Hey everyone! Thanks for watching my video. I made it a couple years ago but the majority of the attention it's gotten has been very recent, which has been an awesome surprise. I've been reading through the comments, which I really appreciate, and I keep seeing two that I wanted to address... First, people can't believe that I don't give season four more credit. And I get it. John Lithgow was incredible. The whole season was. I rank it only behind seasons 2 and 7, for reasons I explain in the video, and season 1, which is a sentimental favorite. Second, a lot of people are upset that I spoiled the ending of Murder on the Orient Express. I don't get this one. The whole video is about moral dilemmas, so I was comparing the two big ones on Dexter with ones from other stories. It's kind of impossible to compare dilemmas without discussing what happens during them. And I put a spoiler warning at the start of the video. So my question is, are people missing the spoiler warning, or do some people not understand what a spoiler warning is? I don't mean for that to sound snarky. I'm seriously asking. If the spoiler alert is too quick then I'll make it longer going forward because I don't want to spoil anything. I appreciate any feedback here. Thank you again so much. Dave Oh, I forgot to mention that yes, I do mispronounce episodic, as so many people have been nice enough to point out. LOL. Please keep roasting me for it;-)
Great analysis, got yourself a new sub. The YT algorithm just recommended this to me lol, interesting timing. As for your question, idk I think the warning was long enough. I definitely could read it completely.
I'd be interested in your thoughts on Dexter New Blood and how that show resolves itself compared to how the original series did it. I think the new show worked stronger with it.
The show was HEAVILY promoted in its' time. We heard about it everywhere. Why? Because the main character went after nobodies while once again, the oligarchy was completely ignored and unscathed. "Well done Dexter", they all said.
Truly, the biggest mistake in the series is that the code should have been: Don't get caught. Don't kill the innocent. Stay away from small town cops armed with the power of google.
So many people said that the finale of Dexter: New Blood was a great conclusion for the story, made total sense, etc. I will argue that it made zero sense in terms of what the characters would and wouldn't do (and that's setting aside the massive plot holes and retconning of original Dexter stories to fit the sequel and lead to that point). To me, it just feels that the writers felt compelled to shoehorn the story into a conclusion that they planned in advance but couldn't make either the story or the characters fit.
@@elinat8665 I honestly might hate the ending for New Blood MORE than the last few seasons of Dexter. They had such a good villain too. Destroyed any chance of a good story with the last episode.
its not that characters acted differently, its that they wrote dexter to have finally cracked. Which relating a lot to dexter myself I can completely see in him. When he brought his son with him, he crossed into psychosis. The storyline as ridiculous as it is was idea from the book where Dex teaches astor and cody to murder. @@elinat8665
@@elinat8665 The writing was so lazy it's painful, plus it felt like a forced way to leave doors open for spinoffs. Either have Dexter face the music or have him get shot trying to get away.
Still, it's amazing how many shows break this rule. And now that we're in an age where bad people aren't allowed to be bad, we're probably going to see a lot more of this bad storytelling.
I have this rule. Don't write dark stories if you're scared of dark implications. The writers of Breaking Bad understood this. Writers of Bojack Horseman knew this. The writers of Dexter did not.
Yes, it's almost like they were scared of somehow ruining or changing Dexter's character. I mean, it's kind of boring that he remains the same throughout the entire story.
@@stretch654 Because Dexter is constructed as a bad boy. On one side, he kills people, everything else is on the good side. Audience likes these kind of characters and authors are very careful to keep Dexter as he is, if anything they turn Dexter to be better. So we got the show that has a very dark setting, yet it's really a no sugar vanilla flavour when it comes to serial killers. What authors didn't know is that audience LOVES when characters from good to rotten bad... like Walter White did. If they had the balls to gradually turn Dexter worse, and worse, and worse until audience hate him, this show would be a bomb.
@@dariozanze4929 Barry did this also really good. The hitman protagonist wants to stop beeing a hitman and become an actor and you just excpect it to work but instead he becomes worse every season and pretends that everytime he kills someone it will be the last time.
@@dariozanze4929 I would've loved to see him deteriorate throughout the show, however I suspect many female viewers would've been turned off by that. Part of Dexter's appeal is that he often acts in the best interests of those closest to him (Debra, Rita, Harrison, Lumen, etc.) while pursuing his own goals, displaying great competency at providing for and protecting those he values (despite a few slip-ups) and taking an active role in eliminating other societal threats. Yet, he's a bit of a challenge (living a secret and guarded life) and, as we saw with Rita, many women would like to rescue, domesticate, and use this monster to their advantage. That's hot. If he had instead degraded to the point of irredeemability, it would've been much more interesting to see but ruined his appeal to many female viewers. No one says Tony Soprano or Walter White is hot (baldness and physicality aside). I can't help but think New Blood showing Dexter to be solitary, yet self-domesticated and otherwise "unavailable" is just a small facet as to why that sequel caused great disappointment.
Dexter is a great show if you allow yourself to truly believe Dexter is the good guy. It's a fantastic show to binge if you turn off your brain and just think "Yay Dexter killing bad people and can never get caught"
@@eek42we got plenty of shows that are deep, like Mr robot and breaking bad and such, but Dexter he's a morally grey person but it's great you don't need it to be so complicated
You didn’t mention the ultimate moral dilemma in Poirot, where in the finale he is unable to prove that the killer is guilty so he kills him and then out of the guilt of becoming a murderer he doesn’t take his heart medicine so he would have a heart attack, effectively killing himself as punishment.
That's a great point. Such an odd way for the series to end. I gotta watch it again. My literal reaction to watching that the first time was "Wait... What?" lol
@@davescripted3796 If you've read the book series, you'd find it wasn't a weird way to end the series at al (this is also how the book-series ends,by the way)l. While Poirot was a man of high morals for sure, he was also a man of ego. A very big ego. Him killing Norton was actually very in character, as Poirot couldn't allow Norton to get away with his crimes (his Morality), and how would it look if Poirot had let the killer get away after Poirot had caught so many of them? It could affect hos reputation, and Poirot enjoyed when people thought the best of him (his Ego). Christie also conformed it herself, saying that's why she hated Poirot so much, because he was "a detestable, bombastic, tiresome, ego-centric little creep".
@@KimeraOne there's abit of a flaw in that statement, EGO, how does Poriot care about what others think of him, most of it is for his own benefit, and his moral code, given he used to be a detective who has a thirst for justice and seeing things right and his OCD is really what allows him to see things right and see what others dont, a man learning to live with a disadvantage and making the best of it also Christie lived abit like Poriot, her house, papers and the like, some modern block of apartments and would live in seclusion maybe she really just hated him as he reminded her so much of herself, and was really making a personal judgement on herself
When I watched Dexter I always liked to think that he wasn't actually a psychopath and that he was just a disturbed child poorly raised by his disillusioned Dad. There were so many instances where he seemed to have convinced himself that he couldn't feel but he clearly could... Then they went and scanned his brain and destroyed any question
To be fair there are several shows and movies that play with that trope of "psychopath stops being a psychopath once he discovers the power of friendship" and it always strikes me as odd
@@BRobMorrishe shows way too much empathy and sympathy for others in the show to be a psychopath. They make the mistake of arguing (like much fiction) that he's only like this because of trauma. In reality many people with good childhoods are just terrible and other people have horrible childhoods but choose to be good people. The book version is more selfish, but the author dips his toe in the supernatural.
@@jacobstaten2366 it's too simple to say "well other people have bad childhoods and aren't like that" people aren't the same, their brain chemistries aren't the same and how they think about their experiences (that are never absolute mirrors) aren't the same
The interesting thing is that Dexter did break his code, but they never touched on it. In season 5 when he’s reeling from Rita’s murder he kills a random guy at a rest stop. Sure they made it seem like he was unsavory and possibly could’ve fit the code, but there was no way Dexter could’ve known that for sure. Instead it’s undone by the introduction of Lumen and the code being reinvigorated in Dexter. Could you imagine if that first few episodes it showed Dexter hunting outside of his code, maybe actually targeting an innocent and then maybe that leads him to Lumen and it actually gives him a reason to use the code again.
@@user-fz9vk4js5l yeah that’s what I’m saying, the writers still had to make it seem like he was some stereotypical asshole, maybe an abusive drunk or something. They leaned too heavily into this Dark Avenger aspect of Dexter. I remember in season 1 he kills a drunk driver who yeah he killed someone behind the wheel, but Dexter justifies him fitting the code because he’s an alcoholic who still drives drunk. If you look at Harry’s code, that guy doesn’t fit the code really, because he’s not a serial killer per se. If they just leaned more into Dexter changing the code to feed his urges, then they could’ve tackled those moral dilemmas. Instead they just always found ways for Dexters victims to always fit the code, and whenever there was a risk to him and his dark passenger getting exposed, there was outside intervention, almost nigh divine intervention.
@@Schrodinger_ another aspect the show could’ve tackled, Dexter killing someone via the ritual and the code and him finding out they were truly innocent. Would he feel more guilt or conflict that he killed someone who didn’t fit the code? As the video says, Dexter is a killer who seemingly grows a conscious over the course of the show, so if he killed someone innocent, not to protect his secret but because he was wrong would he feel guilty about or would it thrill him and make him crave it more than killing someone within the code?
Dexter writters were scared of making Dexter truly bad. That's the truth. They wanted a good guy vigilante serial killer, but that's quite simply not who Dexter is, and it's not even a sensible concept Dexter kills because of a need, and because of the code, he kills people who deserve it. But he's not a vigilante Breaking Bad understood a guy like Walter White wouldn't do it for his family. They understood he wasn't a good person and had deeply selfish intentions
You are so spot on with this comment and I see way too many people overlook and/or ignore, whether intentionally or not, the giant flaws in the writing of Dexter especially in the later seasons. I think they felt they needed Dexter to be someone the audience cheers for with minimal hesitation, someone they want to be free, happy and loved e.t.c. He is in a very questionable area morally though, and they should have pursued the idea of him being a morally grey anti-hero instead of some heroic, good natured, serial killer pyschopath which obviously makes no sense but thats what they so desperately tried to do and unsurprisingly failed at. Dexter is supposed to be a man who feels nothing or very, very little and has dark urges to kill and he is held back by the code which keeps him from being a monster. It is not that he is a good man fighting off his monster within and I think the writing team forgot that or got confused about that.
@@LuckyNobody1Yep, another example is Joe from You (‘YOU’ S4 SPOILERS AHEAD)…. So by the end of Season 4 they make it very clear Joe is evil and not some sympathetic killer with what he does with Nadia framing her who’s completely innocent for the murders that he committed with not remorse. The writers for Dexter could’ve went down that path.
@@LuckyNobody1 I feel like he does care about some of the people in his life. But that's about it, and they did ask some interesting questions regarding that. However, the writers wanted the audience to cheer for him, like you said. But it directly conflicts with the essence of the character
“Why isn’t Dexter allowed to be bad, HE’S A SERIAL KILLER” I love that quote. Killing Doakes made so much narrative sense to me. He finds out in the episodes before that Harry finally saw what the code has wrought and couldn’t live with himself. Dexter should have the thought that if Harry didn’t respect the code, why should he? The rules were so vague that Harry never considered when the 2 rules became mutually exclusive. Dexter could say Doakes deserved because of his vigilante Justice toward the Haitian in S1. Hell, he killed and would kill for a lot less. But unfortunately the writers thought we would riot if the serial killer killed someone and gives Dexter a convenient out and then the chickens take 4 seasons to roost because he forgot a blood slide (something he’d never do) only to do the same song and dance again, fuck it.
Maybe the problem was trying to imply that there was a moral dilemma in the first place. Dexter never truly had a code. He had his father's code. He held onto it because of how it served him. It allowed him to move freely in the world, feeling good about himself, indulging his worst impulses, with people still holding him in high esteem. I think his real dilemma was more of an identity crisis... He seemed to have a serious case of imposter syndrome because he could never really be himself and was afraid to try. It's pretty telling that others had to do the really "dirty" work for him. In some ways I think that was the real moral test, which he obviously failed. Especially when Deb, a deeply feeling person, was the one to "take care of" Maria. I haven't watched the series in years, though. This was a nice reminder to rewatch!
Realistically I think if any kind of real idea was being touched on it by the directors, it was probably Dexter's struggling to fit in and figure out who he is. He is a psychopath whos seen and done the worst things to sure, bad people, but seeing and doing those things doesnt change the effects on a person especially after being raised into it and shown what to do with those feelings. Dexter rarely struggles with 'morally' right or wrong things from what I remember, it a lot more down to what is gained or lost and an essential view point. Like dating Rita at first from what I remember was more to look normal and not fit into the criteria of 'Single adult white male' and seem more normal. Most of what we see initially of Dexter is him focusing on appearances and constantly worrying about if someone may see who he really is. Even toward the end of the show with his kid, the morally right thing is giving the kid up the moment Rita died, a psychopath murdering father who goes out once a week to murder isnt a good dad. But the issue wasnt morals. The issue came with Dexter being scared his kid would be like him, unfeeling, isolated, not knowing what these dark urges are or could be, and later struggling with how his kid would see him if he knew the truth. The show wasnt trying to tell us whos right and whos wrong, it was showing us way more about fitting in, overthinking, and self-loathing I think.
very true. Its supposed to be an antidote to sociopathy and psychopathy. I always thought it was clearly written that way. I relate to the character in ways most audiences do not, and I can honestly say it produced some effect. It did push me towards confronting my psychopathy and worst memories @@scorchinorphan1687
Killing Doakes would've broke his code, but there was enough gray there to have the *character* justify it in the moment. He talks about how Doakes shoots a lot of suspects and how he's not 100% innocent, given his past, and that's absolutely true. Killing Doakes would've led to some interesting character development for Dexter as he struggled with that choice for the rest of the series. Instead, as you said, it was a return to the status quo. The interesting thing about LaGuerta is that he couldn't even half-heartedly justify that killing. And he ends up running *anyway* in the end. It feels like the writers made it way harder on themselves than it needed to be just to allow Dexter to remain a "good guy". When the whole point of the series was (or at least should've been) that Dexter is not at all a good guy. Dexter is a puzzling series when it comes to the writing. Some of it is astonishingly well written (even, as you said, when they go off-book) and then some is so amateurishly written it shocks me that people were getting paid to write it.
The book/s make it clear that Doakes is every bit the monster Dexter is. Its why Doakes is hard on Dexter. Doakes can tell what Dexter is like and vice versa. Also the lab tech is a nutbar to. But the books do have a habit of having Dexter think a lot of people of like him. Unreliable narrator probably.
It is pretty strange that they killed off Doakes in season 2 since he was like the main foil to Dexter. For example that's like if in Breaking Bad they killed off Hank in season 2.
Doakes was a murderer, and Dexter knew it because the blood evidence didn't match Doakes' story of what happened under the bridge. So there's no code violation or moral dilemma. How does everyone keep missing this?
@@pintolerance785 They couldn't keep Doakes around and keep it from getting stale or Doakes seeming like a moron. Once he's suspicious, it'd be almost impossible for Dexter to not get caught.
Okay but Doakes going to prison after being framed by Dexter and trying to convince everyone of the truth would have been such a perfect escalation for their antagonism: Doakes has gone from being able to freely pursue the truth about Dexter, to being in full possesion of the truth but unable to do anything about it. It would also be a great escallation from the previous dilema where Dexter framed his girlfriends ex husband, showing him developing new codes/patterns of behaviour for new situations, and how impossible it is for a strict set of rules to be applied to a variety of situations with an equal moral outcome. The stakes would have been raised because any slip up on Dexters part would cooberate Doakes story. You could also have a character like Angel, who had significant emotional beats with both of them, put in the middle of the fight and have him start to question what actually happened. Theres just so much potential for where the story could go from there its such a waste of potential.
Dude, imagine, what if Debra or Angel figured something was wrong with Dexter, visited Doakes in death row, and Doakes helped them piecing out that Dexter was the real Bay Harbor Butcher, and it kicked the manhunt back in motion. So much wasted potential.
