basically went on for 6 straight seasons without one single break.

  6. mutecypher says:

    You know, the next time Sam and Dean encounter a ghost, I wish they’d have the ghost do something useful like this.

    Did I miss it, was there an explanation why Sam was driving in the last scene?

    • sheila says:

      No explanation, but it makes sense because that scene was “run” by Sam. He was in the driver’s seat of the scene. It felt very fatherly and having Sam driving helped with that dynamic, I thought.

  7. sheila says:

    Haven’t watched yet, but am happy to see my favorite Stones song referenced in the title. I’m shocked it hasn’t been used yet.

  8. Pat says:

    During Dean’s confession, my ears pricked up when he started in on saying there are experiences that he may be missing out on…. my mind went right to Destiel.

    Sound like the end of the season may include a big witch/Winchester showdown in the bunker. Oh, I hope the bunker is not destroyed and the boys don’t have to go on the road again. I love that place and want them to have a stable roof over their heads.

    • sheila says:

      // my ears pricked up when he started in on saying there are experiences that he may be missing out on //

      I’m not a Destiel person, so my mind went to women/fatherhood – as we have babbled on in the comments section – not recently but a while back. Dean as Parent! Yes! His libido seems to be creeping back into the sunshine as well. It was good to see Dean have the impulse to flirt again. It’s been a while.

      I gave my thoughts on him signing up for a dating app, which many seemed to despise. I have a different take on it. I know the dating app was just a dumb plot-point and it’s never been referenced again – but I saw it as very hopeful, even if he just wanted to hook up with women, one night stands, whatever (I don’t judge him for his hook-up propensities – hooking up is a sign of Life and that you think you are worth something) and I am clearly over-identifying due to my own issues with romance and also doing online dating right now. I was like, “You go, Dean. I feel like a piece of shit nobody too but I’m going on dates and I’m making out with people and whatEVER, I GET TO DO THIS TOO.” Ha.

      In regards to the bunker: I know, right??

      To my conspiratorial friends: we need to get cracking on our bunker floor plan before the powers that be burn the whole thing down!!

      • Lyrie says:

        Yes! He looked at that nun like she was a birthday cake in a sheriff’s office and that made me very happy too.

        • sheila says:

          This goes back to my Wendigo re-cap, for God’s sake – and my whole thing about Dean and reacting to women. He gets thrown off. He’s not “over” women. And a woman who has chosen to renounce sex? Well. That must be like catnip.

          I loved Sam clocking Dean flirting with an eyeroll and then excusing himself.

          I like how Sam and Dean don’t really cock-block each other.

          • Natalie says:

            //I like how Sam and Dean don’t really cock-block each other.//

            Although, in this case, Jesus was kind of the one doing the cock-blocking.

          • sheila says:

            Yeah, that’s true.

          • Lyrie says:

            OK. So. I know what cock-block means. But I can’t help it, my sick brain sees two grown up fighting with their cocks. A little like children do fake sword fights with stick, except, you know, grown men Sam & Dean Winchester, naked, doing it with their turgescent dicks. Hey, I didn’t say it was right, it’s just what my brain makes up!
            And now, Natalie has added Jesus to the mix.
            That’s disturbing. #You’reWelcome

          • May says:

            //Although, in this case, Jesus was kind of the one doing the cock-blocking.//

            HA!

          • Jessie says:

            Sam’s a cake-blocker not a cock-blocker.

      • Natalie says:

        //my mind went to women/fatherhood//

        I know this may come as a shock, but same here ;-)

        (I have a plan to get him there, SPN writers! Use me!)

        • sheila says:

          They really need to have you on retainer for your story ideas as it is.

          Would love to hear how you would get him there.

          • Natalie says:

            //They really need to have you on retainer for your story ideas as it is.//

            Aww, thanks!

            //Would love to hear how you would get him there.//

            It’s more of a rough outline, and some of it would depend on what they’re already planning for the characters. But I can tell you it starts with my Labyrinth episode, and the new character I would be introducing there :-)

        • May says:

          And, to the surprise of no one, my mind went there, too.

          We are a wasted resource, SPN writers!

  9. sheila says:

    This episode was nuts. No peril whatsoever!! But I actually enjoyed its loopy ridiculous all-over-the-place-ness, with Piero in his pirate shirt and the cat-fight between the witches – where I honestly could not even follow what the hell they were talking about, and the sepia-toned gauzy flashbacks which were so cheesy I couldn’t believe it – with hot moaning sex sounds in the next room (damn you, SPN, says Sheila, because neither Sam or Dean are having any sex at all right now, and I, for one, am missing it – so now you give me some sex, only it’s that Russell Brand look-alike in 1520 Florence and I couldn’t care less about any of it!), as well as the hamster in the wheel with the red necklace on.

    They put a freakin’ red necklace on a hamster, people. They made a small version of the large necklace and put it on a freakin’ hamster and I am laughing out loud just typing these words.

    The evil nun blowing out behind the good nun? Inadvertently hilarious. It looked like the good nun had eaten some toxic Mexican food or something and was experiencing some serious gastrointestinal distress.

    I also am glad to see that the edicts of Vatican II in regards to nun’s habits have somehow not reached that one particular parish, even though Vatican II was, like, 50 years ago.

    Same church as Houses of the Holy – at least those front steps were!

    The confession scene was great – Dean saying “It makes me sick” – I laughed out loud. Dean always goes too far. Gina! Haha. “sex and lasagna.” But then it got serious – and I liked how that section was written. This is new kind of language for Dean – and we’ve seen some of that in this season (mostly in those immediately post-demon episodes)- Dean said in the confession scene he wants to experience people and “feelings” – “in a new way” – Pretty major shift in language!! – and of course JA played it great.

