Jensen Ackles | Toronto Convention (July 31, 2022)  [@sarli45 | X | X ]  

Mama void with all of her voidlings 🖤🐈

I don’t think it’s possible for human beings to look more sheepish than the Winchesters after the siren incident.

Turns out the horsemen of the Apocalypse now prefer to go by Shareholder Profit, Private Equity, Corporate Personhood, and Workforce Optimization.

Jensen Ackles | Kansas Convention: SNS Concert (September 24, 2022)  [preserver_time | FudgeTexas | n_e_davis | n_e_davis | shanawatchestv | n_e_davis | n_e_davis | FudgeTexas ]  

Dark Angel Interview

That’s a fair assessment:

So they have almost managed to beat Jensen into submission (Not that I think he is ever going to fully agree). Their "keep asking him until he says what we want" strategy seems headed in the right direction. Poor Jensen can't even now say that interpreting his art in a way that is completely opposite to that intended is offensive to him as an artist. He has to behave like everything is abstract and open to what you take from it.

And Jared is going to hurt because of that answer, because he isn't giving in to them. I hope they just leave the boys alone. The new cons should prioritise questions on ongoing projects.

Fan: People find slivers of connection to your characters in vastly different ways. What you make is art, and what is art if not a mirror? So really, interpretations are more of a reflection of the viewer than the creators. And the nature of cons is that you're asked to say this or that about your character and sometimes that becomes the definitive thing, and sometimes fans use that against other fans, to be like, 'Well, Jared said' or 'Jensen said'. So how do you feel about the way your characters and scenarios are interpreted differently by other people that might not be the way you all see it. I know Jensen you said something about 15x18, where you said we're artists and the artist doesn't stand next to the painting and tell the viewer what to think about the painting. So do you think it would be a good caveat to say, these are - kind of the death of the author kind of thing - so how do you feel about how people interpret your characters so differently, is my question.

Jensen: I kinda still stand by that comment of we are creating - this is an art form that we get to do and luckily we have found an audience, so we get to do it more. But it is, yeah, I wouldn't wanna - I think early on I maybe took a little ... a little umbrage with what people were reading into maybe certain characteristics or certain storylines or whatever and then I realized that nononono that's not up to me to tell them how to interpret what they want to interpret. Or it's not up to me to be disappointed if they're not inspired by what I thought was y'know an inspiring - whatever it might be. And I realized, and I think we've talked about this, that it's like yeah, you don't go into a gallery and have the artist standing next to you and going, "This is what you need to see, and if you don't see it then there's something wrong" - or whatever. Because it's like, no, it is up to interpretation. And if it inspires you or if it makes you feel anything then I think that's the whole point of art and that's the whole point of entertainment is to bring feeling into escapism and feelings and connectivity, all of that should be a part of it but we shouldn't have to tell you that, that's a gift that we give to you and you get to do what you want with that.

Jared: Yeah, we can't tell you that.

Jensen: No, everybody's different.

Jared: I think the artist shouldn't stand next to the paining in this proverbial situation, but I think also the critic shouldn't come in and go like, "This is what that episode was about, this is what the relationship was about, this is what it means to me so this is what needs to mean to all of you." [Jensen nods] It's all incorrect. So whether it's art or life, some people listen to Stairway to Heaven and think it's about uh, you know, this mortal coil that we live with and some people think it's about Lord of the Rings and then you're like okay you're both right. But you don't - you shouldn't tell somebody else that they should think something about that because it means to you what it means to you. And that's great. It means to us what it means to us and that's great. You know, there are objective - there's objective and subjective, right? So if you say, 'Hey, Jensen, Jared, I just love the way y'all deal with aliens and their space ships on Supernatural". I'm not gonna say, "Hey, we didn't have any aliens and spaceships". You know if that's what it means to you, that's great! I'm gonna say that's not - we weren't talking about aliens and spaceships. Um, and so I think that's the wonderful part and why we're here after almost twenty years to talk about - it means something similar to a lot of us, but it means something very unique to all of us as well. It means something different to me than it does to him, even though we have much of a shared experience and probably everybody in this room. And so I think that's the wonderful part of -

Jensen: My answer is there's no wrong answer.

Jared: Yeah, yeah, it means to you what it means to you.

I often have a problem with this for the minor actors, and then cannot identify WHERE I saw them before, and can't concentrate before I can see who they are and where I know them from.

my filmbro toxic trait is recognizing the actors in everything i watch and needing to look it up and confirm it before i can go back to watching the thing

Jensen trying (and failing) to not laugh

Twitter

m. on Twitter

“jealous!winchesters a thread: https://t.co/3PFfy1m9pM”

Love this thread on jealous Winchesters on twitter

Jared’s smile for the masses.