@hollyro4665 I watched that show like over a decade ago so I don't really remember it that well but maybe that's where it came from in my brain lol. I feel like framed man has to convince people of who the real killer is is a pretty common trope tho and it would be interesting to see it play out in a show where the serial killer is the protagonist.
Yeah, and that kind of storyline has been pulled of before too! NBC’s Hannibal did it, with Hannibal framing Will Graham for the Chesapeake Ripper case. Now Will did end up getting out of it, but only because Hannibal and another killer both tried to make it look like the Ripper was still at large so doubt would be cast on his conviction. And it also gave Hannibal plenty of time to clean up any loose ends so nobody could trace the murders back to him even after Will, who was very insistent Hannibal was the killer, was released. If they’d done something like that, with Dexter framing Doakes, cleaning up his act and then regretting having done it and choosing to find a way to free him without Doakes being able to point the finger would have made a great story. And nobody but Doakes saw Dexter do it. If there’s no evidence, the accusation can’t be followed through.
@beedoesthings8037 you make a really good point, I would rather see it play out a bit differently with Dexter not seeing anything wrong with what he did and continuing with his life while Doakes has to work hard to convince the people around him and the people on the outside who believe him having to fight to find evidence while pretending not to suspect anything. Meanwhile it's becoming increasingly obvious that Dexters moral code doesn't stop him from being a bad person
I think the perfect solution to this problem would have been to keep the course of events the same, but with Dexter resolving that he’d have to kill him with that not having to happen. The fact that he knows he would have done it will have still shaken him to his core, and the technicality of him not actually doing it but still being torn up over it keeps him a sympathetic character from the POV of the audience while not canceling out the effect of the dilemma.
I agree! That's the only solution I've heard that could actually work. As much as people might want Dexter to go through with the difficult choice, it would ruin the show.
Wouldn't it be possible if he felt guilty if he had constant reminders of it? Like people still thought doakes was the butcher. So constant slander against one person who actually knew Dexter which was illogical since doakes was locked up even during the killings would be enough imo @goopguy548
I agree! The real moral moral dilemma is him being bad v. him being evil. If he had made the decision to be evil, then he would have had to grapple with that. Then he has a choice: actively choose to be different or be as just evil as the people he's killing, which would have been so interesting. For me, part of the show's allure was him walking that tight-rope.
I loved Doakes, he was such a great antagonist to Dexter and no other character equalled his presence and charisma. They should ve kept him in for more seasons and have a real cat and mouse plot going for way longer as it was truly exciting to watch. Or find a way to make him survive season 2's story which would ve kept Dexter on his toes for the next seasons. As you said, the excitement for the next seasons never matched season 2's conflict.
@@spookspotlightnews-spookoh he survived alright... But getting blown up might have been a more desirable outcome. I'm not sure Showtime had the nerve to go down that rabbit hole.
9:00 Might have been interesting if Dexter had realized that Lila was going to find Doakes and now had to make the choice: 1) Stop Lila, leaving him with the same dilemma about how to deal with Doakes. 2) Let Lila fix his problem for him, technically following the code, but also knowing full well that he pulled a fast one.
In the book, poirot doesn't act like he is in much of a moral dilemma. He offer the passengers the fake explanation first. When no one's buying it, he shows them that he knows exactly what transpired. But in the end, he gives the police the fake explanation without a fuss.
Was surprissed to find that moral dilemma in the show here for that reason. I had to read the book on highschool and my recollection was that he felt pretty high and mighty about the fact that he found a way to exhonerate them all. If I remember correctly also, the room where the victim was had the lights off so none of the potential killers knew if he had been stabbed before they entered the room, so no one really knew who exactly had killed him.
@@BIIGLOO-r3q It wasn't improved, it was just different. I hope you've actually read the book to so flippantly claim the TV show "improved" it. (If you can't tell, I highly prefer the book).
Poirot of the show is an infinitely better character than the one in the novels. It’s a rare thing for a TV adaptation to improve on the original, but to be fair Agatha Christie didn’t care for him much and didn’t really do much with the character across the stories. Poirot is much improved by the addition of a moral dimension and a sense of humor.
I agree. Dexter would have killed Doakes. Probably making the rationalization that Doakes stopping him stops him from getting rid of serial killers. Then later him figuring out he's just a killer would let the weight of his rationalizations fall upon him. Could have made for a gorgeous scene. Especially if Deb was there for it.
I would have stopped watching as soon as Dexter became just another serial killer murdering innocent people? Who but another sociopath would want to watch that?
@@davidhoward4715he would still be the main character? Moron. You have an entire show building up to the “murder is murder” realization, and what would make you stop watching is just that the show stops pretending Dexter isn’t a murderer?
A great example of a moral dilemma is near the beginning of Death Note. Light establishes a code for himself and is immediately challenged. Light responds by breaking his code with barely a thought. It wasn't a super high tension decision, but it told us everything we needed to know about Light. We learn from that moment it was never actually about killing criminals, and as the series goes, we see Light continually break and bend the rules to maintain his delusions of being a savior. That one moral dilemma at the start pushed Light down the path of having a god complex, and the show was incredible for it. Death Note, unlike Dexter, had the balls to make its main villain bad. They are in the same vein of Serial killer killing criminals, but the author of Death Note knew where they wanted the story to end. Light was never the good guy. He was never going to win in the end. The writers of Dexter seemed obsessed with making Dexter a good person who got the happy ending. He is the "good guy Serial Killer" after all, so he isn't technically bad. It's a shit argument, and the writers definitely just wanted to milk the show. If Dexter changes, the show changes, the show changes, Dexter may not get good ratings.
Americans have a weird tendency to want to excuse horrible actions of their protagonist. Even when it comes to Comedies like Friends or Seinfeld. The Friends go unpunished for their misdeeds and the Seinfeld crew getting arrested is treated as a Betrayal of the fans.
I just discovered this channel, never heard of either or Poirot before 10 mins ago, but this dude talks about em in such an engaging way. Instant subscribe.
Actually I think it was in season 5, dexter finally decides to run away thinking the FBI suspects him of killing Rita. Then he completely loses it and kills some random guy who happened to annoy him. Which made him completely break the code and give in to his dark side but its like the showrunners decided to ignore that. Its never mentioned again
this is a really good video, i was too young when dexter came out to realize the faults in the moral dilemmas and youve brilliantly explained and described them
Something I wished the show touched upon more, ironically, was Harry. Rewatching the show, it's clear there's something very disturbed and wrong with Harry, he essentially grooms and abuses Dexter into being a serial killer. It's an aspect of the character that is never really touched upon either, but you can hear it when he talks to the child Dexter, he constantly reinforces the idea that Dexter is a monster that can't change, and of course teaches him how to kill, something he shouldnt know how to do (yes they sort of retcon this in the later season but i digress). But Dexter does change, he starts caring about people and feeling feels for them "it's not fake anymore" In my headcannon, Harry was the true evil, a serial killer that passed on his craft, which is why he is the representation of the dark passenger. Harry is the darkness that entered Dexter that day in the shipping container
I totally agree and I think that’s why the guy in the video is wrong at 8:05 because killing dokes doesnt go against who Dexter thinks he is, it goes against who harry thinks Dexter should be. Which seemed like the reason why he started questioning the code so much during season 3. The vid isn’t all wrong it’s just that bit I think he misinterpreted
yea, I don't think Dexter is a psycopath, he has high functioning autism, that's why Vogel was so perplexed when he showed emotions and signs of caring for people. Harry and Vogel made him believe that he was a monster and reinforced it. I don't agree on your last sentence tho, Harry wasn't a serial killer and he isn't the dark passenger, he portrays the code and morality of Dexter, he never incites him to kill, he just reminds him of the code when.
10:00 honestly, this is one of the big reasons that i assert that (show) dexter is absolutely NOT a psychopath...he believes he is, but he repeatedly shows FAR too much attachment to others, and empathy/emotion for them. i spent the entire show waiting for ANYONE to call him on his bullshit, and there was a character near the end who was an expert on psychopaths who really SHOULD have, but for some reason the show never even explored this area. i think it could have really added a lot to his characterization to challenge this core belief about himself
The one doesn't have to rule out the other. There are plenty of serial killers that are labelled as psychopaths, but had loving relationships. With either wives, mothers and/or brothers. Ted Bundy had a brother and they genuinely had brotherly love towards eachother.
The Hollywood portrayal of psychopaths is nonsense. Science has shown many times that they do possess empathy, it's just more selective and callous. They can love their families just fine, but then remorselessly kill someone for trivial reasons.
I agree! It would have been interesting if he was 98% a psychopath but someone called him on that other 2% and was like, hey, you don't have to kill people. You can overcome that compulsion. Also the fact that Dexter changes and evolves. And as the audience, you're left wondering if he can actually "overcome" his tendency to be a serial killer and lean into the parts of his life that he's unexpectedly come to love. Crazy stuff. Love Dexter's premise.
Dexter would have killed Doakes and his narcissism would have reconciled the breach of Code with the fact Doakes was a killer, just a legally protected one.
I wanted Dexter to be arrested by Debra and everything to come crumbling down, everyone learning about him and maybe even him helping them with future cases kinda like Hannibal, there really was a LOT of ways the show could have gone.
@@Cryin98 I think it would have been great but It wasn't just about that though, we just never really got to experience any kind of reaction from the characters that we followed through the seasons and then the show released where he is in alaska or smth and his son is there and granted it had a great villain but it wasn't a proper epilogue imo.
@@torturapesnorrarape Yeah, very true. And even though they were told they weren’t allowed to kill him, there’s so many ways it could have panned out, like you said.
I was rewatching the show with my roommate (i finished it 10 years ago, it was his first time) and couldve sworn i vividly remembered Dexter having to kill Debra because she was going to turn him in and they were on the boat and everything. When we watched the finale, i was shocked and realized I probably created a false story in my head all these years to compensate for the terrible ending we got
The thing about Dexter's "moral code" that allows him to be a vigilante killer while still considering himself a good person is that it's a facade, and always was. It was a lie he told himself time and time again because the ugly truth was always that he kills because he wants to. There are several points throughout the show where Dexter's true nature shows itself when he's backed into a corner. Had season 2 stuck to its guns and had Dexter commit to that choice -- had he killed Doakes to protect himself -- then season 3 could have been the start of his downward spiral. Dexter would have no idea what to think of himself, and he would have to wrestle with everything that's just been outlined, until eventually things came to a head, and he accepted what he really was. We would see a version of Dexter without this false sense of justice telling him that what he's doing is okay, and he would start killing anyone he wanted to without remorse, which would inevitably cause the perfect little life he built around himself to crumble. Fans might not have liked this--because a lot of people seem to misunderstand Dexter and consider him some kind of hero--but I think that would have been the best direction to take here.
also, this video & the general consensus of this guy's video (the comments section, although not all) is all superficial, in its premise & critical analysis
I think having him resolve to do it, on his way to kill him then he gets the bail out could have given the best of both worlds to shake him, make him acknowledge how BS his code is when push comes to shove but kept him from crossing that line so whether he is going to or not could be dragged out a bit but
Hi Sheev! I'm watching the show for the first time now and I had been assuming what you described was going to be the natural trajectory of the show. I'm astonished to hear that it ISN'T
Thank You. I'm somehow here 6 months later, and had to scroll way too far to see this. One of those things that makes you doubt if they've ever watched things and talked to people, probably only ever read it it, and guessed, so, so, wrong.
@canisretro it's not that "crazy" even though i noticed immediately it was wrong, yes. No beta listeners before publishing either i guess. No "proofreader" equivalent to check your video essay. Here he guessed it would be like how the word "episode" is pronounced not realizing in English we have all these norms to explain why it's different. Kinda like atom and atomic pronounce the "tom" part so differently.
@@canisretroDon't get so triggered over a mispronounciation. Just because he said something wrong doesn't mean that he hasn't "watched things or talked to people" (whatever that's supposed to mean)
@@Ai-Spectre0 No but it certainly makes you harder to take seriously. I'm not going to take the media critique of someone who can't pronounce elementary school-level vocabulary 😭
Irish myth has a concept called "gaes" which is a code that grants power when held, and brings devastation when broken. Had Dexter been allowed to break his code and as a result become increasingly sloppy and grey, ultimately ending with killing his sister, it would have been a lot more compelling. But really, doakes should have been around until trinity, then that could expose dex to doakes, and you could cut out a bunch of fluff as dexter spiraled down.
@@thispersonwriting1889 haha, its sad to think about how many good concepts get trashed by bad writers. I watched dexter, then breaking bad, then got...and one out of three is a bad record. I don't even bother with these shows anymore because even if they start good they become trash.
@@daniel8181 I think the process is as follow: Writer/Author: comes up with material. Editor: removes clutter, flaws, and those good aspects with the potential to become ruinous. Publisher: sees quality, publishes it. Audience/Readers: sees quality, engages with it. Everyone: Congratulates writer/author. Continuation Writer/author: comes up with more material. Editor: Removes clutter and flaws. Editor: Attempts to remove those good aspects with the potential to become ruinous. Writer/author: Insists on including those elements because they are good elements. Publisher: Sees quality, publishes it. Audience/Readers: sees quality, engages with it. Everyone: congratulates Writer/author, admonishes Editor. Continuation Writer/Author: comes up with material Editor: removes flaws, attempts to remove clutter. Writer/Author: insists on including clutter. Publisher: sees amount of content, sees lack of flaws, publishes it. Audience/Readers: sees amount of content, sees lack of flaws, engages with it. Everyone: Congratulates writer/Author, chastises Editor. Good elements with ruinous potential: start to take over and become bad (with clutter in the way, it’s hard to notice, and these elements are so integral to the story by now that it’s too late to remove them). Continuation Writer/Author: comes up with material Editor: Attempts salvage and damage control. Publisher: publishes it Audience/Reader: engages with it, wonders where these flaws, clutter, and ruinous elements came from. Everyone: Yells at Editor for lack of quality. Nobody did anything unexpected, unreasonable, or with ill intent, and everybody did their jobs and reacted normally, and yet it ends up being what nobody wanted in the end.
my gripe was always that they didnt know how to let a sociopath be an actual sociopath. we could have had a show where we see how that kind of person really deals with dilemmas pitting their personal code against the feelings of their supposed loved ones; these would be no-brainer "abandon life and flee" situations. which works fine for a seasonally episodic setup! plenty of human drama to be mined from those he leaves behind, rather than some phony inner turmoil. half hearted attempts for him to grow emotionally fell flat anyway. it just never really made any sense.
@@myboatforacar well number one sociopaths actually have a conscience, its just weak. That being said, he didn't start killing bad guys to protect the innocent like the other guy claims, he did it cuz his father tried to tame him and tried to teach him how to not get caught
@@nomanejane5766 My armchair psychologist's reading of it was that it was a redirection of his feeling of helplessness, which were amplified when he was a child through the trauma he underwent, manifesting as primeval wrath under a thick veneer of methodically maintained control. That's why he endulges in this extreme version of a power fantasy - revenge.
5:25 Reminds me of the Doctor Who Quote “Sometimes, the only choices you have are bad ones, but you still have to choose.” Funnily enough, this is in the Orient Express episode!
@@iprobablyforgotsomething as someone who has watched it my whole life, i think you'd like it, i gained many moral lessons from it as a child, and also a fear of statues.
In the Witcher I recall Geralt saying "f I have to choose between one evil and another, then I prefer not to choose at all" which in my view is choosing the greater evil
I stand by that the core issue is the writers thought Dexter was a hero when he was always a villian. He's a sociopathic seiral killer, the fact that he's killing "bad people" is just an excuse he gives himself to give him to his murderous impulses. Breaking Bad is everything Dexter could have been strictly because the writers understood this core rule. Best way i think to honestly examine dexters actions is to question would he kill someone like himself. A man who has murdered thousands because he claims they are all "evil"?