    In an episode as ridiculous as this one – where I can’t care at all about the coven, or about Piero and his Renaissance-era lover or about Crowley – I need to grasp onto that psychological stuff with the brothers, and I loved all the Sam/Dean stuff in this episode. I loved Sam in this episode. He felt very loose. I’ve missed his humor – it was good to see it operating. It wasn’t a comedic episode, but the dynamic between the brother felt loose, comedic, and sponteneous. That, for me, is blood to a vampire. It’s why I love their “so what are we dealing with and how do we kill it” conversations because the two of them usually find a way to make it interesting/funny/unexpected.

    Dean talking to Sam and referring to her casually as “okay so hot nun said such and such …”

    Again: laughing.

    Even Mark Sheppard seems bored with his role right now. Yes, Crowley is bored. But what an undramatic choice. Where are his stakes? What does he want? Why don’t I care?

    I liked the pep talk in the car at the end.

    Still laughing, though, about the fuzzy Piero flashbacks and the ghost-nun blowing out of the backside of the good-nun. lulz for days …

    And Helena – didn’t you just mention the Men of Letters in a comment recently? I had been missing them as well, so it was good to hear those words spoken again.

    Can’t get over the little red hamster necklace. That, for me, is the takeaway of this episode.

  10. Lyrie says:

    // They put a freakin’ red necklace on a hamster, people. They made a small version of the large necklace and put it on a freakin’ hamster and I am laughing out loud just typing these words.//
    Now that you’ve mentioned it, that’s probably all I’ll ever see next time I watch the scene. Hilarious!

    // Same church as Houses of the Holy – at least those front steps were! //
    The inside too!

    This is new kind of language for Dean – and we’ve seen some of that in this season (mostly in those immediately post-demon episodes)- Dean said in the confession scene he wants to experience people and “feelings” – “in a new way” – Pretty major shift in language!! – and of course JA played it great.//
    I gasped when he said “feelings”. Wow, so great to see a character evolve.

    • sheila says:

      Right! Just the word “feelings” – like, what??

      I’m thinking back now on Season 3 – when he was in denial about facing death – and then finally started to want to live – Supernatural Christmas (heartcrack) – and all of those other moments where Dean had to decide he was worth fighting for.

      It’s kind of the same thing happening now. But it feels even more precarious – Dean seems more fragile now than he did back then.

      Prop person’s husband: “Hey, honey, how was work?”
      Prop person: “…. okay.”
      Prop person’s husband: “What’s wrong? So what’d you have to create today? An ancient dragon sword? A pewter bowl filled with blood? More rock-salt bullets?”
      Prop person: “Nope. Just a teeny-tiny red necklace for a hamster. I don’t understand my life anymore.”

      • Lyrie says:

        Ha ha!
        Sheila, when you are a showrunner and doing the awesomest of all tv shows, I want to work with you.

      • Helena says:

        //And Helena – didn’t you just mention the Men of Letters in a comment recently?//

        I did. And I need to be very very careful what I wish for.
        Ok, the hamster necklace was cool.

        And the habits reminded me of Ida. Who wears habits like that? That’s not a rhetorical question.

        • sheila says:

          I’m a Catholic in America and nuns do not wear habits like that.

          It reminded me of Ida, too – but that took place in 1962!

          I don’t know if I would call the hamster necklace cool – but I do know that I am still laughing about it. Super silly and stupid! (I love silly and stupid.)

          • Natalie says:

            //I’m a Catholic in America and nuns do not wear habits like that.//

            I grew up Catholic (I’m not anymore, not that that’s relevant), went to 12 years of Catholic schools (including an all-girls Catholic high school), and even worked for a Catholic social service agency after college that had a nun as the executive director and several more nuns on staff. I’ve known a lot of nuns in my life. Few of them wore habits at all, and the ones who did all joined the convent prior to 1950. And NONE of them wore habits like that. (Also, I don’t think I’ve ever met a nun who was younger than 40. And that was back in the 90’s.)

          • sheila says:

            The costume designer saw Ida, I’m sure of it.

      • Helena says:

        // Supernatural Christmas (heartcrack)//

        God, I thought of that too … I need to watch that episode right now.

  11. Helena says:

    Deep breath.

    Ok, I’ve calmed my nerves with a few shots of the hard stuff.

    General assessment – more in sorrow than anger – What was with everything in that episode? I. Just. Can’t. Even.

    On the plus side, it was totally Anne Radcliffe. I’ve just read the Castle of Otranto (and I deserve a MEDAL for it) which is replete with bloody corpses, bad stuff happening in Italy, thwarted love, haunted paintings and ghostly nuns going bonkersly batshit. I held onto that thought amid the scene after scene of smouldering looks (oh just stab the guy already), ugly paintings (aagh, my eyes!) and sex noises (NOOOO!). To be fair, I think I missed quite a lot of the plot details because for a large proportion of this episode my fingers were jammed in my ears, my eyes were screwed shut and I was making silent screaming noises.

    But, as for what was going on … a nun/ghost with a weird accent turns up at the church and Sister Whatnot was totally ‘Whatevs’ about it and, by the way, she and the priest are totally unphased by a rash of suicides among the parishioners which, whether or not suicide still counts as a mortal sin is still, you know, a rash of suicides.

    Accents. What was with Sister Ghostly-Murderer’s whistlestop vocal tour of the Mediterranean via Italy, Spain, Greece and then straight up the Bosphorus to the Black Sea and all the way to Vladivostock?

    I thought the confession scene worked – it brought something a bit new to the MoC thing. I enjoyed the slightly elbows out Sam-Dean working relationship thing – a bit of professional jostling always brings joy.

    At least I’ve realised what Crowley’s current situation reminds me of, which is the venerable BBC production of I, Claudius – the decline of the Roman Empire, Nero and Messalina and lots of fiddling.

    A lost opportunity for a witches vs nuns death match.

    Marks for peril? Nil, nil, nil.

