Welcome, veteran commenters, newcomers and fellow "Supernatural" fans of all kinds! Let's discuss "Changing Channels," Thursday's episode of the CW show.

For information about upcoming episodes of the show, look here. For all my stories on "Supernatural," look here.

If you are new around here, please take a minute to review the commenting rules at the end of this post. If you don't see your comment show up below, those rules might give you an insight as to why that happened.

Now, on to some thoughts about "Changing Channels"…

Tandem bike!

"Jackpot"!

Sam as the voice of the Metallicar!

There were some absolutely delightful moments in "Changing Channels," a funny episode with a serious twist. Kudos not only to the writers but to Jared Padalecki and Jensen Ackles, who once again proved how versatile they are. As is the case with the best episodes of "Supernatural," a clever concept served to illuminate an issue affecting the Winchester's lives. In "Changing Channels," the show had a lot of fun with TV conventions even as it reinforced the brothers' vessel-icious dilemmas. Good times. 

I thought I'd kick things off by listing my favorite parodies in order of awesomeness:

1. "Knight Rider." I died of laughter at the Metallicar tribute to "Knight Rider." Sam as the voice of the car was 120 percent hilarious. The soundtrack was spot-on and the way the camera was angled on the car when it drove down the leaf-strewn road was a perfect evocation of the original show. This short scene was about a thousand times more entertaining than the craptastic "Knight Rider" remake NBC unleashed a while back. Hey, "Supernatural," I smell spinoff!

2. The opening credits were absolutely awesome. I can only imagine how much fun the writers, production team and actors had putting this sequence together. Every single aspect of it was golden, from the song to the typeface to the "We're just brothers goofing around and having a few laughs" scenes. That was just a heaping slab of hilarious right there. Honestly — tandem bike!

3. "CSI: Supernatural." I'm with Dean — I'm not particularly a fan of the 40 million procedurals on TV, and any time someone breaks out a really good David Caruso parody, I'm on board. Sam's swagger toward the camera and the brothers' recitation of the intentionally bad puns were outstanding, as were the comments about "no-talent d-bags" who wear sunglasses at night.

4. The Japanese game show. Just funny. As was the genital herpes ad. More funny than the actual ad was Sam's discomfort about speaking his lines. Both actors can play comedy really well, but Jared especially nailed the funny moments in this episode. 

5. The sitcom. It was mildly amusing, and it gave Jared and Jensen opportunity to demonstrate how good they are at comedy — and at sending up overly broad comedic performances on schticky sitcoms.

6. "Grey's Anatomy." This segment did have its moments, and it is amusing to picture Dean as a secret fan of soapy medical melodramas (is it just me, or did Dean have a bit of a mancrush on Dr. Sexy?). And I should say, I don't think any of the TV parodies were bad, per se — they all brought a smile to my face — but I can't escape the feeling that the "Grey's" segment went on a little too long. But I had to love the moment when the boys spotted a doctor's ghost boyfriend (who of course was played on "Grey's" by Jeffrey Dean Morgan, a.k.a. John Winchester). "This show has ghosts too? Why?" Good question, Sam. And of course the spot-on folky-poppy song that played in the background for much of the "Grey's" segment was so perfect because "Supernatural" and "Grey's" have the same music supervisor — Alexandra Patsavas.

I shouldn't limit my praise to Patsavas — far from it. Everyone involved in the making of this episode went above and beyond the call of duty. The score was well-matched to each segment (again, that cheeseball opening-credits song was classic). Director Charles Beeson did an excellent job of imitating each of the very different shows being parodied. (The only real quibble I have about the look of "Changing Channels" is that the "Grey's" set didn't look much like the ABC show — it looked like every hospital scene we've ever seen on "Supernatural." I'd imagine budget limitations might have been part of the issue there.)

One small note: I'm glad that Castiel wasn't really part of the comedic aspects of the episode. As perceptive fans have said on this site in previous discussions, CasComedy often works best when he is the stunned or befuddled straight man reacting to situations that are unfamiliar to him. So the sparing use of him here was just right. Anything more than that would have been pushing the character too far, and as it was, there was plenty of funny to go around without inserting Cas into the proceedings.

One other stray thought: Did the Winchesters and/or Castiel go to Costco and pick up an extra-large container of Ye Olde Angel-Trapping Oil? They sure seem to have a lot of that stuff lying around, which is lucky for them.

But seriously — and, seriously, who knew there would be such a somber ending to this episode? — guest star Richard Speight, Jr. proved his versatility also. He did an excellent job of playing the comedic side of the Trickster, but then he effortlessly shifted gears and gave a very credible performance as the resentful, angry Gabriel. 

Boy, these angels really have some daddy issues, am I right?

Perhaps part of the story of this season is about boys becoming men. The Winchesters have had to figure out how to relate to each other as adults who have differing opinions and sometimes differing agendas. The discussion between Sam and Dean about not having the luxury of a "moral stance" indicated that the brothers can at least have somewhat difficult discussions now without blowing up at each other, even if they don't necessarily agree.

