Your awesome Tagline

162,875 notes

espniosa:

coolghost:

tv show. white man. hes sad. he has to do important thing but its hard. his girlfriend died probably. TWSIT!! theres another white man. maybe MORE. hes sad too but for different reason. its very deep probably. theyre best friends but not gay but maybe they are haha fandom!!! every girl dies or goes away. just not gay white man friend. 10 seasons 100 million viewers. what will moody white men do this week.

image

(via elfturd)

1 note

>If you don’t like the show, then don’t watch it.

Did you know, that it is very possible to like something a lot AND criticize it at the same time?

I really like Supernatural. I mean, I DO run a blog that is like 98% just SPN.

But that doesn’t mean I agree with everything on the show or even like every aspect of the show.

I hate how the women just kinda die or just go away. I hate how there always has to be some kinda romantic interest kinda deal.
I hate how everyone is white. And like every black person just kinda…went somewhere idk where did they go did they disappear or what
I hate how the show queerbaits, I don’t think that’s very nice.
And I have a love/hate relationship with the monsters. I wish more of the monsters were like the Wendigo. I wish they weren’t just HUMANS WITH TEETH AND CONTACTS AND CLAWS. I want them to be monsters. I don’t want them to be humans with slightly nonhuman attributes. I think their SFX crew could do A LOT more. 
I wish they had lesser known monsters on the show more frequently. Vampires and werewolves are cool but I mean…come on.
I wish there were less sappy moments, kinda like in the first seasons. Its more about emotions than hunting? If that makes sense? I like to feel a range of emotions when I watch something. Excitement, fear, sadness, I like to laugh too. But I feel like now its not like that anymore, maybe? I feel like it’s a drama?

THAT ALL BEING SAID
I STILL LIKE THE SHOW.
AND WILL CONTINUE WATCHING THE SHOW
but I will still criticize it as an active audience member.

Filed under Supernatural would tag this as wank but its not really wank sorry not sorry

299 notes

redteekal:

Nerd HQ Jensen Photoset #2

Can I just point out that the Nerd HQ background was HELL on photo taking. The white balance settings almost needed to be tailored for each individual photo and that sure wasn’t happening. I’m going to drop Zach and Nerd HQ staff a line on this.

(via backseatdean)

13,443 notes

FYI

dean-has-a-wing-kink:

castiel-knight-of-hell:

browncoatsforever:

iwannaliveindeansdimples:

When Dean says, “Dude, on my car, he showed up naked, covered in bees”, he is not saying Cas showed up on his car naked/bee-adorned. He is swearing on Baby that Cas showed up naked and covered in bees. 

This has been a PSA.

…this is life changing…

yes, baby was in storage from 7.6 Slash Fiction until the end of 7.23 Survival of the Fittest 

THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING

(via team-fuckshitup-freewill)

5 notes

asexyrainbow:

It’s called subliminal baiting, Jared. It’s an old dependent media trick in which the unsuspecting audience is thought to have “changed their stance” on their already thought opinion due to negative word association. It was notably used during the Holocaust, during the Civil Rights Movement, and can be seen throughout history during times of racial/cultural conflict because it’s believed in the the psychology of it, that the racism is already there in the audience’s subconscious level, and they would rather trust what the media is putting forward, because they “accredited” news sources,rather than other means of what’s going on. So they are more likely to believe the broadcasting and “filtered” media, than they are asking a person at the actual scene, or will stop looking/listening all together and only rely on the networked (as opposed to independent) sources to tell them what is going on.I really really need to go back to my Journalism studies…

asexyrainbow:

It’s called subliminal baiting, Jared. It’s an old dependent media trick in which the unsuspecting audience is thought to have “changed their stance” on their already thought opinion due to negative word association.

It was notably used during the Holocaust, during the Civil Rights Movement, and can be seen throughout history during times of racial/cultural conflict because it’s believed in the the psychology of it, that the racism is already there in the audience’s subconscious level, and they would rather trust what the media is putting forward, because they “accredited” news sources,rather than other means of what’s going on. 

So they are more likely to believe the broadcasting and “filtered” media, than they are asking a person at the actual scene, or will stop looking/listening all together and only rely on the networked (as opposed to independent) sources to tell them what is going on.

I really really need to go back to my Journalism studies…

Filed under revevent to whats going on sorry not sorry