    • sheila says:

      // What was with Sister Ghostly-Murderer’s whistlestop vocal tour of the Mediterranean via Italy, Spain, Greece and then straight up the Bosphorus to the Black Sea and all the way to Vladivostock? //

      hahahahahahahahaha

      // replete with bloody corpses, bad stuff happening in Italy, thwarted love, haunted paintings and ghostly nuns going bonkersly batshit. //

      Wow. Sounds like a 1 to 1 correlation!!

      It was also, to mention a certain name again, Ken Russell-ish. Or … not enough. If you are going to remind me of Ken Russell, with homoerotic hot-house nun talk about love affairs … then you need to do a bit more with it. The whole episode was totally silly – and I PREFER silly, my favorite episodes are the silly ones – but maybe it wasn’t silly enough.

      Going back and forth between Rowena and the Nuns plot-line did not work for me.

      In general: and I know I keep saying this:

      Crowley no longer matters and neither does Castiel. I would be so fine with Sam and Dean doing Monsters of the Week stuff and obsessing about the Mark. That’s more than enough to keep things going. Similar to Season 3 – which it is reminding me of a lot. That season was a march towards an inevitable end – and along the way – they worked cases, and talked about what to do, and that was the Season. Worked great.

      I definitely don’t think this is the worst clinker of the season. For me, that would be the werewolf one, early on – although that one had all those great Sam/Dean conversations – which were fantastic. But the actress was not up to her role, she could not hold the screen with those two guys at ALL, and she was in it too much, too many flashbacks – to me, that episode really didn’t work in a far more serious way than this one. It felt amateurish.

      This one just felt insane and like everyone was on drugs. hahahahahaha

      • Helena says:

        //Worked great.//

        It did. I love Season 3 (didn’t used to. Took a while.) Interesting, though, it was a 15 episode season, which possibly meant hard choices about focussing on the central story line. All the stronger for it.

        //This one just felt insane and like everyone was on drugs.//

        Hahaha, I’ll go with that theory! ‘And then they all woke up and it was all a dream.’ But as you also say, perhaps not quite insane enough. To give the ep some props, this kind of story telling – the novelistic quality of the flashbacks, starting almost medias res with the two nuns – is a new thing for Supernatural, but the flipping between the Crowley/Rowena and Winchester narratives sucked much of the life out of both for me.

        I recently read the ‘Chaos Walking’ trilogy by Patrick Ness. It’s written in an unusual way – about three narrative POVs, all written in very different voices, and flipping them very rapidly (lots of adventure and PERIL, it’s a YA novel) – it’s like lots of very short chapters, all with their own climaxes. I thought it worked brilliantly for the first volume, less so in the second where the action and number of characters expanded and by the third volume, jumping around from narrators with them all having to have a cliffhanger every second page was a fatal flaw. I feel that with episodes like this. Less is more. Flipping manically between two different story lines doesn’t necessarily create more suspense or tension. It can have the opposite result, it can drain it all away.

        So yeah, I think I’m going to watch A Very Supernatural Christmas, which does one thing very well indeed. :-)

        • sheila says:

          // Flipping manically between two different story lines doesn’t necessarily create more suspense or tension. It can have the opposite result, it can drain it all away. //

          Yes, definitely! I have felt that a bit in the Game of Thrones books – which has all of these different POVs – many many many POVS – but the good thing there is that if one storyline bores you, you know it’ll only be 10 pages or so before you’re onto the next thing. That doesn’t work so well in an episode that only lasts 40 minutes. Less is more is definitely the best way to go – and the best SPN episodes are focused – with one spine, one theme – one driving source of tension. Even the more complicated episodes of Season 5 – with all that chatter about Michael and vessels and angels and devils circling around Sam and Dean and all that – it still felt very focused. One big long thru-line.

          Here, it just goes back to the fact that Crowley doesn’t seem a part of the series anymore. As much as I love him. And I’ve been bored with Castiel since … well, season 6 really although I liked him getting out of Purgatory – but for me the time he was most relevant was when he was in service to the guys. A sidekick. And that whole “betrayal” sequence – was really good – when Bobby/Sam/Dean realized that Castiel had been spying on them – the sense of disconnection was palpable and devastating, because he was in service to them, and so much a part of their mission.

          Now he isn’t at all. But that’s been true for a while.

          Crowley feeling so secondary is a surprise though – considering who he was at the start of this season, and the end of last season.

          I’m sure events will spiral into a big climax, and Crowley will rise. I almost wish we had had more time with Dean as a Demon. But I am sure there will be a huge back-slide after all this nice “I want to live my life and feel new feelings” bit from Dean.

          • Lyrie says:

            //I almost wish we had had more time with Dean as a Demon.//
            I was thinking that this morning, too. It feels like it should have been a bigger part of the story. But there’s still time.

          • Natalie says:

            //I’m sure events will spiral into a big climax, and Crowley will rise.//

            God, I hope so!

    • sheila says:

      and yes, Helena – I, Claudius – very good call!!

  12. Jill V says:

    A lot of episodes in the series were “filler” for me. In this season, just about every episode seems like “filler” interspersed with moments of greatness. I feel like every scene with Sam and Dean is breaking new ground with regards to them finally learning to communicate like grown-ups. Talking about feelings, wanting to better themselves and get out of their ruts, finally getting a sense of who they are and not who they think they should be. I know the Internet exploded with Destiel after that confession scene but I also saw a more generic declaration. Wanting a relationship, one that he enters into without a promise made to Sam. Not that I don’t absolutely love Lisa, but would he have gone if he hadn’t promised Sam? I see him wanting to experience dating, having a family. He sees the end of the tunnel and is realizing he wants a chance for a different life.
    And as much as I am bored to tears with Hell’s court I absolutely adore Rowena’s over the top dramatics. That curtsy? I died laughing. Not to mention the little chuckle with the “Winchesters again, perpetually the Winchesters.” What show have you been watching, lady?
    I think we’ve taken a rambling path to get to this point but the rest of the season should be a bit more exciting.

