New interview with Eric Kripke

[agt_spooky]

Hey all,

There's a new (spoilery) interview with Eric up at TV Guide's website: http://community.tvguide.com/blog-entry/TV-Show-Blog/Tv-Previews/Supernatural-Returns-Burning/800038033

There's one thing in particular I wanted to talk about...



With all the debate about Bela, etc — whom I personally don't mind — I find myself wondering how much the displeasure or pleasure of the fans affects the direction of the show. Are you swayed or do you stick to your vision and hope they'll stick with you? — islandgyal

Kripke: Here's another honest answer. The reality is, I have a core story that I want to tell, and I've never wavered from it, not once. It's the saga of the Winchester clan — who the brothers really are, who their parents really are, why Demons are so closely intertwined with them, what their destiny really is. It's an epic, emotional family story at its heart, and to me, that's what Supernatural is really and truly about. Beyond that, story elements come and go, some are introduced, and others discarded. And whether we keep a storyline or toss it is based on several elements: the writers' opinions, the realities of actors' schedules, and yes, at times, the opinions of the fans. We value the fan response. It works as a kind of real-time audience testing. We never listen to specific comments…. But if the fans overwhelmingly reject something, over and over and over, on every website, we tend to pay attention to that. Again, I want to stress, it never alters the core story and central mythology; if the fans don't like that, then they should go watch Grey's. But if one of the outer-orbit, less important stories just isn't working, the writers don't feel so self-important that we need to keep it. There's always room to make the show better, and that means trying new things, keeping the things that work, losing the things that don't.

~~~~~

Well I don't know how much clearer a HUGE chunk of this fandom can be, regarding Bela, there Eric! So was this your way of telling us that yeah, you made a major mistake with this character and are now going to correct it? It damn well better be! If you kill her off or just make her disappear forever, it'll go a LONG way to redeeming yourself in my eyes, Eric.

Comments

[magser.livejournal.com]

You know...Last year with the whole Jo thing i was kinda shocked at the way people took such a dislike to a character they didnt seem to give a chance to... however this year,while i think Ruby worked out great,i just cannot take a likeing to Bela.Ive tried,lord ive tried but jesus i just want her gone... im sorry...

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

My god, don't be sorry! Bela is a character that is absolutely useless in this show and has been shoehorned into every episode she's been in, serving no purpose except to make Sam and Dean look like bumbling idiots and I've had enough. She needs to be killed off. NOW.

[magser.livejournal.com]

Lol thats ok then... i can relax...

[craftypug.livejournal.com]

While I don't love or hate Bela or Ruby, it wouldn't bother me one bit if they just went away. They're not much more than background fluff.

This is the one line that I just love and puts Kripke miles above the rest. Again, I want to stress, it never alters the core story and central mythology; if the fans don't like that, then they should go watch Grey's.

For this, I love the man. He listens, but sticks to his core story. Everything else is just background. squeee!

[magser.livejournal.com]

Exactly! I love that while he is paying attention it doesnt change what he has wanted to do with the story from the beginning.

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

They're not much more than background fluff.

That's it exactly. Neither of them furthers the storyline ahead one bit. Bela most of all, but Ruby, too. Now that we know she can't help Dean out of his deal, which was the ONLY reason she was being kept around, what do we need her for, either??

Jettison them BOTH, Eric and give me back the show I used to love.

[khek.livejournal.com]

What I don't get is how they dropped the Roadhouse storylines and Jo and Ash pretty quickly, when the fan opinion seemed more divided, but they seem so intent on keeping Bela around and convincing us that she's a good character when the OVERWHELMING majority of fans hate her.

I still think that Raelle Tucker was the person who kept them on an even keel and stopped their knee-jerk reactions and made them *think*. They need more thinking and less reacting. Even if they have a great core story, bad side stories will drive people away just as effectively. It's like having a '67 Impala and painting it pepto-bismol pink with puce pinstriping. Nobody is going to see the car, because they'll be fleeing in horror from the color scheme.

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

What I don't get is how they dropped the Roadhouse storylines and Jo and Ash pretty quickly, when the fan opinion seemed more divided

I'm thinking that this time Dawn and the CW came down pretty hard on Eric, forcing him to keep the bimbos all season, whereas last year they let it slide when Eric threw up his hands and said, "see, it's not working!" I guess they weren't going to let him get away with it this time.

I still think that Raelle Tucker was the person who kept them on an even keel and stopped their knee-jerk reactions and made them *think*.

AMEN to that. I used to think it was Sera that I really loved out of that writing partnership, but it was Raelle all the time. God, I miss her! And as far as I know, she went to work on Blood Ties, which got cancelled. Get her back for season four, Eric and get this show back on track!

