Supernatural Forums

Tuesday 9:00 PM on The CWIn Season

Official Episode Thread: The Girl Next Door (possible spoilers)

  • Avatar of Gislef

    Gislef

    [1]Oct 4, 2011
    • member since: 04/22/05
    • level: 101
    • rank: Grand Poobah
    • posts: 23,882
    Please direct all general and specific discussion of the 10/7/11 episode "The Girl Next Door" to this thread.

    Enjoy!
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of chrolligal

    chrolligal

    [2]Oct 5, 2011
    • member since: 09/11/11
    • level: 4
    • rank: Thighmaster
    • posts: 49

    Sounds like the Sam episode. I guess Dean's broken leg might be an excuse to make it a Dean light episode as Jensen had to be both sides of the camera for this one.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of AnimeMadness

    AnimeMadness

    [3]Oct 7, 2011
    • member since: 09/14/05
    • level: 22
    • rank: Freak and Geek
    • posts: 6,778
    O.o I can't believe Dean just did that... WTF? That poor kid. Heck if I was him, I'd kill Dean too! I mean was it really so bad she was killing thugs? Dean can be a hypocrite at times...

    So Sam always had a thing for monsters. Not that that's anything new. XD I kinda wished they went further into Kitsune lore. They didn't mention them being shapeshifting foxes with 1 to 9 tails who have control over the elements. Although I suppose Amy implied she and her mother were wind kitsune. But I don't ever recall reading kitsune ate brains. Also, Sam forgot the pie... Not that that's anything new too.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of evil1janitor

    evil1janitor

    [4]Oct 7, 2011
    • member since: 12/23/06
    • level: 11
    • rank: Red Shirted Lt.
    • posts: 160

    So first they unceremoniously kill off my favorite character, and now my second favorite character managed to kill both Kaylee and Amelia Pond at the same time, and his reasons for doing it were flawed to say the least. I'll stick with the show till the end but I'm not loving this season so far.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of mynameisjohnas

    mynameisjohnas

    [7]Oct 7, 2011
    • member since: 05/02/08
    • level: 6
    • rank: Small Wonder
    • posts: 121

    POSSIBLE SPOLIERS

    Interesting episode. Not one of my favorites, but definitely not one of my least liked either. Out of the entire 40 minutes the ending really finishes with a punch to the gut (or a knife if you will) that you're not likely to forget anytime soon. Reminded me a lot of the debate in "Fresh Blood" from season 2 (with Amber) and "Metamophasis" from season 4 about the different paradigms surrounding the stand different hunters (well, mainly Sam) have on killing anything that isn't human. Can one honestly justify killing something if it hasn't killed yet (as was the case in "Metamorphasis")? Is everything really black and white when it comes tothe job Sam and Dean do?



    In the end, while I enjoyed that the show was willing to do something ballsy like they did, I can't help but think less of Dean's morally simplistic viewpoint of hunting. It's not that I don't understand it since if I had been in his shoes for as long as he has, I'd probably be pretty jaded too. But after his experiance with Amber in relation to Gordon (Fresh Blood) and Jack in relation to Travis (where Travis actually caused Jack to turn) I would have thought his viewpoint might have slightly changed over the years. Dean wanted to prevent something bad from happening and yet may, in the long run, be the cause of something bad happening. After all, what is Amy's son supposed to do now with no mom to raise him? Sure, the kid said he had someone else to go to, but does that person really know what the kid is? And regardless of whether they do, can they raise him properly under the circumstances? Remember, his mom already made him feed, which could mean the kid arleady has a taste for what he was already fed. With a mom who was a mortician, even if the kid did need to feed, all he would have needed was his mom to go to work and bring back sometasty brains for dinner. Now that's not really an option which may lead to consequences down the line that Dean didn't even bother to consider.


    So yeah, I guess I liked that Dean's morally questionable decision makes his character more complex, but I can't say the same about the actual decision itself. Next week should be interesting. Is Dean feeling guilty because of what he did to Amy and her son, or because he lied to Sam (or both)?

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of libra113

    libra113

    [8]Oct 7, 2011
    • member since: 10/04/05
    • level: 27
    • rank: Shark Jumper
    • posts: 24,388
    AnimeMadness wrote:
    O.o I can't believe Dean just did that... WTF? That poor kid. Heck if I was him, I'd kill Dean too! I mean was it really so bad she was killing thugs? Dean can be a hypocrite at times...