    • sheila says:

      Jill –

      // I feel like every scene with Sam and Dean is breaking new ground with regards to them finally learning to communicate like grown-ups. //

      I totally feel the same way. I am enjoying it very much.

      // I know the Internet exploded with Destiel after that confession scene but I also saw a more generic declaration. //

      I was not aware of the Internet exploding with Destiel, but I am not surprised.

      // Wanting a relationship, one that he enters into without a promise made to Sam. Not that I don’t absolutely love Lisa, but would he have gone if he hadn’t promised Sam? I see him wanting to experience dating, having a family. He sees the end of the tunnel and is realizing he wants a chance for a different life. //

      I like how you put this. That’s kind of how I saw it too.

    • sheila says:

      // Not to mention the little chuckle with the “Winchesters again, perpetually the Winchesters.” What show have you been watching, lady? //

      Ha! She doesn’t know what show she’s in. She thinks it’s the Rowena Show.

      If I were Mark Sheppard though, I’d be bored out of my mind. He has nothing to do now but look bored.

      I am enjoying Season 10 though – overall.

  13. sheila says:

    “Oh my gosh, Sister Whatever, another nun just blew out of your backside.”
    “Thank goodness. I thought I had food poisoning! What a relief!”

  14. bainer says:

    Okay, I’d had a glass of wine, or two, but still I love Rowena. The actress’ choices are so theatrical (I know she has a theater background). I don’t know if that accent is real or not but every word is so enunciated and every move is so big; she is totally witchy. She is a witch, I really believe it. I’d love to see her and Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix go at it. They’d burn up the screen.

    • Jessie says:

      I enjoy Rowena as well, and I am kind of looking forward to seeing her go nuclear on the MoL bunker. Bring some real thunder and lightning, pending budget. I just wish she was being used in a richer and more interesting and messed-up storyline.

  15. Helena says:

    Talking of nuns and Ken Russell … The following will demonstrate how the ep didn’t go far enough.

    A while back I went to an exhibition about the Gothic in popular culture. Being the British Library they had a fabulous display of early editions of Gothic novels. The following is on title page of The Monk, a success de scandale of its time. Imagine every line set in a different typeface.

    THE MONK
    A Romance
    In which is depicted the
    Wonderful Adventures of Ambrosio
    Friar of the Order of Capuchins
    Who was Diverted from the Track of Virtue by the
    Artifices of a Female Demon
    That entered his Monastery Disguised as a Novice
    And after Seducing Him from His
    VOW OF CELIBACY
    Presented him with
    A BRANCH OF ENCHANTED MYRTLE
    to obtain the person the person of the beautiful
    ANTONIA OF MADRID
    How he was
    Discovered in her chamber
    by Her Mother, Whom He Murdered
    to keep his crime a Secret
    And the particulars of the means by which he saved
    The Body of Antonia (This line set in BlackLetter type)
    t0 be conveyed to the
    Dreary Vaults of his own Convent
    Where he accomplished his Wicked Machinations
    on the Innocent Virgin, whom he then
    ASSASSINATES WITH A DAGGER
    Presented to him by his Attendant Fiend
    Who afterwards betrays him to the Judges of the Inquisition
    In the dungeons of which he is confined and suffers Tortures
    and and how, to escape from thence he assigns over his
    SOUL AND BODY TO THE DEVIL
    Who deceives him and inflicts a
    MOST IGNOMINIOUS DEATH.

    All of which makes Crowley and Rowena look like a bunch of amateurs.

    I just love that they have the confidence to spill the entire plot on the title page.

  16. May says:

    Perhaps I’m feeling extra critical today, but I’m not feeling very charitable towards this episode. I really disliked those cheesy flashbacks. They were just sort of…there. They felt very clunky to me, like they were randomly placed in the episode willy-nilly.

    I did enjoy the BMs. And Dean’s confession scene.

    • Natalie says:

      Dean’s confession scene, as far as I’m concerned, was pretty much the reason for this episode. (I was also excited to see Teryl Rothery.)

      • sheila says:

        // Dean’s confession scene, as far as I’m concerned, was pretty much the reason for this episode. //

        Yes. I agree. They probably wrote that scene first and then built the episode around it. “We need to have Dean in a confessional booth. I know! Hot young nuns! Flashback to Florence! Pirate shirts! Hamster wheel! Hamster necklace!”

        You know, something like that.

        • mutecypher says:

          I wonder if the Florence flashback will pay forward to Charlie’s trip to Tuscany for Chas Fort’s The Book of the Damned.

          Maybe it was just there to remind us of her, like Dean’s use of the word “idjit” in an episode before Bobby shows up.

      • Jessie says:

        Natalie — Teryl Freaking Rothery!! Dr Fraser!!! Gracing us for the second time on Supernatural. Loved her hair. Loved the lines on her face. Loved her wandering accent. I need her unhamstered pronto.

    • sheila says:

      Very clunky flashbacks. And so cheesy – like a 1980s music video, or like one of the videos you see on the screen when you sing karaoke and it has nothing to do with the song.

      You’re singing “You Should Hear How He Talks About You” in Koreatown and the screen shows a guy in a pirate shirt painting a portrait with candles lit around the room.

      • Helena says:

        //You’re singing “You Should Hear How He Talks About You” in Koreatown and the screen shows a guy in a pirate shirt painting a portrait with candles lit around the room.//

        Like a Kindle Cover Disaster!

      • Jessie says:

        The flashbacks were the first time (apart from Bloodlines an episode that doesn’t exist) where I thought the show really did look like its CW sisters, Reign and Vampire Diaries etc. Lost any distinctiveness. The Grand Coven business doesn’t help either.

        • sheila says:

          The flashbacks were so embarrassing. Even when the show is dumb, it’s rarely embarrassing!

          and nice strike-out with Bloodlines. I am so annoyed, by the way, that they wasted a perfectly good commentary track on Bloodlines – as opposed to devoting the time/energy to another episode that people actually care about. I mean, I get it, everyone was hoping it would be a “go” – and I don’t fault anyone for that – but still!