Even if they have a great core story, bad side stories will drive people away just as effectively.

And I am absolute proof of that.

[el1ie.livejournal.com]

I think it's also worth noting him mentioning his "lower budget" for next year?

Surely having two useless characters on salary comes in here?

I'm hoping so anyway.

What bothers me most is Bela - I can't for the life of me bring myself to watch her - like nails on a chalkboard, my reaction is visceral and stomach churning, she just goes through me.

However, I'm STILL waiting for EITHER of these two to actually DO something. Antagonists weren't they supposed to be? Bela's like a snotty nose that just won't go away and about as useless. Ruby COULD and SHOULD have been a much better fit with the show, but she hasn't been written that way and the girl has about as much antagonism as a paper bag. Exactly what has she done apart from sweep in looking like the perfect overly made up Mary Sue and acting like the ultimate plot device.

What exactly has she done to tempt Sam or train Sam or what the bloody hell it is she's supposed to be doing, whatever it is, she's really bad at it and comes across like an annoying schoolgirl playing dress up.

Horror? Menace? Chills? Mystery? Those are what extra characters should bring in to the show not these pair of buffoons on day release from Glamour Girls R Us.

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

I think it's also worth noting him mentioning his "lower budget" for next year?

Yes! I should've mentioned that because I thought the exact same thing as you - another sign that we're dumping the bimbos? Maybe we can bring back something that we ALL like - the music!

What bothers me most is Bela - I can't for the life of me bring myself to watch her - like nails on a chalkboard, my reaction is visceral and stomach churning, she just goes through me.

I couldn't agree with you more. I absolutely cannot watch her either.

However, I'm STILL waiting for EITHER of these two to actually DO something. Antagonists weren't they supposed to be?

Yes they were and were touted as that over and over. But like you said, they're FAR from it. Antagonists should be up in your face, strong characters. All Bela's done is sneak around, being an irritant, and Ruby just drops in, spews out her holier than thou "wisdom" telling the boys they're idiots. Yeah, there's two well-written antagonists. [shakes head]

What exactly has she done to tempt Sam or train Sam or what the bloody hell it is she's supposed to be doing

Umm...absolutely nothing? Which makes HER absolutely useless, too!

Horror? Menace? Chills? Mystery? Those are what extra characters should bring in to the show not these pair of buffoons on day release from Glamour Girls R Us.

LOL! But you're right. And I keep going back to Meg. SHE brought those things to the show and was a really great character that was used in small, very effective doses. Why that couldn't have been done with these two, I'll never know.

[katikat.livejournal.com]

Maybe they told him "Fine, you can get rid of Bela but you will get less money?" I mean, last year, they basically told him "Add a second female regular character or you won't have S3"... Besides, if lower budget gets us something at least remotely similar to S1 - dark lights, scare instead of flashy gore - I'm all for it *nods*

Just drivin' by... ;)

[el1ie.livejournal.com]

**nods**

Lower budget, more family/brother/character stuff...sounds good to me, can we get his budget slashed a bit more to dim the lights again, turn off the perma tan, the gloss, the suit rentals and back slowly out of suburbia? *G*

[katikat.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that miffed me a lot this season. Half the time I expected flowers to start blooming under their feet and bunnies to just hop around looking cute *rolls eyes* For pete's sake, it's a horror show!

[el1ie.livejournal.com]

No matter how many buckets of gore he threw around I still felt it was too much of

(http://s9.photobucket.com/albums/a63/Elliepdowd/gifs/?action=view&current=rabbits_001.gif)

When left to my imagination it could have been, should have been more like

(http://s9.photobucket.com/albums/a63/Elliepdowd/gifs/?action=view&current=vulture_snacking_md_wht.gif)

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

No matter how many buckets of gore he threw around I still felt it was too much of

OMG, you're killing me, here! LOL! That was brilliant. :-)

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

Besides, if lower budget gets us something at least remotely similar to S1 - dark lights, scare instead of flashy gore - I'm all for it *nods*

Man, so am I! Just add back in the classic rock and I'll REALLY be a happy camper!

Aw, c'mon, K, admit it! You screwed up!!

[feldspar2.livejournal.com]

Of course, he'll never say, "Yeah, Bela stinks and I'm canning her because the majority of the fans hate her."

Re: Aw, c'mon, K, admit it! You screwed up!!

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

Hell no! But I'm sorry, actually coming out and admitting it would make him the bigger man, admitting his mistake. It would go a long way to redeeming himself in my eyes.

[jellicle.livejournal.com]

Again, I want to stress, it never alters the core story and central mythology; if the fans don't like that, then they should go watch Grey's.