@michaelsimmons8613 people and Dexter fans constantly see Dexter as the hero and constantly justify or romanticize what he does while people like, Fuches from Barry, are more qualified as Dexter victims than half the people Dexter went after
Im sorry, but its pretty clearly shown that dexter is not a hero... the writers never painted him as a hero, people seem to not understand that the main character of a story is not inherently a hero. Dexter is portrayed at best, as a necessary evil, you could consider him an antihero, like frank castle as the punisher but theres literally no way he can be considered a hero. Where does this hero shit come from?
@@Seasonal-Shadow_4674i dont get it, dexter isnt a hero, but he is absolutely justified in almost every killing he commits. He doesnt just kill for the sake of it, an alcoholic doesnt drink to get drunk, they drink in order to feel normal and thats what dex does for the most part, he kills to satiate the dark urge so he can function as a person. He was born in blood similarly to a baby born with an opiate or crack addiction. He is damaged beyond repair and without the code and channeled release he spends a lifetime in a prison cell or insane asylum. People latch on to dexter for the same reason they latch on to characters like the punisher, necessary evils that invert the typical hero trope because the system is corrupt.
I don’t know if this is just me but didn’t he start killing only because he couldn’t not kill? Like of course he’s been trained into thinking that he only is supposed to kill bad guys, but that’s all because he just needed a moral ground to stay on to make himself believe killing is okay? Like the real reason why he’s killing is because he wants to not because he has to. Idk that’s just me 🤷♀️
The real Dexter definitely would’ve killed Doaks, and I would’ve LOVED to see him agonize over it for seasons to come. I agree with you, we were robbed. Would love to see your perspective on the seasons & why you ranked them the way you did.
@@beattheodds6219 part of the code is not to get caught. the not killing of innocence applies more to his mo, who he can have fun killing. not to what he has to do in order to not get caught.
It's very strange how the show refuses to accept the absurdly obvious reality that a "good guy serial killer" is paradoxical and impossible. He's not killing as a means to an end to rid the world of evil people, he's finding evil people as a means to the end of fulfilling his urge to murder. Harry's code doesn't work because you might identify bad guys incorrectly, disproportionately administer death to someone who didn't deserve such a severe punishment, or get caught and be forced to act in self preservation. Instead of writing Dexter the character with his code against the reality of the universe and letting it hit its natural conflicts, they molded the universe around Dexter to allow him to kill people for pleasure and get away with it.
I wouldnt say "good guy serial killer" is impossible, partly due to how subjective the word Good is. But there are even some common ethical arguments that would promote Dexter's actions, particularly utilitarianism (as controversial as utilitarianism is). Personally, I think he saved a lot more lives than he actually took, and the lives he saved were worth more than the scum he tended to take out. Even if he was only doing it to fulfill his own needs. That being said, I don't really believe there's been a good guy serial killer in real life... or, at least not more than one in a billion or so. To be willing to kill, but also have the discipline to hold back from killing until you have absolute proof, it's a very specific temperament. Also it's a rare person who would be in a position to encounter, confirm, and abduct that many people who the world would be absolutely better off without.
It's not strange at all. A lot (and I mean A LOT) of people share the show's mentality: vigilante justice is the right kind of justice, because bad guys getting away would be the worst thing imaginable, bad judgement just does not exist, and no punishment is too harsh. Vigilantes are revered because they are a projection of many people's sense of justice.
Some people provide nothing beneficial to the world, but negativity. You're negating, Dexter's pure 'luck'. He does end up making people slip through the system, but that doesn't mean that someone like himself couldn't just get 'lucky'.
Excellent video! The best example of moral dilemmas done well is Barry on HBO. It’s the most character choice-driven show I’ve ever seen. The writers never write a character out of a dilemma to maintain them as a “good” person in the eyes of the audience. Barry and everyone else receive every consequence of every choice, no matter how tragic or brutal.
YES, this perfectly explains why season 2 was so exciting and then so disappointing. It made me hate Dexter that he got everything he wanted, by doing absolutely nothing, then punished Lyla for it by killing her at the end, as if she wasn't his easy way out for the most compelling problem of the show so far. Everything leading up to that ending had been so delightful but it made me lose all interest I had in continuing. This really put it into words. Also same, Jane's death was so harrowing that even expecting the worst, it was so shocking I didn't know how to live with it for a second there. It's amazing how Walt is so awful yet I don't feel cheated by his actions the way I felt cheated by Dexter
@@happoki In France? How was she going to hurt them all the way over there? I was annoyed he sought her out. And that he killed her for being a killer when he was overjoyed to benefit from her actions. I understand she's a "loose end," it was just all resolved in the most annoying way possible for me.
Jane's death wasn't Walt's fault she did it herself when she used the needle again. If anything it's Jesse's fault Jane died because he got her back into d rugs
@@SunBane67 No, give it a rewatch. Jane made her own choices but the episode shows clearly that she dies that night because first, Walt knocked her over, causing her to be on her back instead of her side when she vomits. Then, he chooses to watch her choke instead of helping her, which he chooses purely because it would benefit him if she died. He's horrified with himself for doing this but it can't be undone and it's what he chose. She would not have died that night if he weren't there. Walt also chooses to leave quietly so Jesse will wake up next to her dead body and think exactly what you're saying, that this is solely his fault for enabling Jane's relapse. The whole point is Walt (and we) know something much more sinister happened, but he is hiding the truth because it would destroy Jesse's trust in him.
@@citonita2207 This is true, He touched her shoulder, causing her to roll over, vomit and choke. If walt was not there she would not have d ied... yet. Two hero ine addicts with hundreds of thousands of dollars? They would have die d in weeks. Regardless of walt being there or not, she would have passed. Also they weren't exactly careful, laying on a bed on their side. It is so incredibly easy to roll over accidentally. The same thing would have happened with how careless both of them are. Walt took advantage of the situation which would have happened regardless. So Jane rolling over and choking is not Walter's fault. It's not like he shoved her over, he lightly touched her and she rolled over. Likely she would have rolled over a couple minutes later if walt wasn't even there. So Jane rolling over and choking is not Walter's fault. Also people don't consider this, but what can walt even do? Walt is not a trained EMT, he can't stop her from choking, it's not like she could easily be given the Heimlich. Walt would have been forced to call 911... How is walt going to explain to the cops that he broke into an apartment full of methh and two hero ine addicts? If he calls the cops Jesse, and Walt go to jail for life, Jane goes to jail for possessing drugs. Let's say Walt calls anonimously and removes the meth. Jane d ies before EMTs can get there, Jesse is caught with dru gs, and Gus knows Walt is a massive risk taker by calling the police on his partner. So Walt likely gets box cuttered because Gus isn't sure that he needs Walt yet and definitly cannot trust him here. So, Walt has no way to save Jane on his own, cant call the cops, and thus has no blame here in what happened. Jane di ed by her own actions and Jesse's influence. Nothing more. Walt was simply wrong place wrong time, but made the only logical call that keeps him and Jesse safe when there is nothing he could have done to prevent her dea th.
I was literally thinking that all this sounds like what Barry handled perfectly. A bad person who thinks hes a good guy forced to come to terms with who he is.
@@MrTuas Even though he never does comes to terms with it. He in a way becomes worse by denying how evil he is. He lives out his delusion of being a good person through his son and religion in the last season but never manages to become actually good.
@@angelinthecenterfold the problem was the gate Fuches a redemption arc which was very unnecessary, and he seemed to get away with everything with no consequences after leaving prison, just because he cared for children and saved Barry’s child doesn’t mean he’s necessary redeemable and people humanize him more than they do Sally
i could see dex framing doax, cause while he couldnt justify killing him, he didnt think doaks was a good person at all. he thought doaks was like him, a killer but one who used the military to justify his murders. thats why he brings it up and doaks says :jesus that was war" and dex just says something like.."uh huh, sure"
This was Dexter trying to come up with an excuse to kill him. He tried a lot to find one but didn't convince himself of nothing who makes Doakes a code match
Doakes in the books really did use the military and police as an excuse to kill - that's where that came from The way the show was written didn't show that so maybe it was dexter looking for an excuse there
I just stopped after season 2 of Dexter, and I could never put into words why. Just felt like a good ending to the show. You've put the reason into words fantastically!
Same here. The first episode of Season 3 did a horrible job of filling the void left by Doakes. I realized the show was out of steam and just stopped watching.
Not gonna blame you for that because it's true. But I would HIGHLY recommend watching season 3 just so that you can get to the amazing season 4! And then after season 4, you can truly stop. But there's just SO much that's FANTASTIC about season 4 - I promise you, it's worth it.
@2:50 Doakes didn’t trip over himself. There was a big gap in the wood flooring in the bridge that he was walking backwards on. If he kept his eye on Dexter while backing up, he would’ve tripped anyway because of the broken bridge.
14:48 They screwed up Dexter's moral dilemma, but that is why the show started to revolve around Debra for me. Her acting was absolutely phenomenal. I have no idea how difficult it was to pull off such realistic acting, but it was so intense to watch a master.
I just rewatched S1-8 of Dexter and the New Blood limited series all in a row. I was surprised to find how much I enjoyed S3 (the Miguel Prado season). I felt that Prado and Dexter had a better and more *REAL* relationship than Dexter ever had with Rita. They had trust, friendship, Dexter could share who he was, his code, his ritual, they had a kinship, a shared purpose, they protected each other, and they even killed together. Of course, ultimately, Prado was a charming bastard who lied to everyone and used them for his own purposes, but that’s what made him such a compelling character in the 8 seasons of the main show. It challenged the idea that Dexter couldn’t have friends, couldn’t have a real life, and couldn’t have FEELINGS. Which is something that I think I missed when watching the show as it aired - all the stuff with Harry is just proof that Dexter DOES have a conscience and feelings. It’s not necessarily what Harry would have said; it’s what Dexter is imagining and projecting on to the memory of Harry to talk him out of doing things he wants to do, and to protect him. By the end of the 9th season, New Blood, I’m almost convinced that Dexter was just TOLD he was a psychopath and trained to be one (and while. he definitely did have dark, homicidal urges, he still had feelings). He had multiple, real relationships where he shared his secret with people. He cared about people. By the end of the show, I was fully in the Deb camp where I felt that she was the moral center of the show and always had been, and I had really started to hate Dexter for all the harm he caused everyone. But Dexter most definitely FELT that harm he was causing. Hell, it even made the abysmal finale better on a rewatch, picking up details like the episode where Dexter’s co-worker in the file room (the friend of Harry) gets a terminal illness. She doesn’t fit the code, she doesn’t kill or plan to kill, she knows who he is and won’t tell… and she can’t kill herself either, due to her religion making that the worst sin that would condemn her to hell. Deb meets her and says to Dex, “if I’m ever on a machine, unplug me” which is exactly what happens at the end of the show (something I’d long forgotten about by the time it aired). I wish Doakes would have survived another season and secretly recruited other members of Miami Metro to work on exposing Dexter and have Dexter have to figure out whether to kill them all or go on the run. He was a great character and the “surprise, motherfucker” meme on the internet everywhere just made it that much funnier the two times he did it in the show. I thought New Blood was a much better ending for the character, if not perfect. But MUCH better.
@@jason555jason555 I understand why people are conflicted over it. There’s not a consensus about how people believe it SHOULD have ended. Should Dexter get away with it and keep killing? Eventually get caught? Should it have been Deb that caught him? Should the existence of Cody and Astrid and Rita as his cover that eventually became *real* people to him that he cared about change him? And moreso for Harrison, his son by blood? I get why people didn’t like the original ending we got but I think in large part, no matter what happened, a large percentage of the fans would have had issues with it because it didn’t do what they wanted. So for the show to come back at all, I thought that New Blood was really well done. I especially loved how cinematic it felt - the swap from 16x9 (which filled the screen in the original series run) to something closer to 21x9 widescreen with a LOT of depth of field usage and the really beautiful color palette in the environments and costume design was so visually pleasing to look at. **SPOILERS FOR NEW BLOOD AHEAD** - I thought that the actor that played Harrison (Jack Alcott) was inspired casting. He felt vulnerable and confused enough that you weren’t sure if he was a normal kid and Dexter was projecting or if he was genuinely struggling with his urges due to being born in blood and what he saw. I also thought that the placement of “Chekhov’s Gun” right there on the wall in between the kitchen of the cabin and the room Harrison slept in was perfect, being put front and center throughout the entire series and then it was obviously of vital importance to the way they resolved the show. I’d personally watch a spinoff were they follow Harrison, who might now be really triggered by the events of the finale on top of everything else. And maybe try to do what he originally thought Dexter was actually doing - more of a vigilante superhero style killer that was taking out the trash than someone that **NEEDED** to do it and that’s just who he was trained to do it to. I’m assuming this won’t ever happen but I’d support it if it did. I also loved how they used Deb in this. She was FEROCIOUS and TERRIFYING and really tormented Dexter (with her being his own thoughts of course). So just like the way he envisioned Harry, the way he imagined Deb and talked to her was further proof that he *did* have feelings and wasn’t completely a sociopath that had to fake emotions to blend in with humanity. The absolute violence that Deb used against Dexter was scary at times; I thought she was gonna claw his face off. So yeah, I thought that New Blood ended up being significantly better than it could have been, and without question a better ending than the original. Clancy Brown was a worthy final target and when the lights came on in his underground lair, displaying all of his victims? Probably the most disgusted I’ve been with a killer throughout the entire run of Dexter. I wish that they did maybe 2 more episodes, would be my main complaint. But yeah, I’m glad it happened at all.
@@MrJagermeister Yeah, New Blood felt a little rushed. I was disappointed that they made it seem like Angel was going to meet Dexter after all those years and he was going to be executed like Clyde Phillips originally was going to end the show. Then they just abandoned that idea completely and there was no pay off to that scene where Dexter's gf tells Angel about Dexter. If they had spaced it out a little more it would have been better. I think I read somewhere a couple years or more ago that Clyde Phillips wanted to end the show with Season 2 and have Dexter be killed by the state of Florida with an electrocution chair and he would hallucinate all the people he killed directly and indirectly in the observation room and the whole show was his life flashing before his eyes. Then they were told they had to do more seasons and by the time they were close to the end of the show Scott Buck wasn't allowed to end it by killing Dexter like Clyde Phillips wanted because they wanted to keep it open for a spinoff or more seasons(probably because of money) so we got that dogshit ending in Season 8. That's why Season 2 felt a little odd being so early on considering the content of the season. It felt like it should have been the end of the show, it felt like that because they thought they were filming the final season.
New Blood had way too many plot holes and it’s like they forgot about what happened in all the other seasons.. Season 1 to 4 were amazing then it went downhill, they should’ve finished strong with a season 5 with Dex on the run like Breaking bad instead of just milking it (don’t know why many hate on season 3😑) imo
How I would've preferred Dexter to end is something like this: Have it take until the end of season 4 for Doakes to catch Dexter red handed (This of course means he doesnt die in season 2). Then have everything go the same as the end of season 2 except Doakes manages to actually escape, has to hide from the authorities while simultaneously prove Dexter is guilty and actually have him succeed in this. Dexter is then arrested, detained and even put on trial. We then watch as him and his lawyer actually fail to get him out of jail and furthermore he gets put on death row. '_____Years Later' he is in the electric chair, a shell of his former self and emotionless, he sees the hallucination/ghost/whatever of his father in tears as the lever is pulled and we see Dexter die as a monster in the way his father so desperately tried to avoid. A brutal and tragic end but Dexter's life, as mentioned in the video, has been tragedy after tragedy, so it makes sense. And sure, it wouldve been so upsetting and maybe not what the viewer wants to see necessarily but it wouldve been much better than what we got instead.
I think the comparison with Breaking Bad is funny, because I think they actually do give Walter White an "out". The fact that he knows that the second he lets the guy free he'll try and kill him, leaves Walter White with no other choice than to kill him first. One might even say it's self defense (though I think that could very much be argued).