          • Jessie says:

            Ha ha, I know! I would say the show’s nadir is Man’s Best Friend With Benefits and even that wasn’t embarrassing.

            I haven’t even bothered to listen to the Bloodlines commentary. I was wondering if they would really get deep into why it didn’t work, but I was too disheartened to give it a shot. It’s definitely not worth wasting a commentary on if they don’t dissect the crap out of it.

    • Jessie says:

      May, I’m in the same headspace. I would love to be able to embrace the ridiculousness like Sheila! On rewatch, this will have to be our Route 666 of Season 10 I think.

      But yesterday, I felt like the whole time I was watching I was also watching the parallel episode when it felt like more than a bunch of scenes shambled together with echoes making me think of other episodes that did it better (Roadkill, Houses of the Holy, Long Distance Call, Malleus Malleficarium, A Little Slice of Kevin). Where it was darker, less glossy.

      I do treasure that shot of Dean in the confessional.

      • Lyrie says:

        // this will have to be our Route 666 of Season 10 I think.//
        Same writers, btw. Since they’re also responsible for other not-so-subtle episodes, I’m not sure it’s a coincidence.

      • sheila says:

        I definitely think the episode was a total mess, but I did laugh my way through the whole thing. With embarrassment at some points, but also … hamster-necklace, backside-nun-blowout. I mean, they all had to know this whole episode was cray-cray, right?

        • sheila says:

          and I really liked your point how the episode had no distinctive “look” – especially with those terrible flashbacks.

        • Jessie says:

          I think laughter is definitely the key here! And this threat is helping! I try not to regret the choices that aren’t made when I watch stuff, to judge it by what it could have been instead of what it is — so easy to be an armchair writer/director — but episodes like this make it hard.

          Those infernal lazy flashbacks — so unnecessary! Did we learn nothing from Werewolf Girl Episode?

        • Jessie says:

          Another thing we can appreciate this episode for is Dean’s awkward almost-bow-curtsy towards the altar when the Grey Narcissus made the sign of the cross, which was hilariously cute and spoke to me on many levels. Well, two levels.

      • May says:

        //On rewatch, this will have to be our Route 666 of Season 10 I think.//

        I think this is the case. Perhaps if I watch it again (someday, not anytime soon) I will be able to laugh at it. But not today. Not today.

  17. Helena says:

    //// my ears pricked up when he started in on saying there are experiences that he may be missing out on //

    I’m not a Destiel person, so my mind went to women/fatherhood //

    My mind went to … sudoku, Olympic figure skating, bungee jumping, Carnival in Rio, morris dancing, cheeserolling, running a marathon dressed as Spongebob Squarepants, javelin throwing, restoring frescos, artisanal breadmaking, organic farming, swimming the English Channel, yoga holiday, mystery shopper, adopting a rescue hedgehog.

  18. Lyrie says:

    Jessie: // Sam’s a cake-blocker not a cock-blocker. //
    Sometimes I wish we could FAV comments like on Twitter. *FAV*

  19. Jessie says:

    I’m wondering a lot of things about the MoC and Dean’s cures and medicines and all sorts and I gotta write this down, sort of…take a few notes here because these conversations about the MoC and not being able to get over it or go under it and having to go through it or whatever are getting me more and more muddled; I hope you guys can help me with my read of it.

    The MoC is not a literal death sentence.* It’s the threat of the loss of self. When Sam faced that threat (several times in several guises now) it was corruption and penetration, losing himself to the forces that have gained entry to him. Avenues of resistance are relatively easy to spot. With Dean, it’s about losing himself to a toxic version of his vocation, Daddy’s little Soldier, the thing that gives him pride and purpose and costs him just about everything.

    *Except where it is, when someone has to put an end to Dean Cain.

    What’s working for me in this storyline is that it’s not about Sam.* It’s about Dean’s relationship to himself and his roles. Who is he? Hunter in the guise of helper/saviour; or hunter in the guise of Alistair’s torturer/demon? He’s vascillated between these two poles before. And the show seems to be implying that Dean’s “cure” is finding a way to become a new version of himself, or be at peace, or…something, right? And Dean himself seems to think that the way to get to this is through hunting, fighting the good fight with bro, finding simple pleasures etc. Increasingly this strategy seems to be less a way of carving a new identity for himself and more a way of coping with the inevitable loss of self.

    *Except in the way that everything’s about Sam.

    Hunting, we know, has been problematic for Dean and he’s never really been able to see his way to an identity where hunting isn’t both “the thing that I am great at that helps me contribute and makes me feel good about myself” and “the thing that compromises and destroys me and the people around me that I fail at all the time.” This has always seemed pretty unresolveable.

    And this leads me to wonder about the bunker and the MoL. I’ve said before that Sam and Dean make the bunker a place of synthesis, sapping some of the opposition out of those hoary binaries: male/female, brain/brawn, hunter/MoL, nature/nurture, disciplined/wild. I wonder if the spectre of John F.U. Winchester has appeared so many times this season so that he can finally be salted-and-burned, and some conception of hunter can emerge divorced from Daddy’s Good Little Soldier? Maybe the purpose of this episode is to show that Dean can, like, we must presume, tonight’s congregation, find a way to go on despite being pèreless.

    I don’t doubt that there will be confrontations and battles and that Dean’s medicines will involve violence and that someone will probably die at the end of this season, or at least fail in some spectacular way. These roundabout conversations are just kind of doing my head in at the moment. What is y’all’s reading on what they’re getting at here?

    Other Wonderings.

    Sam, Sam, how does your research grow? Someone on tumblr said that you must be on page 4000 of Search The Web results for “Mark of Cain” by now. You poor desperate sausage. I am guessing that the real ultimate game of this episode is to get you all up into witchcraft, thus fulfilling last week’s “nice guys don’t win” prophecy.*

    *I’m so sorry Sam, I didn’t mean to call you a nice guy.