And with this, he just told all people who complain about Dean being used only as a secondary character to Sam's journey that this is not gonna change. I've figured that out already, and his 'shut up' speech of Dean being the real hero. I won't fall for that, I'll just accept that things will always be this way.

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

And with this, he just told all people who complain about Dean being used only as a secondary character to Sam's journey that this is not gonna change

Wow, I honestly hadn't thought of it that way! [sigh] Just another reason why I haven't believed anything that's come out of Eric's mouth for a year now.

[katikat.livejournal.com]

Actually, I don't mind Dean being a moral anchor and protector of Sam. That gets us a lot of Dean!hurt X)

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

Actually, I don't mind Dean being a moral anchor and protector of Sam

Personally, I'd rather he have his own purpose and not just be Sam's sidekick. [shrug]

[katikat.livejournal.com]

I don't know, stopping someone from becoming the leader of demons is a rather great purpose *shrugs* I would quite dislike for them to give Dean some other unrelated purpose that would suddenly split the show into two plot lines. That would just invite troubles.

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

I don't know, stopping someone from becoming the leader of demons is a rather great purpose

But it's just like last season - Dean needed to stop Sam from becoming evil and absolutely nothing happened with that. Kripke even admitted in the second season companion book that they dropped the ball on that, it was a whole lot of nothing. And now here Dean is again, trying to stop his brother from becoming something evil, going dark side. Will anything come of it this time? I'm not sure I trust Kripke to keep Dean from just spinning his wheels again.

I would quite dislike for them to give Dean some other unrelated purpose

I don't think that giving Dean a subplot of his own would cause problems. Don't both brothers deserve equal attention on the show instead of one just constantly tagging along after the other, existing only to help him?

[andromakhe001.livejournal.com]

That's what I felt when I read that as well. I was like "Screw you Kripke". I mean I did like the interview in general but why is he so damn determined to keep Dean on a leash, to not allow him full development. Because Dean will never get full development so long as his part of the story has to be completely subordinate to and service Sam's. They always make sure to pull him back before he can make that final leap into being a true "HERO", because only Sam is allowed to go that far. They'll let Dean do heroic things, when they don't really matter in the grand scheme overall, but they never let him move up to that other level. He fails, he makes the wrong choice, he's just suddenly too stupid to come up with the idea or to make the decision--they always make sure to twist it so that Sam is the only who can make that leap.

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

but why is he so damn determined to keep Dean on a leash, to not allow him full development.

I've asked myself that same question.

his part of the story has to be completely subordinate to and service Sam's

And nothing's come of it! Last season it was all about saving Sam from going darkside and absolutely nothing happened. Kripke even admitted in the second season companion book that they dropped the ball on that, it was a whole lot of nothing. And now here Dean is again, trying to stop his brother from becoming something evil, leading the army of demons. Will anything come of it this time? I don't trust Kripke to keep Dean from just spinning his wheels again.

He fails, he makes the wrong choice, he's just suddenly too stupid to come up with the idea or to make the decision-

And that has never been more apparent than in this season. They have dumbed him down SO much.

-they always make sure to twist it so that Sam is the only who can make that leap.

Now I love Sam, too, I really do, but it's gotten really tiring that he can be the only one to come up with the research, come up with the solution, etc. Why can't they do things equally anymore? :-(

[riveryklown.livejournal.com]

Wow, I really have no idea what you all are talking about... Dean was the one who killed the YED, Dean brought Sam back to life, John killed himself over Dean, Dean is still beating sense into Sam when he gets too emo-destructive (JIB and the killing of the virgin) and Kripke actually said this particular storyline is all about him.
Am I missing something?

[katikat.livejournal.com]

I liked the interview very much. I don't mind Ruby (actually I kinda like Cassidy - I couldn't stand the lemon chewing grimace of Nikki Aycox in S1) but Bela is an icky character *reduced to a four-year-old*

I think that Bela might have worked as a "comic" relief if they used her as much as Ellen - once or twice a season. And Kripke did want to make her a recurring character in the beginning. But then Ostroff basically gave him an ultimatum - no matter how he wants to twist it - and he made her a regular. Another big problem is that Kripke adores Bela and so he kept pushing her hard hoping that fans will start liking her if he shoved her hard enough down their throats. And the more he pushed, the more the fans hated her guts.

Also, I can't wait for the return to characters and storylines that he promised in S4...

And I'm still staying spoiler-free for the finale! For the other 3 eps, I was spoiled before and during the strike in one of the interviews with Gamble where she gushed about how awesome Bela is *snorts* But I'm determined to stay as spoiler-free as possible at least for the last ep...