Yeah I agree. As soon as he realised that he was going to try to kill him, it gave him the "justification" of a preemptive attack and removed most of the moral dilemma. To me the first truly serious moral dilemma Walt faces that significantly changes his character is Jane's death.
People always forget though that Walt at any point also had the option to turn himself in. If he'd done it there he would have got off light. Mental breakdown caused by suddenly facing mortality makes him want to act out and do something criminal, he chooses cooking meth because he already knows how to, then kills someone in totally justified self-defence? That spin would make anyone lenient on him, plus Hank would vouch for him.
It’s still a moral dilemma in that Walter could always call the police and turn himself in and get Krazy-8 arrested. By killing Krazy-8 it becomes more than just protecting his family, it becomes him growing increasingly acclimated to his life as a criminal, in which killing to cover your tracks becomes a way of life. Killing Krazy-8 is the first step to him becoming a full blown criminal and losing his humanity.
Maybe that specific instance, but the writers gave him an out for paying for his cancer treatment 2 episodes later, then had him go into remission the following season, and neither of those things stopped him.
Great analysis. This was actually my exact criticism of New Blood. They had an opportunity to set up a moral dilemma with Dexter in jail between Harrison and Logan, yet they didn't execute it right at all.
Hello! Would you clarify what you mean? Dexter did have a moral dilemma in the jail - he killed Logan, not because he fit the code, but simply so that Dexter could escape.
@@StefanSochinsky My take on that is he could have spared Logan. Dexter wanted out of the cell, but killing Logan went against the code of Harry. I wonder if Dexter still held to that code though. I didn't like the fresh blood season to be honest, I think it did more harm than good to the legacy of Dexter. He was sharp, smart and cunning in the 8 seasons based in Miami, but in that backwater hick-town, he was a derp! Miami Dexter would not have made the asinine mistakes Derp Dexter made. But then again, it's really the writers who wrote that trash. The finale of the 8th season with Deb being tossed in the ocean really pissed me off. She deserved better. My hope was that some reconciliation would be achieved with the revival of the series, but that proved false as well. I hold an imagined ending in my mind as to what happened, and no writer can match that.
@@Maderyne Hello! Killing Logan actually DIDN'T violate Harry's Code. Rule 1: Don't get caught. And as far as Dexter's mistakes and missteps, I kind of felt like that was part of the point in New Blood - Dexter's been out of the game, so to speak, for so long that he's rusty. Granted, I thought the pacing of it could have been a little better, but I actually don't have a problem with New Blood. Something I'd like to see (despite my opinion that Dexter is completely done) is Dexter be Harrison's dark passenger.
@@StefanSochinskyBut that would be the case for Doakes as well. Being caught. He caught Dexter. So no, it does go against the code. As per the series' own rulesettubg,
After being bombarded by the algorithm with dexter shorts, I thought about giving it another try... Last I've seen it was +10 years ago, season 5~ish. Thanks for saving my time.
Great video, really love the breakdown of why S2 and S7’s dilemmas let Dexter get off easy. Have to disagree on S1 and S4 though, those seasons nail the story they’re trying to tell on all cylinders. S1 still feels the most exciting to rewatch personally, would’ve been interesting if they had Brian live like he did in the books. S2 is let down by Lila but a more exciting season than S3 but gotta point out how underrated Miguel is. Jimmy Smits gave the show some classic scenes.
@retroRENEGADE - I just rewatched S1-8 before watching 9 and I agree that S3 is totally underrated - Jimmy Smits as Miguel Prado was a better relationship w/ Dexter than Rita ever was. They had trust, friendship, common goals, shared interests, Dexter showed him who he was, let him in on his ritual, his code, his kills, they killed together, covered for each other, even had plans to make Miami a better place ONLY when the law didn’t work and couldn’t work and he had a partner in a District Attorney that, combined with Miami Metro, had a much better chance of bringing actual justice to people one way or the other. Sure, he turned out to be a charming liar that used Dexter and didn’t absorb his code and went to kill the lawyer giving him problems. But the average season of Dexter has a big bad monster of a killer like the Ice Truck Killer, Trinity Killer, etc. and what I loved about S2 was that Dexter was being hunted and in S3, he and Miguel were the big bads *together*. I never connected with Rita (though she didn’t deserve what she got), mostly because the show always kept her at arms length and introduced her as a cover for Dexter and she was always preventing him from doing what he wanted to do, which is why we were watching. The actress did a great job with her; I think it was just the writing that had me cold on her. Miguel was possibly the best non-Deb relationship that Dexter had in the show, until Hannah (good or bad, at least they both knew what the other was and it was all in the open).
"would’ve been interesting if they had Brian live like he did in the books" Thank you! I can't stop thinking about this one. It just seems like an infinitely more interesting idea to keep him around. Not only would it make Dexter a more selfish and morally grey character if they kept him alive, but Brian also had so much more potential. He could be the one to keep disillusioning Dexter about Harry. he could keep digging into their pasts. He could be a call to the dark side. He could create so much more problems and solutions to other problems, just by the fact that he's Dexter's family and a killer *without* morals. Killing him off feels like such missed opportunity to me.
@@blueisasomedancer In the book, "Dearly Devoted Dexter"(2005) Doakes was the victim of a serial mutilator known as Dr. Dano. The "doctor" would kidnap people and play his version of Hangman. For every answer a person got wrong, he would remove a body part. At the end, most victims were reduced to "yodeling potatoes." He got partway through his procedure with Doakes. It was enough to get Doakes out of the picture... mostly.
@asomedancer MASSIVE SPOILERS if you haven't read it, but here's a few in even the *first* book: The barking dog next door is...not re-homed. Dexter comes home and finds it's not barking because it's dead. Because Rita's kids killed it. Turns out, they're also deeply damaged...and he decides he needs to shepherd them in Harry's Code! Brian kidnaps Deborah and LaGuerta. Dexter won't kill Deborah, but he lets Brian kill LaGuerta and then helps Brian escape. So Deb also *knows* he's a serial killer and has absolutely no illusions about his total lack of actual morals, except as enforced by Harry's Code, since she watches him let Brian kill LaGuerta. Saying it follows it "pretty closely" is, imo, inaccurate. Sure, there are a lot of familiar beats, but that kind of massive change to Dexter's character means the core of it all is fundamentally altered.
Season 2 was fantastic. Dexter should have been 4 seasons long and Season 2 should have been the finale. Dexter should have been willing to have Doakes turn him in but then Doakes, at some point, tries to arrest Dexter (maybe he thinks Dexter's getting cold feet) and Dexter is forced to kill Doakes to save himself.
This was nice to see. Back when S2 came out it killed my interest in the show for exactly the reason you lay out. It introduced an interesting moral dilemma with the two main outcomes changing the status quo and then just had it miraculously resolve itself in favour of Dexter with no consequences. At that point any tension I had about him being discovered dissolved. I knew the writers would just throw in some bullshit any time they brought up something interesting to maintain their lead character's code. The code ceased to matter because it would simply never be broken. My friends who watched the show didn't agree and kept watching and because of their persistence I eventually ended up watching S3 a couple years after it aired. I felt nothing because I knew Dexter would "win" regardless of what he did.
You should watch Season 4 if you never did. Even if you think Dexter will "Win" it still makes amazing television, thanks to the Trinity Killer. Easily the best anatagonist of the series.
Conversely if Dexter did break his code it also ends the show. IMO him breaking the code to kill Doakes would have killed interest in the show. A serial killer who kills to satisfy their urges and tries to not get caught is a pretty boring premise with nothing interesting to offer.
@@spicy_mintnot necessarialy. It would be boring if he just became a normal serial killer but they could have made soeething with it. Made so that by breaking his code Dexter had to grapple with what his code even meant and what to do now. They could even return to the status quo by making Dexter try to stop killing but convince himself that stopping is worse as the other serial killers won't be stopped unless he kills them (if it's true and he is doing good or not it's an audience debate), now this is frammed still by the lens of Dexter wanting to kill more people but being stopped by the morality quesiion brought by the code. So Dexter decides to do something to punish himself for breaking it once and keeps going. Except now both Dexter and the audience now he can kill innocents for selfish reasons and to question the validity of code making the payoff of Dexter choosing to die as to get the world rid of another evil (himself) better.
The show is about a serial killer that doesn’t get caught, if that were to happen there would only be one season. “Breaking Bad sucks because I know Walter is not going to die in season 2”. Ok I guess.
I have an idea they could've used if Dexter killed Laguerta. Like you said "He isn't a good serial killer anymore, he's just a killer", they coul've used what seemed to me a good idea in season 6 : make Bryan replace Harry in his mind. It was underused in season 6, but it could've been great to see a Dexter tortured by his brother's illusion, trying to force him to let it go and kill whoever he wants to.
That’s why he always WAS he kills because he likes killing It’s Harry that made sure he killed those who “deserve it” How is this still lost on people lol
I think you're exactly right and you've got the point about how they re-introduced Bryan (one effin' time!) as another "Dark Passenger". They could've even had Harry and Bryan acting as the angel and devil on your shoulders wrestling for control with Harry slowly fading away. Eventually Dexter left to himself and Bryan and then eventually have the Dark Passengers leave. It could be left ambiguous if they will return to Dexter's mind one day or if the "Dark Passenger" was just always a facade Dexter's mind made to rationalize his carnal nature.
If you love the cat and mouse chase of season 2, may I recommend Death Note if you haven't already seen it? Please don't let it being animated put you off, I never thought I could enjoy an anime until I watched it. It's genuinely got one of the best plots I've ever seen in fiction and will scratch the Dexter itch
I highly recommend Mr. Robot if you liked Dexter. I'm a big fan of inner mono-logging and Mr. Robot does that with the lead Elliot character as well. Also you may like The Shield. It has some similarities in the show structure, but unlike Dexter the main character is a bit of scum bag. But I think the show may share some of the same writers and that show has so many actors that turn up in Dexter as well.
This was actually really cathartic. I remember watching it as it was first airing and while I didn't conceptualize their blunder to this degree at the time I remember thinking "They just bailed him out! What the Fuck?!". Season three was like the aftertaste of the end of season two and a pretty lousy reset of the stakes and I only stuck around for season four for John Lithgow. I jumped ship without even trying season five and wondered until I heard how they ended it whether I should give the rest a go. I was wondering again today until I saw this video. Thank you for your service o7
“Dexters story has always been a tragedy” Exactly, because he DID lose something, pretty much everyone he was ever close to. That’s what his choices cost him.
Dexters tragedy is irrelevant to his choices, he watched his mother and some other people get chainsawed to pieces in front of him and was left to die in a pool of blood and gore. His humanity was stolen from him before he ever had a chance to live.
@@g00gleisgayerthanaids56 Nah. Dexter's core issue is he really doesn't like not being in control. Killing is not the only way to get a sense of control. It's just the one Dexter was drawn to first because he didn't know anything else. Harrison decided that the traumatized child's first impulse was correct and molded Dexter's whole lifestyle around it and taught him to hide his feelings. HORRIBLE FATHER. By the time Dexter was wise enough to reflect on himself he was addicted to murder. This doesn't make his choice to succumb to his addiction any less his own. Quitting is painful but possible especially since his addiction is hurting his family
@@krag3405 its like you didnt actually watch the show... dexter was killing and torturing small animals before harrison ever even started on the code. Not only that, but dexter is supposed to be a murderous psychopath, thats the show... bad writing or inauthentic acting doesnt change anything. Harry worked with a clinical psychologist to keep dexter on the "straight and narrow" so to say who also gave him an official diagnosis. The books this show was based on also had some supernatural elements to it, as the dark passenger, was a real entity that infected dexter.
@@g00gleisgayerthanaids56 Read it again, Dex decided to start killing dogs but Harry didn't try to fix Dex and instead just doubled down on it and made Dex an extremely efficient killer. Dex isn't broken being repair like Harry says, the entire point of the show is that Dex could've been 'normal' but he had an awful father that led him deeper into the darkness.
@jaskaranbajwa8443 youre just flat out wrong on all accounts. The entire point of the show is to have fun with the idea of a "necessary evil," by showcasing a psychopathic serial killer that the audience can get behind and root for. It makes for good entertainment. Dexter, as a show has no real main thesis or underlying message its trying to show or tell, its a character driven series that has fun with its characters by putting them in ridiculous situations... the bay harbour butcher is the forensics guy, "looking for himself" cmon... theres no groundbreaking story here. Its pure entertainment. You cant expect sane, normal people to be able to come together to actually write/act/perform authentically psychopathic characters, not only is it nearly impossible, it wouldnt make for good tv. Your entire argument hinges on small, tiny details/breaks in character, and attempt to change the entire narrative with them. Dexter had to walk a fine line between making watchable, gripping tv, and promoting a serial killer that objectively does the job better than law enforcement... sacrifices of the story and narrative and performances are going to be made for the sake of actually having a successful show.
This video essay is outstanding: It's well explained, the production value is as good as anyone else's in the writing craft space, and it's entertaining. Looking forward to more. Subscribed.
I never really liked Dexter but I recognize he is the vehicle for the show's plot to keep going. James Doakes still remains my favorite character in Dexter, tied with Batista but no one after him really hit the same energy or presence for me. Erik King friggin' KILLED it (pun intended) as Sgt. Doakes.
Love the comparison with Poirot's moral dilemma!! David Suchet brought that character to life with style and hilarity, seeing him struggle with a real moral/ethical/religious decision was incredible and no other actor in the role is worth even a footnote. As for Dex... Agree completely about S2's finale being a bit of a let down, but it worked for S7 because Deb had been wrestling with her own morals and code that entire season too and Jennifer Carpenter was phenomenal in that scene and when she first found out the whole truth... I think the real Dex would have used the excuse of Doakes' history with Black Ops to try and justify killing him, and it would have made S3 better with him grappling with the knowledge that he is capable of bending the code in that way. S4 is better than you rated it, they did an excellent job with the twists, cat and mouse of Dex vs Trinity, Dex's arrogance getting Rita killed etc. I think if S6 and S5's main plots had been flipped, then people would be more forgiving of the Lumen storyline, but it came too close on the heels of Rita's death, which was a devastating blow to viewers, especially with the tragedy of Dex only realising he loved her when she was already gone. We needed more time to see him deal with that, before they introduced another love interest. I also think the finale of S5 was another cop out: Deb faced her own moral dilemma which was great, but I think she should have actually seen them and then come to the same conclusion. Then we could have had Deb accept those particular kills, but still grapple with the idea of Dex going outside the law, slowly becoming more suspicious etc until she finds the blood slides and flips out. That would have made it much more believable than her buying Dex's bullshit about the DDK and helping him cover it up. The less said about S8 & 9 the better.
I didn't watch past season one, but this is such a great video essay. I feel like the obvious ending is for dexter to kill himself, realizing that he has become someone who will not violate the code and choosing to sacrifice himself to save his family the pain of further exposure and Maria from death. I actually think that would be kind of beautiful, for him to realize that he will never stop killing and be the bigger person and remove himself from the equation to protect everyone he loves.
SPOILERS AHEAD This is how Dexter New Blood ends, in a sense. He has the character in the end of the show shoot him, as a way to atone for all his supposed horrid actions. Dexter does realize he's the problem, and dies for it, but this correct ending can't make up for the disasters of the show that came before it. Like, if it happened far far earlier, maybe after Trinity, now that would be an ending alright.
