Origins Issue #3

[galathea]

The latest issue of the Origins comic is available now and well, all I can say is that this issue really managed to piss me off even more than the previous instalments in the series. Do these writers pay attention to the actual show .. at all?



My first problem with this issue is the characterisation for Dean in the 1991 timeline. The story opens on a distraught twelve year old Dean, who tells Sam that he is going to run away, because he can't take it anymore. We remember that this is after the Shtriga incident in Something Wicked. So, we are supposed to believe that Dean would leave Sam behind, simply because he is fed up with John? That Dean suddenly comes to the conclusion that running away would force John to take better care of Sam or that he thinks Sam would be better off without him? I’m sorry, but after John’s speech to Dean in In My Time Of Dying or Dean’s monologue at Sam’s death bed in All Hell Breaks Loose II, both of which emphasise that even without John's encouragement Dean always considered Sam to be his responsibility, that's hardly believable. I mean, I can easily imagine that Dean would throw a tantrum and openly express his anger or frustration with John, but actually leaving? Thinking it would be better for Sam and him to be separated? With his kind of abandonment issues? Uhm, no!

In the second timeline, which curiously takes place in 1982, a year before Mary even died *head desk*, John drops Sam and Dean off at the Roadhouse. Now, in the show there is no indication from either Dean or Ellen, that the boys have ever even heard about the Roadhouse, let alone been there in person, before Everybody Loves A Clown. While I am willing to assume that Dean might not remember it, after all, he was only four at that time, Ellen surely should. But okay, let’s say she just doesn’t mention it, when she meets Sam and Dean as adults. However, it's simply unacceptable that these writers can't even be bothered to get at least the simplest facts straight: Firstly, Jo’s full name is Joanna Beth and not Josephine and secondly, she is definitely not the same age as Dean. She is more likely at Sam’s age or even younger. How the writers managed to get simple facts like names and dates wrong is quite frankly beyond me.

John’s characterisation seems to change from issue to issue as well. In the second issue John had no problem at all to leave his kids with a total stranger at a random motel, but now he suddenly has scruples to leave them at the Roadhouse? He readily agreed to kill his injured brother-in-law by pushing his car from a cliff, but now John hesitates to shoot a heeler/shapeshifter who is about to kill him, because he fears it will turn him into a killer? Huh! Even if I take into account that he is terrified at being so close to the creature when it attacks him in the cabin, just a couple of hours later he blows the shapeshifter's head off in cold blood - in front of his four year old son even. The characterisation is jumpy here and not really believable to me.

And the final ominous statement of the hunter that John needs to see Mary again? I am not sure I want to know where they are going with this. A séance? There is no indication that John even had any clue about Mary’s spirit still being around. Ah, well! I have to admit, the comic series becomes more and more an annoyance and frustration to me. It is really not difficult to keep track of the most basic facts the show itself relays about the Winchesters' past, and the characterisations for Dean, Sam and John in their younger versions shouldn't be that difficult to figure out either. Why the writers don’t make an effort to accurately tie the comic in with canon is beyond me. After all, the comic is for the fans of the show and they are most likely the first ones to notice, if the tone and characterisation of the comics are off.