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

I don't mind Ruby (actually I kinda like Cassidy - I couldn't stand the lemon chewing grimace of Nikki Aycox in S1)

We'll definitely have to agree to disagree on that one! I loved Meg and thought she was a strong, well-written character and for a small woman, she pulled off being a demon with ease. I totally believed she could kick Sam and Dean's asses!

but Bela is an icky character *reduced to a four-year-old*

Ha! Yeah, icky would be one way to describe her.

I think that Bela might have worked as a "comic" relief if they used her as much as Ellen - once or twice a season

I agree. I would've been totally impressed if this chick blew into town and stole from Sam and Dean - ONCE. But when that's ALL she does, every single time she's there, constantly making Sam and Dean look like fools, when we know they're NOT - it just gets utterly ridiculous.

Another big problem is that Kripke adores Bela

Why, god, WHY??

Also, I can't wait for the return to characters and storylines that he promised in S4...

I haven't believed a word he's said for a year now, so I'll believe it when I see it next year.

And I'm still staying spoiler-free for the finale!

Good for you! I just don't have the willpower, I'm afraid. :-)

OKAY

[cattraine.livejournal.com]

We agree the bimbos need to disappear. NOW, are there any particular SPN websites or blogs that we know Kripke reads regularly?

That way we can state simply and politely OVER and OVER again why these characters ruin the show for us.

Re: OKAY

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

The only one I can think of is Television Without Pity. I think I heard him mention that once as one he goes to. Which sucks because I can't stand TWOP and really don't want to have to go over there and post. Grrr....

Re: OKAY

[dairwendan.livejournal.com]

I would love it if there was a way to give him a special invitation to spnbadfan! *evil giggles*

Re: OKAY

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

I would love it if there was a way to give him a special invitation to spnbadfan

OMG, that would be freakin' awesome! LOL!

Re: OKAY

[andromakhe001.livejournal.com]

I believe he also mentioned supernatural.tv forums. And TV.com.

Re: OKAY

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

I believe he also mentioned supernatural.tv forums. And TV.com.

[snaps fingers] Yep, you're right, he did mention those as well.

[simonesa.livejournal.com]

Amen!

I kinda want her to die messy. Maybe Sam could shoot her in the head?! He's getting good at that.

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

Maybe Sam could shoot her in the head?! He's getting good at that.

LOL! Oh, that's awesome. :-) I'll keep my fingers crossed!

[cindyls.livejournal.com]

I take it you haven't watched Matt Mitovich's vodcast on the TV Guide online page?
He has huge news from Kripke regarding this subject for fourth season and I know how happy you will be ;-)
http://community.tvguide.com/blog/TVGuide-Editors-Blog/Tv-Mattrs/700000117

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

I LOVE YOU FOR THIS!!! Thank you SO much for letting me know - I'm jumping up and down in my seat right now! No more Bela! Squee!!

[simonesa.livejournal.com]

I don't know how much we can blame Kripke. I don't think these characters were part of his core story. I think they were pressured by the network to put some love interest into the show. Which sucks! I am the first to say. But, given that he was probably forced to bring the characters in by some network A-hole or focus group crap is probably why the writers never embraced them or made the the least bit likeable. It might even be a diabolical plot to deliberately sabotage the characters to prove to networks to stay out of his business. But I am probably giving him way more credit that he deserves.

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

I don't know how much we can blame Kripke. I don't think these characters were part of his core story

Well we can definitely blame him for Ruby. He stated in an early interview about season 3 that she was always planned, but that Bela was forced to become another part of the cast when CW demanded it. Bela was originally supposed to be a one-off character and honestly, I would've liked her if that had happened.

It might even be a diabolical plot to deliberately sabotage the characters to prove to networks to stay out of his business.

The same thought crossed my mind as well, and I'm truly wondering if that's what happened with Bela at least, because Eric truly does love Ruby. [blech]

But I am probably giving him way more credit that he deserves.

LOL! Hey, I want to believe it, too! :-)

[simonesa.livejournal.com]

The same thought crossed my mind as well, and I'm truly wondering if that's what happened with Bela at least, because Eric truly does love Ruby. [blech]

So do I. *running and ducking*

[agt-spooky.livejournal.com]

So do I. *running and ducking*

LOL! You don't have to run! That's totally cool that you like Ruby. Quite a few people do. My problem is that Katie's acting is SO bad, IMO, that that's why I can't stand the character. I mean, I loved Meg and thought Nicki did a fantastic job, so I've got nothing against female characters playing demons. Or female characters in general. But Katie just can't sell me on being a bad-ass demon, so I'm turned off by Ruby. :-(