    Dean, did you actually get stabbed at the end there or are you getting ready for another one of those befisted “sidekicks in a Raphael painting” poses?

    Crowley, is any part of your story ever going to remember that with the “half-cured by Sam’s blood” thing that sent you down this path or should I give up that theory of your characterisation?

    • May says:

      I have jumbly thoughts about this! I think I’ll be spending much of my free time at work thinking up a reply that makes sense.

      But until then…

      //Sam, Sam, how does your research grow?//

      Sam’s seeming obsession with finding a “cure” for the MOC, instead of finding a way to help Dean to live with it, makes me wonder. (Perhaps it’s too early for him to think this way? Does some part of him need Dean to always be his idea of “Dean,” instead of who he really is?)

      //It’s about Dean’s relationship to himself and his roles . . . Increasingly this strategy seems to be less a way of carving a new identity for himself and more a way of coping with the inevitable loss of self.//

      It sort of seems like Dean’s old coping mechanisms don’t work anymore. Maybe Dean wanting more out of life is the way to go. Love, as cheesy as it sounds, seems to be the thing to keep the MOC in check. (I’m trying hard to keep personal theories of Dean and fatherhood from breaking in here…BUT IT IS REALLY HARD, YOU GUYS.)

      • Natalie says:

        //Does some part of him need Dean to always be his idea of “Dean,” instead of who he really is?//

        I would say yes to this. It all goes back to Dean being Sam’s mother figure. (You’re lucky I don’t have time to go into a lecture about attachment theory right now lol.) Seeing a different side of one’s primary attachment figure can be very stressful and destabilizing, even in adulthood, especially if it’s a significant or threatening change.

        //Maybe Dean wanting more out of life is the way to go. Love, as cheesy as it sounds, seems to be the thing to keep the MOC in check. (I’m trying hard to keep personal theories of Dean and fatherhood from breaking in here…BUT IT IS REALLY HARD, YOU GUYS.)//

        This would all play so perfectly into my plan!!! Seriously, SPN! Hire me!

        • Barb says:

          I agree completely with this, and would add that I think this is the reason that there is so often an undercurrent of anger in Sam when he thinks Dean is giving up. When he says “you don’t get to give up on this family”–what he means is, of course, “you don’t get to leave me.” And maybe, taking it a step further, “I’m the one who gets to leave, not you.”

          • Natalie says:

            //And maybe, taking it a step further, “I’m the one who gets to leave, not you.”//

            Oh, yeah. That’s there for sure.

          • May says:

            //Seeing a different side of one’s primary attachment figure can be very stressful and destabilizing, even in adulthood, especially if it’s a significant or threatening change.//

            //And maybe, taking it a step further, “I’m the one who gets to leave, not you.”//

            Yes. I’ve always thought this, too. Parent-Dean is my favourite topic to harp on and it is frequently Sam’s attitude (or seeming unconscious feelings) that have fed the theory the most. Sam both pushes Dean away, while clinging to him, in a way that reminds me of a child with its mother/parent. He wants a life outside of Dean, on his own terms, but also needs Dean to always be there to go back to if he needs him.

        • May says:

          //(You’re lucky I don’t have time to go into a lecture about attachment theory right now lol.)//

          I would like to hear this lecture, please. (Seriously, if you ever want to go into that. Please do! Facebook message me if you don’t think it’s appropriate for here!)

          • Natalie says:

            It really is more to do with a lack of time and energy to organize my thoughts about it. I have my 2-year-old niece this weekend. Maybe I’ll have time when she takes her nap tomorrow. In the meantime, here’s a basic explanation of the theory, so I can just go straight into my thoughts about how it applies to the Winchesters when I do get around to it:

            https://explorable.com/bowlby-attachment-theory

      • Barb says:

        Dean and fatherhood. YES, please! What if we sent the writers a fruit basket?

      • Jessie says:

        I got the impression a couple of episodes ago from Sam’s thrice-daily pep talk that Sam thinks the Power of Love and Self-Acceptance has gotta be part of it. But Cain’s backsliding has maybe made that more difficult for them to believe in.

        Does some part of him need Dean to always be his idea of “Dean,” instead of who he really is?)
        Yeah, but….don’t we all? None of us have direct access to the true reallyness of someone else. I think more than needing Dean to be his idea of Dean, what he wants is for Dean to be okay, and to perform that okayness in a way that Sam recognises. I don’t mean that he wants Dean to pretend to be okay when he’s not okay (as we see at the end of the Cain ep) but that neither of them are really sure what signals “okayness” any more, and it’s tied up with that whole Winchester belljar where they’re constantly checking in on each other. At the end of this episode I I felt like telling Sam to hush, dude…Dean will talk to you when he wants and it’s okay if he doesn’t want….

        Sam has talked a lot about how he’s Dean’s brother this season. I don’t get the feeling that he thinks of Dean, consciously or unconsciously, as a mother-figure. I think maybe the problem is that he doesn’t trust Dean to relate to him like a brother (or what Sam thinks of as a brother).

        • May says:

          //Sam has talked a lot about how he’s Dean’s brother this season. I don’t get the feeling that he thinks of Dean, consciously or unconsciously, as a mother-figure. I think maybe the problem is that he doesn’t trust Dean to relate to him like a brother (or what Sam thinks of as a brother).//

          I certainly don’t think Sam would agree that he thinks of Dean (consciously or unconsciously) as a mother-figure. I don’t think Dean would agree, either. They see their relationship as a brotherly one. And it very much is, in most ways.

          But, Dean also played a big caregiver role in Sam’s life, and that has affected the dynamic of their relationship. The way I see it, to borrow Natalie’s professional terminology, Sam transferred the sort of attachments most people have to their mother to his older brother. And Dean buried himself in the caregiver role.