I think both the writers of the show and the character (Dexter) himself probably believes that he's incapable of love or caring about others, but he did care about those in his day to day life. He's not a soulless machine, just really messed up from a young age with the worst possible parent teaching to control his urges instead of getting him help. There are a million other ways that Dexter could have processed his traumas, or dealt with his personality of being impulsive and harmful, but he did not need to murder anyone. I think that's what makes Dexter a great character if you consider that his childhood was so fucked up and his adoptive father really messed him up instead of just getting him help, but who knows, maybe he sees what kind of help people like Dexter would have gotten so he dealt with it his own way, creating the monster he decided to end his life over, realizing what he did was a huge mistake and that he enabled a killer, regardless if the killings are justifiable or not. It's actually kind of why the show had bad writing at points, they couldn't let Dexter grow, to make himself accountable, or to change in any meaningful way. It also means the show couldn't go on when it reached an actual end point. That was the biggest issue with the series was that people wanted more of Dexter but didn't want him to change. It's why, even now, with an ending befitting of Dexter in New Blood, that people still find it a bad ending because of a multitude of reasons, one I hear being "Why can't you just make Dexter good again?" They just wanted him to kill more people, they don't care about his journey or growth or fall into depravity. I think that's what puts a show like Breaking Bad above Dexter in terms of writing. You get to be manipulated by Walter White and realize just how much of a monster he is over and over again and see how far he will go to reach his goals. @@J-Rush
This is a great video essay. Very well done! The parallels to The murder on the orient express and breaking bad were amazing. A new perspective on the moral delimas they face.
Really enjoyed the video. I agree with all points. But a secondary view (kinda backed up by the new series) of the show is that it explores how Dexter reacts to how his actions effects others. I think that point is made by deb in Dexter's head of "Everybody near you dies."
One of the reasons why Daredevil is the better option to read stories about a vigilante super hero. There's always a copout for Spider-Man, but Daredevil not only has been found out to be Matt Murdock (which put him in the moral dilemma of him having to accept the fact he's addicted to being Daredevil because he can't stop even if his loved ones are in danger), he has also killed a person accidentally. I know Spider-Man faced the dilemma of having accidentally killed Venom but then it turned out Venom faked his death.
If you think about, Better Call Saul also had a big dillema in the last season. Saul could just keep on the run, or give himself in, which was something he didn't want to do.
I've been showing my husband Dexter because he's never seen it. We are on season 4, which I think is undoubtedly the best the show ever was. And while my husband is enjoying John Lithgow's performance, he just doesn't really care enough to keep going. This wasn't always the case, and I am pretty sure that he stopped caring once they killed off Doakes in the way they did. He was such a fun character and it brought so much tension to things to have someone who clearly sees through Dexter from get go. To get rid of him by allowing Lila to kill him was such a waste. There were so many ways that storyline could have gone. Could have framed Doakes and dealt with the aftermath of him trying to prove his innocence. Dexter would have to be on his best behavior and that could drive him a bit crazy until he does something impulsive, and it fucks everything up. Could have HIM kill Doakes and deal with the aftermath of that. But no. We got what we got.
Ya season 3 and 4 were so good and i think season 4 was 1 of my favorites. The guy in the video mentions that just season 1 and 2 were good and then it fell off lol. I dont think i ever met a single person who thought that about the first 4 seasons. You could say the show fell off after season 5, but not before that. I think season 4 absolutly destroys season 2. Lilah got really annoying for me and season 4 was such a breath of fresh air. The trinity killer was so cool and complex and that guy suffered his own mental problems with family, life and killing. I think this guy in the video worries about moral dillema way to much. Not everything needs a moral dillema lol.
Doakes was dexters greatest foil, they really screwed the pooch by killing him off early but they didnt have 8 seasons planned out from the get go and didnt know if thered even be a season 3 or 4... so they wanted to cash in on doakes vs dexter before they got cancelled or fall into irrelevance. It just turned out that people loved the show so they just kept going.
@@Killercoldice22the issue is this guy cant see the forest for the trees... too focused on the moral dillemma argument to consider outside factors and influence.
The biggest dramatic outcome would've been for dexter to debase himself by increasingly flauting his code, becoming a twisted version of himself, _and_ for that to be the lynchpin that gets him outed, forcing him to run and hide anyway. The only way he could redeem himself, even someonewhat, would then be for him to turn himself in, possibly as a sacrifice for the protection of his family.
Doakes was such a good character for Dexter to go against and it truly seems like Dexter was only meant to be 3-4 seasons long. I kept watching until the beginning of season 8 and it seems like Dexter is never allowed to have an end to his internal struggles. At the beginning of each season, he just starts his struggle again with no real conclusion. You're right that he never changes, and it made the show duller.
The idea of Dexter turning himself in (or being caught) reminds me a lot of how Barry handled its season 3 finale leading into the entire concept of season 4. Would've been interested to see the series continue with Doakes' presence and/or Dexter shifting his entire perspective after breaking the code. Great video!
What disappointed me the most was that he ran away and nothing he did was discovered. It would have been great if everything he did was discovered, like Breaking Bad when the whole world finds out who Walter White really was. It was very impactful, the big secret that was the whole reason for the series to exist was discovered. To me, Dexter would have had a great ending if he got more and more violent and used less of his code, only to be discovered and die.
They wanted to keep it open ended so they could revisit the character in the future... still, he shouldve just gone down to argentina instead of abandoning his son. He thinks he would damage the kid, so he leaves him with... a murderer??? They need to just retcon all of newblood and the season 8 finale. Deb shouldve had DNR in her living will, so dexter doesnt have to euthanize her and then he is free to travel down south as nobody at miami metro wouldve blamed him for wanting to get away.
Season 4 was best IMHO. Trinity had me on the edge all season. Dexter could kill Doakes out of desperation, that's understandable. At the end of the day, he's still a serial killer. He can easily justify it by saying it preserves the code... More work to be done.
Trinity was my favorite season too. John Lithgow just nailed it, but yeah I have always thought like... Killing doakes is the only choice. There's a reason the first rule is don't get caught, that's how I could see him justifying it. Glad they kind of did that in the new blood series
Season 4 was when the homIcide department acted like dumbasses and we saw more of the personal relationship drama which was so so boring. The cat and mouse game between Trinity and Dexter however was handled beautifully.
@gretaenglish3519 I guess, with seeing so many despicable characters get away, I couldn’t take half Dexter victim seriously because they never seemed as threatening as others
The directors/producers who created this series based on the book really set up Michael C. Hall to become a heart throb if you ask me. His actions give a sense of justice as the viewer is painfully aware of the men and women who have performed heinous acts against people, especially women and children. So, though a vigilante breaking the law via murder, Dexter supposedly makes sure that these people are in fact guilty of the heinous acts involved and performs a terrifying murder upon the guilty perpetrator to reveal the horror he or she visited upon others. It basically is a bit of a twist as it makes the viewer look forward to Dexter killing that next serial killer and wanting him to get away with it. In some way, I think it is Dexter taking vengeance upon whomever killed his mother, repeatedly. In a world where we all have witnessed predators, con artists and selfish people who have sabotaged others for selfish gain and no thought of the pain they've caused, it really does satisfy a person's desire for justice to watch the series. Of course I love the series and the actor Michael C. Hall, but of course it helps to keep the distinction between what is real and imaginary, as I'd always mistrust someone who gets a rush from murdering people. LOL! It's a great show though and it amazes me how I am able to watch it as I typically hate slash 'em up violent shows. It has caused me to analyze myself for liking it! Hence the analysis above. There is definitely a theme in the series to make one consider the psyche of human beings, how a person can be affected by childhood trauma; etc.
Yeah pretty spot on breakdown and analysis. The way i wanted the show to end was for Dexter to come to realisation that what was best for his son was for him to turn himself in and take responsibility for his actions (all of them). I also really wanted a scene between Dexter and an Angel who finally knew the truth.
Hey everyone! Thanks for watching my video. I made it a couple years ago but the majority of the attention it's gotten has been very recent, which has been an awesome surprise. I've been reading through the comments, which I really appreciate, and I keep seeing two that I wanted to address...
First, people can't believe that I don't give season four more credit. And I get it. John Lithgow was incredible. The whole season was. I rank it only behind seasons 2 and 7, for reasons I explain in the video, and season 1, which is a sentimental favorite.
Second, a lot of people are upset that I spoiled the ending of Murder on the Orient Express. I don't get this one. The whole video is about moral dilemmas, so I was comparing the two big ones on Dexter with ones from other stories. It's kind of impossible to compare dilemmas without discussing what happens during them. And I put a spoiler warning at the start of the video. So my question is, are people missing the spoiler warning, or do some people not understand what a spoiler warning is? I don't mean for that to sound snarky. I'm seriously asking. If the spoiler alert is too quick then I'll make it longer going forward because I don't want to spoil anything.
I appreciate any feedback here.
Thank you again so much.
Dave
Oh, I forgot to mention that yes, I do mispronounce episodic, as so many people have been nice enough to point out. LOL. Please keep roasting me for it;-)
Great analysis, got yourself a new sub. The YT algorithm just recommended this to me lol, interesting timing. As for your question, idk I think the warning was long enough. I definitely could read it completely.
TY!!!🙏@@20Gero09
I would have also said the warning out loud before each comparison. Most people skip videos until they actually start.
I'd be interested in your thoughts on Dexter New Blood and how that show resolves itself compared to how the original series did it. I think the new show worked stronger with it.
The show was HEAVILY promoted in its' time. We heard about it everywhere. Why? Because the main character went after nobodies while once again, the oligarchy was completely ignored and unscathed. "Well done Dexter", they all said.
Truly, the biggest mistake in the series is that the code should have been:
Don't get caught.
Don't kill the innocent.
Stay away from small town cops armed with the power of google.
Get a sponsor from Bing and make that used instead XD
So many people said that the finale of Dexter: New Blood was a great conclusion for the story, made total sense, etc. I will argue that it made zero sense in terms of what the characters would and wouldn't do (and that's setting aside the massive plot holes and retconning of original Dexter stories to fit the sequel and lead to that point). To me, it just feels that the writers felt compelled to shoehorn the story into a conclusion that they planned in advance but couldn't make either the story or the characters fit.
@@elinat8665 I honestly might hate the ending for New Blood MORE than the last few seasons of Dexter. They had such a good villain too. Destroyed any chance of a good story with the last episode.
its not that characters acted differently, its that they wrote dexter to have finally cracked. Which relating a lot to dexter myself I can completely see in him. When he brought his son with him, he crossed into psychosis.
The storyline as ridiculous as it is was idea from the book where Dex teaches astor and cody to murder.
@@elinat8665
@@elinat8665 The writing was so lazy it's painful, plus it felt like a forced way to leave doors open for spinoffs. Either have Dexter face the music or have him get shot trying to get away.
Good point! Never bail your characters out of their moral dilemmas.
@@WhereIsMyKek - Did you watch the video? It explains it quite clearly.
Still, it's amazing how many shows break this rule. And now that we're in an age where bad people aren't allowed to be bad, we're probably going to see a lot more of this bad storytelling.
@filmnobelpreis it’s hard to when fans root for these anti heroes and villains and “relate to them” in comics, video games, and television
It makes sense Lila did it
@@GamfluentI agree, it wasn't about lazy writing it was telling a story just the way they wanted it to, in my opinion.
I have this rule. Don't write dark stories if you're scared of dark implications.
The writers of Breaking Bad understood this. Writers of Bojack Horseman knew this.
The writers of Dexter did not.
Yes, it's almost like they were scared of somehow ruining or changing Dexter's character. I mean, it's kind of boring that he remains the same throughout the entire story.
@@stretch654 Because Dexter is constructed as a bad boy. On one side, he kills people, everything else is on the good side. Audience likes these kind of characters and authors are very careful to keep Dexter as he is, if anything they turn Dexter to be better. So we got the show that has a very dark setting, yet it's really a no sugar vanilla flavour when it comes to serial killers.
What authors didn't know is that audience LOVES when characters from good to rotten bad... like Walter White did.
If they had the balls to gradually turn Dexter worse, and worse, and worse until audience hate him, this show would be a bomb.
The Sopranos was masterful at it.
@@dariozanze4929 Barry did this also really good. The hitman protagonist wants to stop beeing a hitman and become an actor and you just excpect it to work but instead he becomes worse every season and pretends that everytime he kills someone it will be the last time.
@@dariozanze4929 I would've loved to see him deteriorate throughout the show, however I suspect many female viewers would've been turned off by that. Part of Dexter's appeal is that he often acts in the best interests of those closest to him (Debra, Rita, Harrison, Lumen, etc.) while pursuing his own goals, displaying great competency at providing for and protecting those he values (despite a few slip-ups) and taking an active role in eliminating other societal threats. Yet, he's a bit of a challenge (living a secret and guarded life) and, as we saw with Rita, many women would like to rescue, domesticate, and use this monster to their advantage. That's hot.
If he had instead degraded to the point of irredeemability, it would've been much more interesting to see but ruined his appeal to many female viewers. No one says Tony Soprano or Walter White is hot (baldness and physicality aside). I can't help but think New Blood showing Dexter to be solitary, yet self-domesticated and otherwise "unavailable" is just a small facet as to why that sequel caused great disappointment.
Dexter is a great show if you allow yourself to truly believe Dexter is the good guy. It's a fantastic show to binge if you turn off your brain and just think "Yay Dexter killing bad people and can never get caught"
Hes not good but he's not bad either he's in a grey area of morality in my opinion
I agree, I don’t think every dark show has to be breaking bad or barry. Dexter is more watchable and less profound and that’s ok
Eh outside of season 1, 2, 4 the rest where anywhere from pretty bad to awful
@@eek42we got plenty of shows that are deep, like Mr robot and breaking bad and such, but Dexter he's a morally grey person but it's great you don't need it to be so complicated
@@ghost_1153
Did you read the comment at all?
You didn’t mention the ultimate moral dilemma in Poirot, where in the finale he is unable to prove that the killer is guilty so he kills him and then out of the guilt of becoming a murderer he doesn’t take his heart medicine so he would have a heart attack, effectively killing himself as punishment.
That's a great point. Such an odd way for the series to end. I gotta watch it again. My literal reaction to watching that the first time was "Wait... What?" lol
Sounds like Javert from Les Miserables
@@davescripted3796 If you've read the book series, you'd find it wasn't a weird way to end the series at al (this is also how the book-series ends,by the way)l. While Poirot was a man of high morals for sure, he was also a man of ego. A very big ego. Him killing Norton was actually very in character, as Poirot couldn't allow Norton to get away with his crimes (his Morality), and how would it look if Poirot had let the killer get away after Poirot had caught so many of them? It could affect hos reputation, and Poirot enjoyed when people thought the best of him (his Ego).
Christie also conformed it herself, saying that's why she hated Poirot so much, because he was "a detestable, bombastic, tiresome, ego-centric little creep".
Does not taking your medecine count as suicide, eschatologically ?
@@KimeraOne there's abit of a flaw in that statement, EGO, how does Poriot care about what others think of him, most of it is for his own benefit, and his moral code, given he used to be a detective who has a thirst for justice and seeing things right
and his OCD is really what allows him to see things right and see what others dont, a man learning to live with a disadvantage and making the best of it
also Christie lived abit like Poriot, her house, papers and the like, some modern block of apartments and would live in seclusion
maybe she really just hated him as he reminded her so much of herself, and was really making a personal judgement on herself
When I watched Dexter I always liked to think that he wasn't actually a psychopath and that he was just a disturbed child poorly raised by his disillusioned Dad. There were so many instances where he seemed to have convinced himself that he couldn't feel but he clearly could... Then they went and scanned his brain and destroyed any question
To be fair there are several shows and movies that play with that trope of "psychopath stops being a psychopath once he discovers the power of friendship" and it always strikes me as odd
@@McDonaldsCalifornia there is? Like what?
@@McDonaldsCaliforniaIirc people with personality disorders CAN mitigate them over time because they only arise due to trauma
@@BRobMorrishe shows way too much empathy and sympathy for others in the show to be a psychopath. They make the mistake of arguing (like much fiction) that he's only like this because of trauma. In reality many people with good childhoods are just terrible and other people have horrible childhoods but choose to be good people. The book version is more selfish, but the author dips his toe in the supernatural.
@@jacobstaten2366 it's too simple to say "well other people have bad childhoods and aren't like that" people aren't the same, their brain chemistries aren't the same and how they think about their experiences (that are never absolute mirrors) aren't the same
The interesting thing is that Dexter did break his code, but they never touched on it. In season 5 when he’s reeling from Rita’s murder he kills a random guy at a rest stop. Sure they made it seem like he was unsavory and possibly could’ve fit the code, but there was no way Dexter could’ve known that for sure.