    So Sam always had a thing for monsters. Not that that's anything new. XD I kinda wished they went further into Kitsune lore. They didn't mention them being shapeshifting foxes with 1 to 9 tails who have control over the elements. Although I suppose Amy implied she and her mother were wind kitsune. But I don't ever recall reading kitsune ate brains. Also, Sam forgot the pie... Not that that's anything new too.
    Yeah given Sam's track record I'm starting to wonder if Jessica was human.

    Dean has always been like that: human over monster. He might not always like it but he will side with just about any human over any monster and I have to say he's not totally wrong. She probably would have killed again at some point.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of libra113

    libra113

    [9]Oct 7, 2011
    • member since: 10/04/05
    • level: 27
    • rank: Shark Jumper
    • posts: 24,388
    mynameisjohnas wrote:

    POSSIBLE SPOLIERS

    Interesting episode. Not one of my favorites, but definitely not one of my least liked either. Out of the entire 40 minutes the ending really finishes with a punch to the gut (or a knife if you will) that you're not likely to forget anytime soon. Reminded me a lot of the debate in "Fresh Blood" from season 2 (with Amber) and "Metamophasis" from season 4 about the different paradigms surrounding the stand different hunters (well, mainly Sam) have on killing anything that isn't human. Can one honestly justify killing something if it hasn't killed yet (as was the case in "Metamorphasis")? Is everything really black and white when it comes tothe job Sam and Dean do?



    In the end, while I enjoyed that the show was willing to do something ballsy like they did, I can't help but think less of Dean's morally simplistic viewpoint of hunting. It's not that I don't understand it since if I had been in his shoes for as long as he has, I'd probably be pretty jaded too. But after his experiance with Amber in relation to Gordon (Fresh Blood) and Jack in relation to Travis (where Travis actually caused Jack to turn) I would have thought his viewpoint might have slightly changed over the years. Dean wanted to prevent something bad from happening and yet may, in the long run, be the cause of something bad happening. After all, what is Amy's son supposed to do now with no mom to raise him? Sure, the kid said he had someone else to go to, but does that person really know what the kid is? And regardless of whether they do, can they raise him properly under the circumstances? Remember, his mom already made him feed, which could mean the kid arleady has a taste for what he was already fed. With a mom who was a mortician, even if the kid did need to feed, all he would have needed was his mom to go to work and bring back sometasty brains for dinner. Now that's not really an option which may lead to consequences down the line that Dean didn't even bother to consider.


    So yeah, I guess I liked that Dean's morally questionable decision makes his character more complex, but I can't say the same about the actual decision itself. Next week should be interesting. Is Dean feeling guilty because of what he did to Amy and her son, or because he lied to Sam (or both)?

    You gotta remember that this situation was a paralle to Sam's situation and since Dean can't do anything about Sam's sitaution right now he dealing with what he could and perhaps vicariously getting out some of his frustrations over Sam.

    Also, gotta love the nod to "Doctor Who" with the name Amy Pond. Almost did a double take when Sam said it and had "Did he really just say that" moment.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Tyrathius

    Tyrathius

    [10]Oct 8, 2011
    • member since: 09/27/11
    • level: 4
    • rank: Thighmaster
    • posts: 90

    Well, I don't think this episode was quite as good as the other two, but it wasn't bad. Just a little too much of the teen drama for my taste.

    I think they're going overboard with the leviathans eating people. I know it's kinda their thing, but it seems like they can't let a single scene pass without one of them mentioning eating someone. Do it too often and it starts becoming less scary and more narmy. Oh, and they talk on phones a lot. I guess leviathans adapt better to modern technology than angels do.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of KingofIPirates

    KingofIPirates

    [11]Oct 8, 2011
    • member since: 08/11/06
    • level: 32
    • rank: Whammy!
    • posts: 45,832
    Mediocre episode at best, about the only thing interesting in this one was the ending.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of misslee022884

    misslee022884

    [12]Oct 8, 2011
    • member since: 05/05/06
    • level: 18
    • rank: Land Shark
    • posts: 498

    KingofIPirates wrote:
    Mediocre episode at best, about the only thing interesting in this one was the ending.


    I agree. This episode was insanely boring in my opinion, the only "twist" was Dean killing Sam's friend.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Tyrathius

    Tyrathius

    [13]Oct 8, 2011
    • member since: 09/27/11
    • level: 4
    • rank: Thighmaster
    • posts: 90

    I think part of the problem with this episode is they didn't bother explaining Dean's actions beyond "she might kill again".