          I also think Sam really wants their relationship to be an equal brotherly one. I think he is trying to change the dynamic and let go of a some of those old insecurities/attachments. He backslides sometimes in moments of stress, but he’s trying. But Dean makes that hard to do, because he won’t let go of it.

          (I also admit this is just my personal interpretation.)

          • Jessie says:

            Hmmm. I have a slightly different read than you I think on the attachment stuff but I certainly don’t disagree that their upbringings continue to affect their definitions of brother, their self-understandings and what they want out of life.

            But if the central question of this current crisis is “who am I” than I’d say Sam’s answer is “I am brother” (with all its attendant drama and soul-selling etc) and Dean’s answer is “uuuuummmmmm” and within that um the central issue is Dean qua hunter or, I dunnno, existential being, not Dean qua caregiver. These are of course messy and intertwined categories. But that’s how I’m starting to see it, and thanks for helping me out!

    • Natalie says:

      //Except in the way that everything’s about Sam.//

      Is it, though? Maybe it’s because I binge watched the first 9 seasons, but I kind of have this hypothesis that even though Sam has been the focal point throughout most of the series, at its core, the show is actually ABOUT Dean.

      I don’t know. I’ll have to give that some more thought.

      • May says:

        //even though Sam has been the focal point throughout most of the series, at its core, the show is actually ABOUT Dean.//

        I think this, too. I think the show started off as more about Sam, but became more about Dean by season 2. Internet twins!

      • Jessie says:

        well, I was being a little flippant ;-) But also referring to the causal chain that led us to this point.

        I wouldn’t say the show is about Dean, but I do agree that they seem to have an easier job depicting his inner life.

        • May says:

          //well, I was being a little flippant ;-) But also referring to the causal chain that led us to this point.//

          LOL. This is very true.

          //I wouldn’t say the show is about Dean, but I do agree that they seem to have an easier job depicting his inner life.//

          This is true as well. Dean’s feeling get a lot of screen time. And when I say it seems more about Dean, that mean it show is like 51% about Dean, 49% about Sam.

    • Barb says:

      So much to mine here, Jessie!

      The MoL, I think, is the endgame of the series. As you say, it’s a crucible of sorts where so many disparate elements in the brothers can be merged, and it could potentially be a healing ground for other damaged souls as well, a real mission in life. And even if the brothers don’t survive the series finale. It’s their true legacy, and someone (Jody? Charlie?) will be left to carry it on.

      If it’s still standing at the end of the season.

    • May says:

      //What is y’all’s reading on what they’re getting at here?//

      I’ve been thinking about it more and I realize I’m having some trouble distinguishing what I would like to see happen vs what the writers are actually doing.

      What I would like to see is Dean learn to live with the MoC and for Sam and Dean to rebuild the MoL over time. Sort of become healthier, better equipped versions of Bobby. Training other hunters, providing knowledge and support to others. I’d also like the endgame to include them leaning how to balance the hunter life with families. Any sort of family—children, spouses, friends, strays…just to expand their family beyond its current, suffocatingly small, number. With some raising/mentoring of kids involved.

      (I just really need this show to end on a note of hope. Because of my long emotional investment and because I generally think it a good idea in good vs evil type stories.)

      What the writers are actually doing…I’m not sure. I can see the seeds of what I wrote above, but I could just be projecting. I also worry they will fall into the CW trap and perpetually drag out the brother angst until they kill one or both of them off.

      On a slightly unrelated note, I think SPN is a show that would benefit from expanding Sam and Dean’s family. Not just because it feeds into my theories, but because it would give them more stories to tell. They don’t seem to be in any rush to end the show, so instead of doing a spin-off, they should just expand SPN, with Sam and Dean as the heads of a family-ish hunter/MoL group. There could still be plenty of brother angst, but it could be new angst as old issues are resolved…Aaaaaaaaand I’m veering dangerously close to fan-fic territory again. MUST. STOP. HERE.

      • Lyrie says:

        I really thought it was going in that direction last season, with all those lost teenagers beginning to hunt. Aren’t the brothers too old to go in a blaze of glory? I’m joking, but really, I’m not. They’ve died so many times, now, what does that even mean? I used to want them to end that way, but seasons ago. Now, I feel like they are on another path, less self-destructive. Training the next generation of hunters would be nice, and yes, a good way to explore new relationships.

      • Natalie says:

        //I’m veering dangerously close to fan-fic territory again. MUST. STOP. HERE.//

        I’m telling myself that what I’ve been cooking up is actually viable material for the show when they finally get around to offering me a job. Which means that I’m veering dangerously close to becoming completely delusional. Who am I to judge whether that’s better or worse than writing fanfic?

        Also, agreed on how the endgame should go down. If Sam and Dean go out in a blaze of glory, I will probably never forgive Kripke, et al. I still haven’t forgiven Chris Carter for the final season of the X-Files. I hold on to these grudges.

        I could live with a riding off into the sunset ending, but I would vastly prefer an extended ragtag family of hunters/Men (and Women) of Letters scenario.

        • Natalie says:

          (P.S. to Chris Carter: You have a chance to redeem yourself here. If William is not joyously reunited with Mulder and Scully, I will never, ever forgive you.)

      • Jessie says:

        Thanks for your thoughts May! I think projection is messing with me too. I am looking forward to a more integrated use of the MoL and I agree with you and Barb that it seems like it could be part of the end game. It definitely has the potential! Do I want to see the organisation resurrected, though? I don’t think so, gives me chilling Buffy S7 vibes.

        I’m not so interested in seeing too much of an expanded family, to be honest, including kid or kid-adjacent stray-types or mentorees in a large role; but I do think the acquired family characters like Jodie and Kevin and Charlie and Garth are crucially important for opening breathing room so I totally agree that we can’t lose any more of their family in that sense.