Instead it’s undone by the introduction of Lumen and the code being reinvigorated in Dexter. Could you imagine if that first few episodes it showed Dexter hunting outside of his code, maybe actually targeting an innocent and then maybe that leads him to Lumen and it actually gives him a reason to use the code again.
Yeah that’s by far the most annoying moment on the show for me. He just randomly murders someone who says mean words
Didn't he also kill a guy, via his ritual, who turned out to be innocent?
@@Schrodinger_if I remember he wasn’t guilty of the thing he kills the guy for but was guilty for something less bad.
@@user-fz9vk4js5l yeah that’s what I’m saying, the writers still had to make it seem like he was some stereotypical asshole, maybe an abusive drunk or something.
They leaned too heavily into this Dark Avenger aspect of Dexter. I remember in season 1 he kills a drunk driver who yeah he killed someone behind the wheel, but Dexter justifies him fitting the code because he’s an alcoholic who still drives drunk. If you look at Harry’s code, that guy doesn’t fit the code really, because he’s not a serial killer per se.
If they just leaned more into Dexter changing the code to feed his urges, then they could’ve tackled those moral dilemmas. Instead they just always found ways for Dexters victims to always fit the code, and whenever there was a risk to him and his dark passenger getting exposed, there was outside intervention, almost nigh divine intervention.
@@Schrodinger_ another aspect the show could’ve tackled, Dexter killing someone via the ritual and the code and him finding out they were truly innocent.
Would he feel more guilt or conflict that he killed someone who didn’t fit the code? As the video says, Dexter is a killer who seemingly grows a conscious over the course of the show, so if he killed someone innocent, not to protect his secret but because he was wrong would he feel guilty about or would it thrill him and make him crave it more than killing someone within the code?
Dexter writters were scared of making Dexter truly bad. That's the truth. They wanted a good guy vigilante serial killer, but that's quite simply not who Dexter is, and it's not even a sensible concept
Dexter kills because of a need, and because of the code, he kills people who deserve it. But he's not a vigilante
Breaking Bad understood a guy like Walter White wouldn't do it for his family. They understood he wasn't a good person and had deeply selfish intentions
You are so spot on with this comment and I see way too many people overlook and/or ignore, whether intentionally or not, the giant flaws in the writing of Dexter especially in the later seasons.
I think they felt they needed Dexter to be someone the audience cheers for with minimal hesitation, someone they want to be free, happy and loved e.t.c.
He is in a very questionable area morally though, and they should have pursued the idea of him being a morally grey anti-hero instead of some heroic, good natured, serial killer pyschopath which obviously makes no sense but thats what they so desperately tried to do and unsurprisingly failed at.
Dexter is supposed to be a man who feels nothing or very, very little and has dark urges to kill and he is held back by the code which keeps him from being a monster. It is not that he is a good man fighting off his monster within and I think the writing team forgot that or got confused about that.
@@LuckyNobody1Yep, another example is Joe from You (‘YOU’ S4 SPOILERS AHEAD)….
So by the end of Season 4 they make it very clear Joe is evil and not some sympathetic killer with what he does with Nadia framing her who’s completely innocent for the murders that he committed with not remorse.
The writers for Dexter could’ve went down that path.
@@LuckyNobody1 I feel like he does care about some of the people in his life. But that's about it, and they did ask some interesting questions regarding that. However, the writers wanted the audience to cheer for him, like you said. But it directly conflicts with the essence of the character
“Why isn’t Dexter allowed to be bad, HE’S A SERIAL KILLER” I love that quote. Killing Doakes made so much narrative sense to me. He finds out in the episodes before that Harry finally saw what the code has wrought and couldn’t live with himself. Dexter should have the thought that if Harry didn’t respect the code, why should he? The rules were so vague that Harry never considered when the 2 rules became mutually exclusive. Dexter could say Doakes deserved because of his vigilante Justice toward the Haitian in S1. Hell, he killed and would kill for a lot less. But unfortunately the writers thought we would riot if the serial killer killed someone and gives Dexter a convenient out and then the chickens take 4 seasons to roost because he forgot a blood slide (something he’d never do) only to do the same song and dance again, fuck it.
Is he!? He kills serial killers. I think we call those kinds of people anti - heroes. Which I love
@@frankdeleon4209 He's not an anti-hero, he's a villain protagonist
@@kilian-one-l how!? He kills serial killers.
@@frankdeleon4209 and? He's still a serial killer. It's not a means to the end for him, it's all about the means. He enjoys it.
@@kilian-one-l I disagree I think Dexter represents a truth were not ready for
Maybe the problem was trying to imply that there was a moral dilemma in the first place. Dexter never truly had a code. He had his father's code. He held onto it because of how it served him. It allowed him to move freely in the world, feeling good about himself, indulging his worst impulses, with people still holding him in high esteem. I think his real dilemma was more of an identity crisis... He seemed to have a serious case of imposter syndrome because he could never really be himself and was afraid to try. It's pretty telling that others had to do the really "dirty" work for him. In some ways I think that was the real moral test, which he obviously failed. Especially when Deb, a deeply feeling person, was the one to "take care of" Maria. I haven't watched the series in years, though. This was a nice reminder to rewatch!
Realistically I think if any kind of real idea was being touched on it by the directors, it was probably Dexter's struggling to fit in and figure out who he is. He is a psychopath whos seen and done the worst things to sure, bad people, but seeing and doing those things doesnt change the effects on a person especially after being raised into it and shown what to do with those feelings. Dexter rarely struggles with 'morally' right or wrong things from what I remember, it a lot more down to what is gained or lost and an essential view point. Like dating Rita at first from what I remember was more to look normal and not fit into the criteria of 'Single adult white male' and seem more normal. Most of what we see initially of Dexter is him focusing on appearances and constantly worrying about if someone may see who he really is. Even toward the end of the show with his kid, the morally right thing is giving the kid up the moment Rita died, a psychopath murdering father who goes out once a week to murder isnt a good dad. But the issue wasnt morals. The issue came with Dexter being scared his kid would be like him, unfeeling, isolated, not knowing what these dark urges are or could be, and later struggling with how his kid would see him if he knew the truth. The show wasnt trying to tell us whos right and whos wrong, it was showing us way more about fitting in, overthinking, and self-loathing I think.
@@scorchinorphan1687 Hmm... Yeah, I like your take on it. Well said!
The show never implied that Dexter's internal conflicts were moral dilemmas and seasons 2 and 5 directly contradict that reading.
@@AbandonedVoid Thanks, I'll look out for that when I watch again!
very true. Its supposed to be an antidote to sociopathy and psychopathy. I always thought it was clearly written that way. I relate to the character in ways most audiences do not, and I can honestly say it produced some effect. It did push me towards confronting my psychopathy and worst memories
@@scorchinorphan1687
Killing Doakes would've broke his code, but there was enough gray there to have the *character* justify it in the moment. He talks about how Doakes shoots a lot of suspects and how he's not 100% innocent, given his past, and that's absolutely true. Killing Doakes would've led to some interesting character development for Dexter as he struggled with that choice for the rest of the series.
Instead, as you said, it was a return to the status quo. The interesting thing about LaGuerta is that he couldn't even half-heartedly justify that killing. And he ends up running *anyway* in the end. It feels like the writers made it way harder on themselves than it needed to be just to allow Dexter to remain a "good guy". When the whole point of the series was (or at least should've been) that Dexter is not at all a good guy.
Dexter is a puzzling series when it comes to the writing. Some of it is astonishingly well written (even, as you said, when they go off-book) and then some is so amateurishly written it shocks me that people were getting paid to write it.
The book/s make it clear that Doakes is every bit the monster Dexter is. Its why Doakes is hard on Dexter. Doakes can tell what Dexter is like and vice versa. Also the lab tech is a nutbar to. But the books do have a habit of having Dexter think a lot of people of like him. Unreliable narrator probably.
It is pretty strange that they killed off Doakes in season 2 since he was like the main foil to Dexter.
For example that's like if in Breaking Bad they killed off Hank in season 2.
Point i tied to make but you made it way better… 😅
Doakes was a murderer, and Dexter knew it because the blood evidence didn't match Doakes' story of what happened under the bridge. So there's no code violation or moral dilemma. How does everyone keep missing this?
@@pintolerance785 They couldn't keep Doakes around and keep it from getting stale or Doakes seeming like a moron. Once he's suspicious, it'd be almost impossible for Dexter to not get caught.
I only know Dexter for the "suprise mf" scene
Okay but Doakes going to prison after being framed by Dexter and trying to convince everyone of the truth would have been such a perfect escalation for their antagonism: Doakes has gone from being able to freely pursue the truth about Dexter, to being in full possesion of the truth but unable to do anything about it. It would also be a great escallation from the previous dilema where Dexter framed his girlfriends ex husband, showing him developing new codes/patterns of behaviour for new situations, and how impossible it is for a strict set of rules to be applied to a variety of situations with an equal moral outcome. The stakes would have been raised because any slip up on Dexters part would cooberate Doakes story. You could also have a character like Angel, who had significant emotional beats with both of them, put in the middle of the fight and have him start to question what actually happened. Theres just so much potential for where the story could go from there its such a waste of potential.
Dude, imagine, what if Debra or Angel figured something was wrong with Dexter, visited Doakes in death row, and Doakes helped them piecing out that Dexter was the real Bay Harbor Butcher, and it kicked the manhunt back in motion. So much wasted potential.
Ok but that’s literally just the Hannibal series
@hollyro4665 I watched that show like over a decade ago so I don't really remember it that well but maybe that's where it came from in my brain lol. I feel like framed man has to convince people of who the real killer is is a pretty common trope tho and it would be interesting to see it play out in a show where the serial killer is the protagonist.
Yeah, and that kind of storyline has been pulled of before too! NBC’s Hannibal did it, with Hannibal framing Will Graham for the Chesapeake Ripper case. Now Will did end up getting out of it, but only because Hannibal and another killer both tried to make it look like the Ripper was still at large so doubt would be cast on his conviction. And it also gave Hannibal plenty of time to clean up any loose ends so nobody could trace the murders back to him even after Will, who was very insistent Hannibal was the killer, was released.
If they’d done something like that, with Dexter framing Doakes, cleaning up his act and then regretting having done it and choosing to find a way to free him without Doakes being able to point the finger would have made a great story. And nobody but Doakes saw Dexter do it. If there’s no evidence, the accusation can’t be followed through.
@beedoesthings8037 you make a really good point, I would rather see it play out a bit differently with Dexter not seeing anything wrong with what he did and continuing with his life while Doakes has to work hard to convince the people around him and the people on the outside who believe him having to fight to find evidence while pretending not to suspect anything. Meanwhile it's becoming increasingly obvious that Dexters moral code doesn't stop him from being a bad person
I think the perfect solution to this problem would have been to keep the course of events the same, but with Dexter resolving that he’d have to kill him with that not having to happen. The fact that he knows he would have done it will have still shaken him to his core, and the technicality of him not actually doing it but still being torn up over it keeps him a sympathetic character from the POV of the audience while not canceling out the effect of the dilemma.
I agree! That's the only solution I've heard that could actually work. As much as people might want Dexter to go through with the difficult choice, it would ruin the show.
Dexter isn't the type to dwell on things like that, it would have been out of character
Wouldn't it be possible if he felt guilty if he had constant reminders of it?
Like people still thought doakes was the butcher. So constant slander against one person who actually knew Dexter which was illogical since doakes was locked up even during the killings would be enough imo
@goopguy548
I agree! The real moral moral dilemma is him being bad v. him being evil. If he had made the decision to be evil, then he would have had to grapple with that. Then he has a choice: actively choose to be different or be as just evil as the people he's killing, which would have been so interesting. For me, part of the show's allure was him walking that tight-rope.
I loved Doakes, he was such a great antagonist to Dexter and no other character equalled his presence and charisma. They should ve kept him in for more seasons and have a real cat and mouse plot going for way longer as it was truly exciting to watch. Or find a way to make him survive season 2's story which would ve kept Dexter on his toes for the next seasons. As you said, the excitement for the next seasons never matched season 2's conflict.
he survived in the books
The season with Trinity did. I'd flip the B+/B rating personally and rate 4th season the best.
The series should've ended there in hindsight...
Trinity was the next best villain, he came decently close esp when he confronts Dexter at MPD (great scene).
I guess to each his own, but in my opinion, Doakes was a bit too much, and too unrealistic.
@@spookspotlightnews-spookoh he survived alright... But getting blown up might have been a more desirable outcome. I'm not sure Showtime had the nerve to go down that rabbit hole.
This is an amazing explanation, i never understood what points broke the show for me, now i do, and it feels great.
9:00 Might have been interesting if Dexter had realized that Lila was going to find Doakes and now had to make the choice:
1) Stop Lila, leaving him with the same dilemma about how to deal with Doakes.
2) Let Lila fix his problem for him, technically following the code, but also knowing full well that he pulled a fast one.
Yeah, that would have been a good way to do it. Especially when you add in the fact that by not stopping Lila he ends up endangering Rita's kids.
In the book, poirot doesn't act like he is in much of a moral dilemma. He offer the passengers the fake explanation first. When no one's buying it, he shows them that he knows exactly what transpired. But in the end, he gives the police the fake explanation without a fuss.
Was surprissed to find that moral dilemma in the show here for that reason. I had to read the book on highschool and my recollection was that he felt pretty high and mighty about the fact that he found a way to exhonerate them all. If I remember correctly also, the room where the victim was had the lights off so none of the potential killers knew if he had been stabbed before they entered the room, so no one really knew who exactly had killed him.
So the television writers improved on an element of the books. NEXT
@@BIIGLOO-r3q It wasn't improved, it was just different. I hope you've actually read the book to so flippantly claim the TV show "improved" it. (If you can't tell, I highly prefer the book).
@@lockeforeer
I don’t care about obnoxious whiny fandoms and the incessant bitching. NEXT
Poirot of the show is an infinitely better character than the one in the novels. It’s a rare thing for a TV adaptation to improve on the original, but to be fair Agatha Christie didn’t care for him much and didn’t really do much with the character across the stories. Poirot is much improved by the addition of a moral dimension and a sense of humor.
I agree. Dexter would have killed Doakes. Probably making the rationalization that Doakes stopping him stops him from getting rid of serial killers.
Then later him figuring out he's just a killer would let the weight of his rationalizations fall upon him. Could have made for a gorgeous scene. Especially if Deb was there for it.
I would have stopped watching as soon as Dexter became just another serial killer murdering innocent people? Who but another sociopath would want to watch that?
@@davidhoward4715I would watch even harder
@@davidhoward4715watchingbad guys be bad guys is fun actually.
@@davidhoward4715he would still be the main character? Moron. You have an entire show building up to the “murder is murder” realization, and what would make you stop watching is just that the show stops pretending Dexter isn’t a murderer?
Fuck Deb, she always annoyed me
A great example of a moral dilemma is near the beginning of Death Note. Light establishes a code for himself and is immediately challenged. Light responds by breaking his code with barely a thought.
It wasn't a super high tension decision, but it told us everything we needed to know about Light. We learn from that moment it was never actually about killing criminals, and as the series goes, we see Light continually break and bend the rules to maintain his delusions of being a savior. That one moral dilemma at the start pushed Light down the path of having a god complex, and the show was incredible for it.
Death Note, unlike Dexter, had the balls to make its main villain bad. They are in the same vein of Serial killer killing criminals, but the author of Death Note knew where they wanted the story to end. Light was never the good guy. He was never going to win in the end. The writers of Dexter seemed obsessed with making Dexter a good person who got the happy ending. He is the "good guy Serial Killer" after all, so he isn't technically bad. It's a shit argument, and the writers definitely just wanted to milk the show. If Dexter changes, the show changes, the show changes, Dexter may not get good ratings.