    Thing is, it's not just an issue of whether she'll do it again. She's already done it once. Thug or not, the guy was still human. Even if we feel her reasons were justified or that he deserved it, it was still murder. And sure, she says she won't do it again, but what happens if her kid gets sick again? She trades another life for his? What gives her the right to decide who's lives are worth living?


    People kill for what they feel are justified reasons all the time. That doesn't make it any less of a crime.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Beecharm3r2

    Beecharm3r2

    [14]Oct 8, 2011
    • member since: 09/16/08
    • level: 8
    • rank: Super-Friend
    • posts: 209
    I really liked the episode. The only drawback was basically what others have mentioned. Dean killing Amy.

    I CAN understand why he did it though. He's a pessimist and just saw Sam's other shoe drop, the Leviathan's are wreaking havoc. He's not in a good place. He probably thinks, 'hey, here's a monster that I CAN kill' and takes the easy way out. I thought it was stupid of him though not to shut the door before killing her or I dunno, make sure the kid wasn't there. He knew she had a kid and she's checking into a motel room - Dean, seriously, where do you think the kid would be? Duh.

    With that said, I don't think it was completely in character for him to kill her. Why? Vampire-Lenore. Last season (and I think, Season 1) she showed Dean she can fight her urges and prevent herself from killing. He let her go. Last season, he was talking to her, not trying to kill her - AND he looked at Castiel all shocked and bothered when she the angel smote her. I think Dean should have been more stalker-like with Amy than just knife happy. He should have followed her and watched to see if she killed, then take her out if she did, IMO. But then, that probably wouldn't have wrapped up the episode in a neat little bow.

    I liked the bits with Colin Ford, young Amy, flashbacks. Colin Ford's a good actor and I always like mini-Sam. I'm glad we got to see more about Sam growing up.

    I really want to know more about John though 'cause when Sam stated John has a bad temper, I wasn't shocked. But when he said "you don't want to see him drinking" that made me think John smacked him and Dean around. I want to know if he did hurt them or if he was just yelling a lot and waking up in his own vomit.

    Overall I really liked the episode and I was surprised to find out this is another one that Jensen directed. I thought he did a great job. My one issue with Dean's actions was with the script and not the director.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Shreela

    Shreela

    [15]Oct 8, 2011
    • member since: 04/05/09
    • level: 8
    • rank: Super-Friend
    • posts: 63
    Even though Amy did kill, it was to save her son's life and she chose a drug dealer and a drunk driver. And she planned to stop killing now that her son responded positively to fresh meat. So even though she was indeed a monster that had killed (degenerates), she developed morals and exercised restraint as much as possible. Had she lived, she surely would have tried passing these morals onto her child, most likely encouraging him to become a mortician as well. But now that Dean's killed her, that boy has no one to teach him higher morals. Not to mention he saw his own mother murdered - look what happened to Dexter.

    But I don't see Supernatural being on the air long enough for this boy to age enough to be able to take Dean on to avenge his mother.

    BTW: Seems more like a FU than a homage when the "homaged" character is killed off.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of lachlan_j_g

    lachlan_j_g

    [16]Oct 8, 2011
    • member since: 03/24/05
    • level: 11
    • rank: Red Shirted Lt.
    • posts: 250

    I liked this episode - was a bit of a different monster of the week but it kept the main storyline going. I see Dean's point of killing her - remember the Rugaru episode? once they pop, they can't stop.


    I would like to know how the Leviathans knew all of the Winchester's aliases. they couldn't have found all that information at Bobby's, so maybe there's an inside man/woman?

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Tyrathius

    Tyrathius

    [17]Oct 8, 2011
    • member since: 09/27/11
    • level: 4
    • rank: Thighmaster
    • posts: 90

    Well, Sam and Dean were unconscious for at least several hours. It's possible the hospital staff took the liberty of IDing them, and then the leviathans got it from them once they realized the Winchesters had been there. I don't think they actually had every alias, just the ones Sam and Dean were using at the time.


    The only person they've really been around lately is Bobby, so I don't see how anyone could be feeding them information.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of dpebbleson

    dpebbleson

    [18]Oct 8, 2011
    • member since: 11/06/09
    • level: 24
    • rank: Golden Girl
    • posts: 5,656
    mynameisjohnas wrote:

    POSSIBLE SPOLIERS

    Interesting episode. Not one of my favorites, but definitely not one of my least liked either. Out of the entire 40 minutes the ending really finishes with a punch to the gut (or a knife if you will) that you're not likely to forget anytime soon. Reminded me a lot of the debate in "Fresh Blood" from season 2 (with Amber) and "Metamophasis" from season 4 about the different paradigms surrounding the stand different hunters (well, mainly Sam) have on killing anything that isn't human. Can one honestly justify killing something if it hasn't killed yet (as was the case in "Metamorphasis")? Is everything really black and white when it comes tothe job Sam and Dean do?