But as others have pointed out, the angels, for all their power, lack any real maturity. Cas is at least starting to make his own choices, but Gabriel and Raphael feel adrift without someone telling them what to do. They just want the doubt and conflict to be over. They want Michael and Lucifer — the older brothers who are at war because Dad isn't around to settle the fight — to finish their tussle and either let the world go down in flames or keep on muddling along.

It'll be interesting to see if Cas (or anyone else) does find God — but part of me thinks He won't be found (honestly, how do you cast that role?). Or if He is located, I bet God won't intervene in the way that the angels want him to. And as the Winchesters have found, blind loyalty to Dad or angry rebellion from the family business — well, those gambits don't necessarily work out the way you want them to.

At some point, you have to stand on your own two feet, not live your life in reaction to someone else's presence or absence, begin making your own choices and living with the consequences. What the angels need is not for God to give Lucifer a time out — the members of the heavenly host need to grow up and get over what Dad did or didn't do for them.

It'll be interesting to see if the Winchesters can win Gabriel (and maybe Raphael and others) over to their side. I'd imagine they have a shot there. Speight's performance made me think that Gabriel is quite possibly open to the idea of entering the fray. The Trickster is, in a weird way, a moral character. Sure, he can seem amoral and is certainly heedless and selfish, but his antics have often involved trying to teach people a lesson of some kind. Surely the possibility of teaching Satan a lesson — not to mention taking meaningful action after centuries of goofing off — could hold some appeal?

It does seem as if the show is putting pieces in place for quite a big showdown in the second half of the season. So far we've met archangels, Lucifer, New!Meg, the Antichrist and of course there's our old pal Zachariah. We've also seen other hunters in the mix and Bobby and Chuck are of course helping out as well. It'll be interesting to see how the show uses this array of characters as the Apocalyptic endgame arrives later in Season 5.

But what exactly is that endgame? I've been thinking a lot about Season 5 lately, and whether the stakes are — or can be — as high as they were in Season 4. 

Of course, the Apocalypse is not a vacation, I get it. But what about the personal stakes between the brothers? That is much of the appeal of the show for me.

The Winchesters' relationship took an interesting turn in Season 4. You never really knew if they were going to stick together or break apart — and yet you knew how much they loved each other. Their growing conflict was compelling, and what occurred in Season 4 was the culmination of years of miscommunication and suppressed conflict between two people who felt intense loyalty and love but also were growing apart.

This season, the boys did break apart — for one whole episode. Then they got back together, talked a bit about respecting each other more, and that was pretty much that.

More and more, I'm thinking their quick reunion and their brief "mistakes were made" chats represent a missed opportunity. I would have liked a deeper exploration of the issues that split them apart in the first place, and being apart would have given Sam and Dean a chance to figure out what their strengths and weaknesses as individuals are.

Perhaps pressure from the network or fear of a fan backlash over splitting the boys up for more than one episode led to the quick reunion. And I fully admit that it might have been hard to pull off multiple episodes without the show's leads working together.

(Also, if we're comparing seasons, Season 4 introduced Castiel, which was a great move, and it also had the mystery regarding the exact nature of Dean's divine mission. Those things really amped up the tension in Season 4, as did the further explorations of the Winchester family mythology.) 

Regarding Season 5, I guess what I'm trying to say is, I feel like the show went from A (the boys with serious trust and anger issues between them, issues that had developed over years) to C (the boys getting along fairly well and working together with little or no friction) without showing me the intervening B (the boys work out the serious problems that came up between them and figure out what growing they need to do as individuals).

Here's some more thinking out loud (and all this is just thinking out loud — these are not Pronouncements About the Season) regarding the Apocalypse and the issue of Sam and Dean as possible meatsuits for Michael and Lucifer.

Is the latter really a danger — is it really possible that the boys could end up being occupied by those entities? We know it would kill or irreparably harm them if they said yes to being vessels. And I'm pretty sure the show isn't the show if it's Winchester-free. An episode of Lucifer vs Michael: Ultimate Cage Match might be interesting. A season of it? Not so much.

And besides, for a variety of quite understandable reasons (not least of which is the whole "It'll kill you" thing), the Winchesters seem determined to not let themselves be vesselized. So… how long can the show play out this possible-vessel angle before it starts to seem like an empty threat? 

Maybe there are twists coming that will answer my questions and shift some of these storylines to the next level. I hope so. Because in the past, "Supernatural" has taken huge gambles and the unthinkable has happened. At the start of Season 2, John Winchester died. At the end of Season 3, Dean went to Hell. At the end of Season 4, the boys unleashed the Apocalypse.

Those were "I can't believe they did that!" moments. But what happens with the Apocalypse? Presumably if it goes forward as Lucifer hopes it will and his side wins, all life ceases on Earth. So I guess that would mean no Season 6. But seriously, doesn't the fact that the angels/Winchesters have to win (or they die, presumably) deflate the tension a little bit?