That's a great point. Death Note rules
Americans have a weird tendency to want to excuse horrible actions of their protagonist. Even when it comes to Comedies like Friends or Seinfeld. The Friends go unpunished for their misdeeds and the Seinfeld crew getting arrested is treated as a Betrayal of the fans.
Light becomes a serial killer almost too quickly. The Japaness writers waste no time with the protagonists with moral dilemmas
THANK YOU FOR GIVING DAVID SUCHET THE CREDIT HE DESERVES
Best Poirot EVER. I’ve had a problem with the various iterations of Miss Marple.
I just discovered this channel, never heard of either or Poirot before 10 mins ago, but this dude talks about em in such an engaging way. Instant subscribe.
Actually I think it was in season 5, dexter finally decides to run away thinking the FBI suspects him of killing Rita. Then he completely loses it and kills some random guy who happened to annoy him. Which made him completely break the code and give in to his dark side but its like the showrunners decided to ignore that. Its never mentioned again
this is a really good video, i was too young when dexter came out to realize the faults in the moral dilemmas and youve brilliantly explained and described them
Something I wished the show touched upon more, ironically, was Harry.
Rewatching the show, it's clear there's something very disturbed and wrong with Harry, he essentially grooms and abuses Dexter into being a serial killer.
It's an aspect of the character that is never really touched upon either, but you can hear it when he talks to the child Dexter, he constantly reinforces the idea that Dexter is a monster that can't change, and of course teaches him how to kill, something he shouldnt know how to do (yes they sort of retcon this in the later season but i digress). But Dexter does change, he starts caring about people and feeling feels for them "it's not fake anymore"
In my headcannon, Harry was the true evil, a serial killer that passed on his craft, which is why he is the representation of the dark passenger. Harry is the darkness that entered Dexter that day in the shipping container
I totally agree and I think that’s why the guy in the video is wrong at 8:05 because killing dokes doesnt go against who Dexter thinks he is, it goes against who harry thinks Dexter should be. Which seemed like the reason why he started questioning the code so much during season 3. The vid isn’t all wrong it’s just that bit I think he misinterpreted
yea, I don't think Dexter is a psycopath, he has high functioning autism, that's why Vogel was so perplexed when he showed emotions and signs of caring for people. Harry and Vogel made him believe that he was a monster and reinforced it.
I don't agree on your last sentence tho, Harry wasn't a serial killer and he isn't the dark passenger, he portrays the code and morality of Dexter, he never incites him to kill, he just reminds him of the code when.
10:00 honestly, this is one of the big reasons that i assert that (show) dexter is absolutely NOT a psychopath...he believes he is, but he repeatedly shows FAR too much attachment to others, and empathy/emotion for them. i spent the entire show waiting for ANYONE to call him on his bullshit, and there was a character near the end who was an expert on psychopaths who really SHOULD have, but for some reason the show never even explored this area. i think it could have really added a lot to his characterization to challenge this core belief about himself
The one doesn't have to rule out the other. There are plenty of serial killers that are labelled as psychopaths, but had loving relationships. With either wives, mothers and/or brothers. Ted Bundy had a brother and they genuinely had brotherly love towards eachother.
The Hollywood portrayal of psychopaths is nonsense. Science has shown many times that they do possess empathy, it's just more selective and callous. They can love their families just fine, but then remorselessly kill someone for trivial reasons.
Dexters a sociopath
@@Zenciiiii The sociopath/psychopath distinction is more Hollywood nonsense. Neither of those even exists in DSM anymore.
I agree! It would have been interesting if he was 98% a psychopath but someone called him on that other 2% and was like, hey, you don't have to kill people. You can overcome that compulsion. Also the fact that Dexter changes and evolves. And as the audience, you're left wondering if he can actually "overcome" his tendency to be a serial killer and lean into the parts of his life that he's unexpectedly come to love. Crazy stuff. Love Dexter's premise.
Season 4 of Dexter is considered still one of the best seasons. Ever.
Trinity season was the best for sure
Season 01&02
@@MrDrgdf this. 1 & 2 were the best, 4 was only good because of trinity, the rest of the season was boring filler. All other seasons are dog shit.
Prefer season 7
@@MrDrgdf season 1 yes but season 2 they killed off Doakes. Why the FUCK would you kill off the sassy black man of your show?
Dexter would have killed Doakes and his narcissism would have reconciled the breach of Code with the fact Doakes was a killer, just a legally protected one.
I wanted Dexter to be arrested by Debra and everything to come crumbling down, everyone learning about him and maybe even him helping them with future cases kinda like Hannibal, there really was a LOT of ways the show could have gone.
Him being in prison would have been boring
I also feel like that’s what should have happened - he should have become a Hannibal like character even just for a last season.
@@Cryin98 I think it would have been great but It wasn't just about that though, we just never really got to experience any kind of reaction from the characters that we followed through the seasons and then the show released where he is in alaska or smth and his son is there and granted it had a great villain but it wasn't a proper epilogue imo.
@@torturapesnorrarape Yeah, very true. And even though they were told they weren’t allowed to kill him, there’s so many ways it could have panned out, like you said.
I was rewatching the show with my roommate (i finished it 10 years ago, it was his first time) and couldve sworn i vividly remembered Dexter having to kill Debra because she was going to turn him in and they were on the boat and everything. When we watched the finale, i was shocked and realized I probably created a false story in my head all these years to compensate for the terrible ending we got
When I was just 8 I thought this show was a live action adaptation to Dexter's Laboratory that aired on Cartoon Network. 😅
"He's now a lumberjack and he's Okay"
I saw they are putting out a new Dexter (same actor, new town), but it was on a channel I don't get.
"He sleeps all night and he works all day" (if there are any Monty Python fans out there, please keep it going).
He kills all night and he works all day!
Tune in next time when he puts on women's clothing and sits around in bars!
He cuts down trees, he eats his lunch, he goes to the lavatory
WHY WAS THIS VIDEO RECOMMENDED TO ME 3 YEARS LATE?!
All praise the algorithm;-)
The thing about Dexter's "moral code" that allows him to be a vigilante killer while still considering himself a good person is that it's a facade, and always was. It was a lie he told himself time and time again because the ugly truth was always that he kills because he wants to. There are several points throughout the show where Dexter's true nature shows itself when he's backed into a corner. Had season 2 stuck to its guns and had Dexter commit to that choice -- had he killed Doakes to protect himself -- then season 3 could have been the start of his downward spiral. Dexter would have no idea what to think of himself, and he would have to wrestle with everything that's just been outlined, until eventually things came to a head, and he accepted what he really was. We would see a version of Dexter without this false sense of justice telling him that what he's doing is okay, and he would start killing anyone he wanted to without remorse, which would inevitably cause the perfect little life he built around himself to crumble. Fans might not have liked this--because a lot of people seem to misunderstand Dexter and consider him some kind of hero--but I think that would have been the best direction to take here.
in season 5 he killed a innocen person
i love you Sheev...
also, this video & the general consensus of this guy's video (the comments section, although not all) is all superficial, in its premise & critical analysis
I think having him resolve to do it, on his way to kill him then he gets the bail out could have given the best of both worlds to shake him, make him acknowledge how BS his code is when push comes to shove but kept him from crossing that line so whether he is going to or not could be dragged out a bit but
Hi Sheev! I'm watching the show for the first time now and I had been assuming what you described was going to be the natural trajectory of the show. I'm astonished to hear that it ISN'T
The way you pronunce episodic is crazy
episowdick
Thank You. I'm somehow here 6 months later, and had to scroll way too far to see this.
One of those things that makes you doubt if they've ever watched things and talked to people, probably only ever read it it, and guessed, so, so, wrong.
@canisretro it's not that "crazy" even though i noticed immediately it was wrong, yes. No beta listeners before publishing either i guess. No "proofreader" equivalent to check your video essay. Here he guessed it would be like how the word "episode" is pronounced not realizing in English we have all these norms to explain why it's different. Kinda like atom and atomic pronounce the "tom" part so differently.
@@canisretroDon't get so triggered over a mispronounciation. Just because he said something wrong doesn't mean that he hasn't "watched things or talked to people" (whatever that's supposed to mean)
@@Ai-Spectre0 No but it certainly makes you harder to take seriously. I'm not going to take the media critique of someone who can't pronounce elementary school-level vocabulary 😭
Irish myth has a concept called "gaes" which is a code that grants power when held, and brings devastation when broken. Had Dexter been allowed to break his code and as a result become increasingly sloppy and grey, ultimately ending with killing his sister, it would have been a lot more compelling.
But really, doakes should have been around until trinity, then that could expose dex to doakes, and you could cut out a bunch of fluff as dexter spiraled down.
That's way too cool for this kind of show.
@@thispersonwriting1889 haha, its sad to think about how many good concepts get trashed by bad writers.
I watched dexter, then breaking bad, then got...and one out of three is a bad record. I don't even bother with these shows anymore because even if they start good they become trash.
@@daniel8181 I think the process is as follow:
Writer/Author: comes up with material.
Editor: removes clutter, flaws, and those good aspects with the potential to become ruinous.
Publisher: sees quality, publishes it.
Audience/Readers: sees quality, engages with it.
Everyone: Congratulates writer/author.
Continuation
Writer/author: comes up with more material.
Editor: Removes clutter and flaws.
Editor: Attempts to remove those good aspects with the potential to become ruinous.
Writer/author: Insists on including those elements because they are good elements.
Publisher: Sees quality, publishes it.
Audience/Readers: sees quality, engages with it.
Everyone: congratulates Writer/author, admonishes Editor.
Continuation
Writer/Author: comes up with material
Editor: removes flaws, attempts to remove clutter.
Writer/Author: insists on including clutter.
Publisher: sees amount of content, sees lack of flaws, publishes it.
Audience/Readers: sees amount of content, sees lack of flaws, engages with it.
Everyone: Congratulates writer/Author, chastises Editor.
Good elements with ruinous potential: start to take over and become bad (with clutter in the way, it’s hard to notice, and these elements are so integral to the story by now that it’s too late to remove them).
Continuation
Writer/Author: comes up with material
Editor: Attempts salvage and damage control.
Publisher: publishes it
Audience/Reader: engages with it, wonders where these flaws, clutter, and ruinous elements came from.
Everyone: Yells at Editor for lack of quality.
Nobody did anything unexpected, unreasonable, or with ill intent, and everybody did their jobs and reacted normally, and yet it ends up being what nobody wanted in the end.
I can't believe Dexter was a moral dilemma butcher
No matter what he chooses one of those options still fit the code. Dont get caught is the first rule for a reason.
And all the other rules are to help fulfill rule 1
no because there's an important second half, never kill an innocent.
@@hyasf Rule 1 takes priority. The code is primarily for Dexter's survival, not for Harry's brand of justice.
@@Leopoldshark correct. it's established quite clearly that the point of the code is to ensure Dexter stays alive, and free, not that he does good.
Which is why, in the final analysis, Dexter was always a bad guy.
my gripe was always that they didnt know how to let a sociopath be an actual sociopath. we could have had a show where we see how that kind of person really deals with dilemmas pitting their personal code against the feelings of their supposed loved ones; these would be no-brainer "abandon life and flee" situations. which works fine for a seasonally episodic setup! plenty of human drama to be mined from those he leaves behind, rather than some phony inner turmoil. half hearted attempts for him to grow emotionally fell flat anyway. it just never really made any sense.
No cause Dexter stands out from other killers cause he actually cares about protecting the people and feel remorse for the innocent
@@Jacobsherman341so then how is he a sociopath, exactly?
@@myboatforacar idk but he’s a likeable guy with morals that’s all I’m saying
@@myboatforacar well number one sociopaths actually have a conscience, its just weak. That being said, he didn't start killing bad guys to protect the innocent like the other guy claims, he did it cuz his father tried to tame him and tried to teach him how to not get caught
@@nomanejane5766 My armchair psychologist's reading of it was that it was a redirection of his feeling of helplessness, which were amplified when he was a child through the trauma he underwent, manifesting as primeval wrath under a thick veneer of methodically maintained control. That's why he endulges in this extreme version of a power fantasy - revenge.
5:25 Reminds me of the Doctor Who Quote
“Sometimes, the only choices you have are bad ones, but you still have to choose.”
Funnily enough, this is in the Orient Express episode!
That's a great point, that quote, and since I've never seen Doctor Who, thanks for bringing it to my attention! (not being sarcastic, fyi)
@@iprobablyforgotsomething as someone who has watched it my whole life, i think you'd like it, i gained many moral lessons from it as a child, and also a fear of statues.
@@CertainOverlord I was smiling till you mentioned the statues.....
Sounds like voting
In the Witcher I recall Geralt saying "f I have to choose between one evil and another, then I prefer not to choose at all" which in my view is choosing the greater evil
I stand by that the core issue is the writers thought Dexter was a hero when he was always a villian. He's a sociopathic seiral killer, the fact that he's killing "bad people" is just an excuse he gives himself to give him to his murderous impulses.
Breaking Bad is everything Dexter could have been strictly because the writers understood this core rule.
Best way i think to honestly examine dexters actions is to question would he kill someone like himself. A man who has murdered thousands because he claims they are all "evil"?
@michaelsimmons8613 people and Dexter fans constantly see Dexter as the hero and constantly justify or romanticize what he does while people like, Fuches from Barry, are more qualified as Dexter victims than half the people Dexter went after
Im sorry, but its pretty clearly shown that dexter is not a hero... the writers never painted him as a hero, people seem to not understand that the main character of a story is not inherently a hero. Dexter is portrayed at best, as a necessary evil, you could consider him an antihero, like frank castle as the punisher but theres literally no way he can be considered a hero. Where does this hero shit come from?
@@Seasonal-Shadow_4674i dont get it, dexter isnt a hero, but he is absolutely justified in almost every killing he commits. He doesnt just kill for the sake of it, an alcoholic doesnt drink to get drunk, they drink in order to feel normal and thats what dex does for the most part, he kills to satiate the dark urge so he can function as a person. He was born in blood similarly to a baby born with an opiate or crack addiction. He is damaged beyond repair and without the code and channeled release he spends a lifetime in a prison cell or insane asylum. People latch on to dexter for the same reason they latch on to characters like the punisher, necessary evils that invert the typical hero trope because the system is corrupt.
Dexter and Water White are no where near the same character for them to have the same faith
I don’t know if this is just me but didn’t he start killing only because he couldn’t not kill? Like of course he’s been trained into thinking that he only is supposed to kill bad guys, but that’s all because he just needed a moral ground to stay on to make himself believe killing is okay? Like the real reason why he’s killing is because he wants to not because he has to. Idk that’s just me 🤷♀️
The real Dexter definitely would’ve killed Doaks, and I would’ve LOVED to see him agonize over it for seasons to come. I agree with you, we were robbed.
Would love to see your perspective on the seasons & why you ranked them the way you did.
He would've killed doakes but if he did then it would've broke the code forever and he'd probably continued to do so realistically
@@beattheodds6219 part of the code is not to get caught. the not killing of innocence applies more to his mo, who he can have fun killing. not to what he has to do in order to not get caught.
@@GotoMaki4Micah thats why harry made the first rule dont get caught.
This is the real Dexter
“The real Dexter” lol no it wouldn’t have fit his overall characterization on the show.
Epi-sode-ic he says
how are you supposed to pronounce it then??
@@Otra_Chica_de_Internet Eppy, so dick.
@@Otra_Chica_de_Internet Epi Saw Dick
@@Otra_Chica_de_InternetEpi-sod-ic
@@Otra_Chica_de_Internet epi-sod-ic the sod being like how you say turf or grass with soil.
It's very strange how the show refuses to accept the absurdly obvious reality that a "good guy serial killer" is paradoxical and impossible. He's not killing as a means to an end to rid the world of evil people, he's finding evil people as a means to the end of fulfilling his urge to murder. Harry's code doesn't work because you might identify bad guys incorrectly, disproportionately administer death to someone who didn't deserve such a severe punishment, or get caught and be forced to act in self preservation. Instead of writing Dexter the character with his code against the reality of the universe and letting it hit its natural conflicts, they molded the universe around Dexter to allow him to kill people for pleasure and get away with it.