        • May says:

          //Do I want to see the organisation resurrected, though? I don’t think so, gives me chilling Buffy S7 vibes.//

          Agreed! While I want them to rebuild the MoL…I don’t want it to be what it was. I’m definitely using Bobby as my inspiration for it.

          And, from the hints from this episode, sounds like the MoL might be active outside of North American still (I know they said the “American” chapter, but I generally assume that means all of North America.)

        • Barb says:

          Agreed, I don’t want it to be exactly what it was, either. No more Watchers, please. But if they can merge the MoL with the hunters’ world, and erase some of the old “ultra secret paternalistic exclusive society” atmosphere in favor of a more inclusive group, I’m all for it. Bobby Singer should be their patron dead guy.

  20. Lyrie says:

    // If Dean ever becomes a vegan barista I WILL SALT AND BURN EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE INVOLVED. //
    LET’S CALM DOWN. I was talking about some salad, from time to time. But Mutecypher is right: he does eat some. (vegan barista, ha ha. Are there really fanfics like that out there? Am I being incredibly naive?)

  21. mercedes says:

    hello. about the collar. i think it is made of coral and it proteccts against witchcraft, accidents and ligthning. nothing about shapeshifting am afraid

  22. Helena says:

    //So you side with the US Supreme Courton this, rather than botanists.//

    I side with the Rule of Pudding. I don’t eat tomatoes for dessert. Ergo, they are a vegetable. Also, I only eat rhubarb for dessert. Ergo, it is a fruit. Ketchup is not custard. QED :-)

  23. Helena says:

    //one of those befisted “sidekicks in a Raphael painting” poses?//

    Ok, Jessie, I’ve finally cracked – can I have an example of a befisted sidekick please?

  24. Pat says:

    Sometimes I wonder why the show runners don’t feel the need to have Dean “grow out” of his titanium hold on Sam. They’ve had 10 years to gradually have him mature psychologically, but that characteristic of Dean’s never changes. I admit, this aspect of the Winchester brothers was nectar to me for a long time, but after this many seasons, it just seems sort of pathological. I love the brothers relationship but sometimes it hurts to have this anvil still thrown around and hit me in the face. To their credit, every once in a while, the show throws in scenes that indicate there’s some progress in Dean learning to let go of Sam, but, inevitably, his obsession to have his brother in his life/not be alone rears up again.

    I’m think it’s time for ready for Dean to start to show some progress in this area.

  25. mutecypher says:

    Natalie –

    Not to put more on your plate, what with your niece this weekend, but I ran across something that really ties into the attachment theory you mentioned. Here’s an article in the NYT about a new class of toys, ramping up with Barbie, that will be Siri/Cortana clever and interact with the child. I wonder what you think about the long term implications of small children growing up with objects that talk to them as if they know them.

    The article does address some of the privacy issues of children speaking to some third party outside the home, what might be shared, etc.

    I’m also curious about the legal/ethical/moral implications for Mattel if Little Susie tells her Barbie that Daddy does naughty things to her when Mommy is gone. Will children’s advocates expect that sort of thing to be monitored? Will Grown Up Susie have a good case to sue Mattel in 20 years if no one came to rescue her?

    But within the normal spectrum of decent behavior, I’m wondering about the attachment theory aspects of this, in particular since it would take a sophisticated toy to know that children need to be ignored from time to time just so they don’t grow up believing that they require attention at every instant.

    I’m an NYT subscriber, but I think that you can look at the link without that.

    • Natalie says:

      I have seen a few articles about these toys, and I have many concerns about them. As far as attachment theory is concerned, it seems like these toys are geared to older children. The critical period for developing attachment is from birth to 3, and attachment patterns are going to be pretty firmly established by the age of 3 (although this can certainly be changed by both traumatic and therapeutic experiences later – it’s just harder to change beyond that age). But, in terms of attachment, toys like a “smart” Barbie probably won’t have too much impact. That said, it reminds me of when Teddy Ruxpin was introduced when I was a child. Like any other kid who watched Saturday morning cartoons back then, I wanted one. My parents told me later that the reason I never got one was because they already read to me, and they weren’t going to buy me a toy that would read to me in their place. That’s kind of what I think of these toys – they’re for the children of parents who don’t actually want to be forced to interact with them.

      I hadn’t really considered the ethical and legal considerations, but you make a good point, and one that I’m fascinated by. I have far more questions than answers. I think it’s going to depend somewhat on individual state laws regarding mandated reporting. In my state, everyone is a mandated reporter of child abuse and neglect, but in other states only people in certain professions (medical and mental health professionals, teachers, daycare worker’s, etc.) are mandated reporters. Regardless of the individual laws, failure to report cases are next to impossible to prosecute, because it’s tough to come up with enough evidence. If Mattel is going to be monitoring and storing communication from these toys and a child did tell her Barbie about her father abusing her, there WOULD be evidence that a court could subpoena, and Mattel may end up looking not just at lawsuits but actual criminal charges if they failed to report it. There’s also the issue of what the reporting procedures might be. How will the child’s location be known? How far geographically does the obligation to report extend? Will someone from Mattel’s corporate headquarters in California have to call Ohio’s social services based on information gathered from these toys? And then there are the related privacy implications.

      I’m actually even more concerned, with just about all electronic toys, about the impact that they have on creativity and imaginative play. Any perceived advantage from even so-called educational electronic toys disappears rapidly when compared with hands on experience with more basic toys. Over the weekend, I watched my two-year-old niece be entertained for literally hours at a time by a $5 set of plastic nesting cups. Most of her play was self-directed – building towers, fitting them inside one another, pouring objects from one cup to another, pretending to serve drinks, etc. I also watched her pretend an apple slice was a car, and blocks were phones, food, drinks, AND things to build with and knock down. A set of coasters was a stack of pancakes. She saw endless possibilities in those toys, and I worry that too much exposure to electronic toys that would do all the thinking for her would take away, or at least reduce, that ability.

Leave a Reply to mutecypher Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.