Now, don't get the impression that my opinions of Season 5 are carved in stone. They are doodled on a napkin at this point. I'm just throwing out some ideas and concerns I have. I'll have to see a lot more of this season before I really decide where Season 5 fits in in the "Supernatural" pantheon. I'm just saying, I still don't know if it'll turn out to be like Season 4, which had a tightly constructed through-line, or like Season 3, which had quite a few outstanding episodes but a major story engine (the whole "We unleashed some demons… who are doing demonic stuff!") that felt pretty amorphous if not vague.

For all I know, the mytharc may take a really epic turn this season (and certainly the Nov. 19 episode looks epic — for more on that look here). But as we saw with the rather unsatisfying Antichrist outing, even episodes that touch on the larger elements of Season 5 need expert handling.

As I've said, I've been satisfied with the quality of the majority of the episodes week to week. But if they're going to do "well, let's just take care of this problem in this town" stories, they need to be really good — a la "Curious Case of Dean Winchester" — if they're going to pass muster. And even if I know the show can't afford epic battles and so forth, I would like to meet a few more of Satan's lieutenant's. Meeting War was a good start in that department.

By the way, speaking of standalone episodes, I thought "The Curious Case of Dean Winchester" was an excellent showcase for Jim Beaver, and in my view the episode's take on Bobby's response to his injury was just right. He would be mad as hell and starting to think he's useless as a hunter, therefore useless as a person. I'm glad the show didn't gloss over his response to the cataclysm that affected his life so radically. And any episode that has a quality Dean-Bobby "talking about feelings" scene is going to be a win in my book (and of course I must say that the scenes Jim Beaver and Chad Everett shared were very entertaining as well).

"Curious Case" had some major funny as well ("Killing you is officially on my bucket list!"), and Chad Everett was outstanding as Old!Dean. He got Dean's mannerisms, body language and speech patterns down perfectly. And given that Dean has always been something of a Grumpy Old Man anyway, all the "Dean's an old dude!" jokes were quite amusing. I'd love to see Everett back on the show some day.

Hal Ozsan was terrific as the he-witch — now there's another character I hope we meet again. If I have one little quibble, it's that we don't know how Sam won the poker game. We're seeing how Sam is becoming even more resourceful and deliberate this season, but it'd be nice to see, in this instance, exactly how he used his smarts to put one over on the he-witch.

OK, on to the commenting rules for this site.

As I've said before, the vast majority of "Supernatural" fans are intelligent, thoughtful, insightful and respectful of my views and the views of their fellow commenters. But some people make me a little crazy.

So before you think about commenting here, keep the following guidelines in mind. And if you can't follow the common-sense guidelines below, you will be banned from commenting on this site.

You won't get a second chance, you won't get a warning.

Why? Because this site functions according to Mo's Grand Theory of Commenting, which can be summed up as the Lurkers Rule. To wit: The environment here should be so accepting, so calm and so non-screechy that most timid lurker should feel it's safe to comment. I simply won't let angry, vicious, annoying or repetitive people hijack the comment areas.

The upshot? Don't tick me off. I'll ban you. Or turn you into an action figure.

So, here are the common-sense guidelines:

• Be nice. To further quote from Alan Sepinwall's Rules for Commenting: "This is an opinion blog, and a place where people can and should argue passionately for their point of view. But there's a difference between arguing with passion and arguing with hostility. If you can't find a way to express your viewpoint without insulting other commenters, or getting strident and self-righteous — say, equating your opinion with fact, and deriding other people for not seeing the truth of your words — then either tone down your words until they're more respectful to other people, or don't comment." Read the whole thing. Those rules apply here.   
• Absolutely no Samgirl-Deangirl fangirl nonsense. I'm not going to explain what this is. We all know what it is. It's possible to critique individual episodes or indeed the creative direction of the show in an intelligent fashion without becoming hysterical about how the writers have ruined Sam, Dean, the show and/or Western Civilization. Alice Jester's post on Sam and Dean, their Infamous Apologies and the nature of family squabbling says it all. As a fan, if you're not coming from the place that Alice is, or someplace in that neighborhood, go elsewhere to rant.
• No comments over 500 words.
• Please, please don't mention any spoilers of any kind. Speculation is fine, actual spoilers are not, even little ones. 
• Enjoy this. I know, everything I wrote above sounds so strict and uptight! And I'm sorry for that (and again, it's aimed at the few people who don't already abide by these guidelines instinctively). But if we can't make this commenting atmosphere enjoyable, then there's no point in doing it.
• Some other relevant info: I read and approve all comments before they are posted. Comments posted Thursday night won't show up until Friday morning. And since commenting typically continues over the weekend, you may see a lag time between when you post your comment and when you see it appear here.
• If you see typos, please be kind when you point them out, and I'll clean them up as soon as I can.

Visit Source