    In the end, while I enjoyed that the show was willing to do something ballsy like they did, I can't help but think less of Dean's morally simplistic viewpoint of hunting. It's not that I don't understand it since if I had been in his shoes for as long as he has, I'd probably be pretty jaded too. But after his experiance with Amber in relation to Gordon (Fresh Blood) and Jack in relation to Travis (where Travis actually caused Jack to turn) I would have thought his viewpoint might have slightly changed over the years. Dean wanted to prevent something bad from happening and yet may, in the long run, be the cause of something bad happening. After all, what is Amy's son supposed to do now with no mom to raise him? Sure, the kid said he had someone else to go to, but does that person really know what the kid is? And regardless of whether they do, can they raise him properly under the circumstances? Remember, his mom already made him feed, which could mean the kid arleady has a taste for what he was already fed. With a mom who was a mortician, even if the kid did need to feed, all he would have needed was his mom to go to work and bring back sometasty brains for dinner. Now that's not really an option which may lead to consequences down the line that Dean didn't even bother to consider.


    So yeah, I guess I liked that Dean's morally questionable decision makes his character more complex, but I can't say the same about the actual decision itself. Next week should be interesting. Is Dean feeling guilty because of what he did to Amy and her son, or because he lied to Sam (or both)?



    Welcome back

    I too didn't understand Dean's decision. You're right in that it makes him complex, but it makes him very cruel. He is willing to kill a monster-mother, because she will always be a monster, but not the kid himself, even though he will become a monster as well? He stomped over his own logic in a matter of one minute.

    As someone pointed out, the mother could have taught the kid to be peaceful, to work in the morgue, integrate, etc. This way he initiated a revenge plot.

    Also, why do I get the sense that he didn't kill the kid because showing that on screen would've been horrible to see?

    Because, otherwise, monster is a monster, what matters if it's young or adult... We are all someone's children, regardless of our age.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of jpi1982

    jpi1982

    [19]Oct 8, 2011
    • member since: 10/07/11
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 49
    I agree that Dean not killing "the kid" is very strange..

    When writing the episode they must have forgotten that the kid actually needs to feed to survive. Dean just cut of he's only "food supply" so for him to come back as an adult, like Dean told him too, would mean him killing humans the next 6-8 years (depending on what age a monster must be for Dean to find it morally justifiable to kill it).
    If "the kid" should decide not to kill anyone, even if his mother was killed in cold blood for being a monster by a human. And why should the kid not kill by the way? His mother stopped killing but Dean killed her anyway, so he's dammed if he does and dammed if he don't... But let say that he does not kill. That means either him sneaking in to the morgue stealing dead bodies (HE'S A KID!). And since that is pretty close to impossible the only option left is for him to starve to death which is a pretty inhuman way to die. So I conclude
    In this episode I learned that: Dean is a sadistic bastard that either wants "kids" to starve them selves to death or to kill humans (which makes no sense) until they become adults so that he can kill them without feeling bad about it.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of dpebbleson

    dpebbleson

    [20]Oct 8, 2011
    • member since: 11/06/09
    • level: 24
    • rank: Golden Girl
    • posts: 5,656
    jpi1982 wrote:
    I agree that Dean not killing "the kid" is very strange..

    When writing the episode they must have forgotten that the kid actually needs to feed to survive. Dean just cut of he's only "food supply" so for him to come back as an adult, like Dean told him too, would mean him killing humans the next 6-8 years (depending on what age a monster must be for Dean to find it morally justifiable to kill it).
    If "the kid" should decide not to kill anyone, even if his mother was killed in cold blood for being a monster by a human. And why should the kid not kill by the way? His mother stopped killing but Dean killed her anyway, so he's dammed if he does and dammed if he don't... But let say that he does not kill. That means either him sneaking in to the morgue stealing dead bodies (HE'S A KID!). And since that is pretty close to impossible the only option left is for him to starve to death which is a pretty inhuman way to die. So I conclude
    In this episode I learned that: Dean is a sadistic bastard that either wants "kids" to starve them selves to death or to kill humans (which makes no sense) until they become adults so that he can kill them without feeling bad about it.


    You're right, based on this episode it pretty much amounts to that. Strange what an episode can do to your reputation
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.