I wouldnt say "good guy serial killer" is impossible, partly due to how subjective the word Good is. But there are even some common ethical arguments that would promote Dexter's actions, particularly utilitarianism (as controversial as utilitarianism is).
Personally, I think he saved a lot more lives than he actually took, and the lives he saved were worth more than the scum he tended to take out. Even if he was only doing it to fulfill his own needs.
That being said, I don't really believe there's been a good guy serial killer in real life... or, at least not more than one in a billion or so. To be willing to kill, but also have the discipline to hold back from killing until you have absolute proof, it's a very specific temperament. Also it's a rare person who would be in a position to encounter, confirm, and abduct that many people who the world would be absolutely better off without.
It's not strange at all. A lot (and I mean A LOT) of people share the show's mentality: vigilante justice is the right kind of justice, because bad guys getting away would be the worst thing imaginable, bad judgement just does not exist, and no punishment is too harsh. Vigilantes are revered because they are a projection of many people's sense of justice.
Did u see new blood?
All a sudden he’s whacking nebody
Some people provide nothing beneficial to the world, but negativity. You're negating, Dexter's pure 'luck'. He does end up making people slip through the system, but that doesn't mean that someone like himself couldn't just get 'lucky'.
Berserk is a good example of a writer who understands moral dilemmas.
Excellent video! The best example of moral dilemmas done well is Barry on HBO. It’s the most character choice-driven show I’ve ever seen. The writers never write a character out of a dilemma to maintain them as a “good” person in the eyes of the audience. Barry and everyone else receive every consequence of every choice, no matter how tragic or brutal.
Thank you!!! Barry is SUCH a good show and I don’t think enough people know about it.
YES, this perfectly explains why season 2 was so exciting and then so disappointing. It made me hate Dexter that he got everything he wanted, by doing absolutely nothing, then punished Lyla for it by killing her at the end, as if she wasn't his easy way out for the most compelling problem of the show so far. Everything leading up to that ending had been so delightful but it made me lose all interest I had in continuing. This really put it into words.
Also same, Jane's death was so harrowing that even expecting the worst, it was so shocking I didn't know how to live with it for a second there. It's amazing how Walt is so awful yet I don't feel cheated by his actions the way I felt cheated by Dexter
She punished Lila because she would've killed the kids and Rita??”?
@@happoki In France? How was she going to hurt them all the way over there? I was annoyed he sought her out. And that he killed her for being a killer when he was overjoyed to benefit from her actions.
I understand she's a "loose end," it was just all resolved in the most annoying way possible for me.
Jane's death wasn't Walt's fault she did it herself when she used the needle again. If anything it's Jesse's fault Jane died because he got her back into d rugs
@@SunBane67 No, give it a rewatch. Jane made her own choices but the episode shows clearly that she dies that night because first, Walt knocked her over, causing her to be on her back instead of her side when she vomits. Then, he chooses to watch her choke instead of helping her, which he chooses purely because it would benefit him if she died. He's horrified with himself for doing this but it can't be undone and it's what he chose. She would not have died that night if he weren't there.
Walt also chooses to leave quietly so Jesse will wake up next to her dead body and think exactly what you're saying, that this is solely his fault for enabling Jane's relapse. The whole point is Walt (and we) know something much more sinister happened, but he is hiding the truth because it would destroy Jesse's trust in him.
@@citonita2207 This is true, He touched her shoulder, causing her to roll over, vomit and choke. If walt was not there she would not have d ied... yet. Two hero ine addicts with hundreds of thousands of dollars? They would have die d in weeks. Regardless of walt being there or not, she would have passed. Also they weren't exactly careful, laying on a bed on their side. It is so incredibly easy to roll over accidentally. The same thing would have happened with how careless both of them are. Walt took advantage of the situation which would have happened regardless. So Jane rolling over and choking is not Walter's fault. It's not like he shoved her over, he lightly touched her and she rolled over. Likely she would have rolled over a couple minutes later if walt wasn't even there. So Jane rolling over and choking is not Walter's fault.
Also people don't consider this, but what can walt even do? Walt is not a trained EMT, he can't stop her from choking, it's not like she could easily be given the Heimlich. Walt would have been forced to call 911... How is walt going to explain to the cops that he broke into an apartment full of methh and two hero ine addicts? If he calls the cops Jesse, and Walt go to jail for life, Jane goes to jail for possessing drugs. Let's say Walt calls anonimously and removes the meth. Jane d ies before EMTs can get there, Jesse is caught with dru gs, and Gus knows Walt is a massive risk taker by calling the police on his partner. So Walt likely gets box cuttered because Gus isn't sure that he needs Walt yet and definitly cannot trust him here. So, Walt has no way to save Jane on his own, cant call the cops, and thus has no blame here in what happened.
Jane di ed by her own actions and Jesse's influence. Nothing more. Walt was simply wrong place wrong time, but made the only logical call that keeps him and Jesse safe when there is nothing he could have done to prevent her dea th.
I really love how Barry handled similar themes basically perfectly.
I was literally thinking that all this sounds like what Barry handled perfectly. A bad person who thinks hes a good guy forced to come to terms with who he is.
By never having a redemption arc, it was truly magnificent!
@@MrTuas Even though he never does comes to terms with it. He in a way becomes worse by denying how evil he is. He lives out his delusion of being a good person through his son and religion in the last season but never manages to become actually good.
Don't even mention Barry in the same sentence as Dexter. That is such a subpar silly show, that is so far beneath Dexter.
@@angelinthecenterfold the problem was the gate Fuches a redemption arc which was very unnecessary, and he seemed to get away with everything with no consequences after leaving prison, just because he cared for children and saved Barry’s child doesn’t mean he’s necessary redeemable and people humanize him more than they do Sally
Thank you for recognizing the beauty of David Suchet.
i could see dex framing doax, cause while he couldnt justify killing him, he didnt think doaks was a good person at all. he thought doaks was like him, a killer but one who used the military to justify his murders. thats why he brings it up and doaks says :jesus that was war" and dex just says something like.."uh huh, sure"
This was Dexter trying to come up with an excuse to kill him. He tried a lot to find one but didn't convince himself of nothing who makes Doakes a code match
@@diogosimao zz. . I
Doakes in the books really did use the military and police as an excuse to kill - that's where that came from
The way the show was written didn't show that so maybe it was dexter looking for an excuse there
Number one rule of his code don’t get caught and doakes was tying to infringe on that rule lol
I just stopped after season 2 of Dexter, and I could never put into words why. Just felt like a good ending to the show. You've put the reason into words fantastically!
good choice lol. contrary i tried hatewatching to beat my screen addiction and only lowered my standards instead.
Same here. The first episode of Season 3 did a horrible job of filling the void left by Doakes. I realized the show was out of steam and just stopped watching.
Season 3 gets really good after a few episodes, then season 4 is awesome. Don't sleep on those, it's some amazing stuff.
Make season 4 ending your finale you won't regret it but that's all you don't have to watch after that
Not gonna blame you for that because it's true. But I would HIGHLY recommend watching season 3 just so that you can get to the amazing season 4! And then after season 4, you can truly stop. But there's just SO much that's FANTASTIC about season 4 - I promise you, it's worth it.
This perfectly puts into words what I was feeling about the show. Great analysis 👏🏻
Thanks for this great, well-thought out analysis!
@2:50 Doakes didn’t trip over himself. There was a big gap in the wood flooring in the bridge that he was walking backwards on. If he kept his eye on Dexter while backing up, he would’ve tripped anyway because of the broken bridge.
14:48 They screwed up Dexter's moral dilemma, but that is why the show started to revolve around Debra for me. Her acting was absolutely phenomenal. I have no idea how difficult it was to pull off such realistic acting, but it was so intense to watch a master.
Oh yeah she was fantastic, especially the grimaces
imo they should let Dexter kill Doakes and have he hesitate to kill LaGuerta then Deb kill her instead
I just rewatched S1-8 of Dexter and the New Blood limited series all in a row. I was surprised to find how much I enjoyed S3 (the Miguel Prado season). I felt that Prado and Dexter had a better and more *REAL* relationship than Dexter ever had with Rita. They had trust, friendship, Dexter could share who he was, his code, his ritual, they had a kinship, a shared purpose, they protected each other, and they even killed together.
Of course, ultimately, Prado was a charming bastard who lied to everyone and used them for his own purposes, but that’s what made him such a compelling character in the 8 seasons of the main show. It challenged the idea that Dexter couldn’t have friends, couldn’t have a real life, and couldn’t have FEELINGS. Which is something that I think I missed when watching the show as it aired - all the stuff with Harry is just proof that Dexter DOES have a conscience and feelings. It’s not necessarily what Harry would have said; it’s what Dexter is imagining and projecting on to the memory of Harry to talk him out of doing things he wants to do, and to protect him.
By the end of the 9th season, New Blood, I’m almost convinced that Dexter was just TOLD he was a psychopath and trained to be one (and while. he definitely did have dark, homicidal urges, he still had feelings). He had multiple, real relationships where he shared his secret with people. He cared about people. By the end of the show, I was fully in the Deb camp where I felt that she was the moral center of the show and always had been, and I had really started to hate Dexter for all the harm he caused everyone. But Dexter most definitely FELT that harm he was causing.
Hell, it even made the abysmal finale better on a rewatch, picking up details like the episode where Dexter’s co-worker in the file room (the friend of Harry) gets a terminal illness. She doesn’t fit the code, she doesn’t kill or plan to kill, she knows who he is and won’t tell… and she can’t kill herself either, due to her religion making that the worst sin that would condemn her to hell. Deb meets her and says to Dex, “if I’m ever on a machine, unplug me” which is exactly what happens at the end of the show (something I’d long forgotten about by the time it aired).
I wish Doakes would have survived another season and secretly recruited other members of Miami Metro to work on exposing Dexter and have Dexter have to figure out whether to kill them all or go on the run. He was a great character and the “surprise, motherfucker” meme on the internet everywhere just made it that much funnier the two times he did it in the show. I thought New Blood was a much better ending for the character, if not perfect. But MUCH better.
About time someone who doesnt rag on the New Blood finale
@@jason555jason555 I understand why people are conflicted over it. There’s not a consensus about how people believe it SHOULD have ended. Should Dexter get away with it and keep killing? Eventually get caught? Should it have been Deb that caught him? Should the existence of Cody and Astrid and Rita as his cover that eventually became *real* people to him that he cared about change him? And moreso for Harrison, his son by blood? I get why people didn’t like the original ending we got but I think in large part, no matter what happened, a large percentage of the fans would have had issues with it because it didn’t do what they wanted.
So for the show to come back at all, I thought that New Blood was really well done. I especially loved how cinematic it felt - the swap from 16x9 (which filled the screen in the original series run) to something closer to 21x9 widescreen with a LOT of depth of field usage and the really beautiful color palette in the environments and costume design was so visually pleasing to look at.
**SPOILERS FOR NEW BLOOD AHEAD** - I thought that the actor that played Harrison (Jack Alcott) was inspired casting. He felt vulnerable and confused enough that you weren’t sure if he was a normal kid and Dexter was projecting or if he was genuinely struggling with his urges due to being born in blood and what he saw. I also thought that the placement of “Chekhov’s Gun” right there on the wall in between the kitchen of the cabin and the room Harrison slept in was perfect, being put front and center throughout the entire series and then it was obviously of vital importance to the way they resolved the show.
I’d personally watch a spinoff were they follow Harrison, who might now be really triggered by the events of the finale on top of everything else. And maybe try to do what he originally thought Dexter was actually doing - more of a vigilante superhero style killer that was taking out the trash than someone that **NEEDED** to do it and that’s just who he was trained to do it to. I’m assuming this won’t ever happen but I’d support it if it did.
I also loved how they used Deb in this. She was FEROCIOUS and TERRIFYING and really tormented Dexter (with her being his own thoughts of course). So just like the way he envisioned Harry, the way he imagined Deb and talked to her was further proof that he *did* have feelings and wasn’t completely a sociopath that had to fake emotions to blend in with humanity. The absolute violence that Deb used against Dexter was scary at times; I thought she was gonna claw his face off. So yeah, I thought that New Blood ended up being significantly better than it could have been, and without question a better ending than the original. Clancy Brown was a worthy final target and when the lights came on in his underground lair, displaying all of his victims? Probably the most disgusted I’ve been with a killer throughout the entire run of Dexter. I wish that they did maybe 2 more episodes, would be my main complaint. But yeah, I’m glad it happened at all.
@@MrJagermeister Deb was awesome on new blood
@@MrJagermeister Yeah, New Blood felt a little rushed. I was disappointed that they made it seem like Angel was going to meet Dexter after all those years and he was going to be executed like Clyde Phillips originally was going to end the show. Then they just abandoned that idea completely and there was no pay off to that scene where Dexter's gf tells Angel about Dexter. If they had spaced it out a little more it would have been better.
I think I read somewhere a couple years or more ago that Clyde Phillips wanted to end the show with Season 2 and have Dexter be killed by the state of Florida with an electrocution chair and he would hallucinate all the people he killed directly and indirectly in the observation room and the whole show was his life flashing before his eyes. Then they were told they had to do more seasons and by the time they were close to the end of the show Scott Buck wasn't allowed to end it by killing Dexter like Clyde Phillips wanted because they wanted to keep it open for a spinoff or more seasons(probably because of money) so we got that dogshit ending in Season 8.
That's why Season 2 felt a little odd being so early on considering the content of the season. It felt like it should have been the end of the show, it felt like that because they thought they were filming the final season.
New Blood had way too many plot holes and it’s like they forgot about what happened in all the other seasons.. Season 1 to 4 were amazing then it went downhill, they should’ve finished strong with a season 5 with Dex on the run like Breaking bad instead of just milking it (don’t know why many hate on season 3😑) imo
How I would've preferred Dexter to end is something like this:
Have it take until the end of season 4 for Doakes to catch Dexter red handed (This of course means he doesnt die in season 2).
Then have everything go the same as the end of season 2 except Doakes manages to actually escape, has to hide from the authorities while simultaneously prove Dexter is guilty and actually have him succeed in this.
Dexter is then arrested, detained and even put on trial. We then watch as him and his lawyer actually fail to get him out of jail and furthermore he gets put on death row.
'_____Years Later' he is in the electric chair, a shell of his former self and emotionless, he sees the hallucination/ghost/whatever of his father in tears as the lever is pulled and we see Dexter die as a monster in the way his father so desperately tried to avoid.
A brutal and tragic end but Dexter's life, as mentioned in the video, has been tragedy after tragedy, so it makes sense. And sure, it wouldve been so upsetting and maybe not what the viewer wants to see necessarily but it wouldve been much better than what we got instead.
I think the comparison with Breaking Bad is funny, because I think they actually do give Walter White an "out". The fact that he knows that the second he lets the guy free he'll try and kill him, leaves Walter White with no other choice than to kill him first. One might even say it's self defense (though I think that could very much be argued).
Yeah I agree. As soon as he realised that he was going to try to kill him, it gave him the "justification" of a preemptive attack and removed most of the moral dilemma. To me the first truly serious moral dilemma Walt faces that significantly changes his character is Jane's death.
People always forget though that Walt at any point also had the option to turn himself in. If he'd done it there he would have got off light. Mental breakdown caused by suddenly facing mortality makes him want to act out and do something criminal, he chooses cooking meth because he already knows how to, then kills someone in totally justified self-defence? That spin would make anyone lenient on him, plus Hank would vouch for him.
It’s still a moral dilemma in that Walter could always call the police and turn himself in and get Krazy-8 arrested. By killing Krazy-8 it becomes more than just protecting his family, it becomes him growing increasingly acclimated to his life as a criminal, in which killing to cover your tracks becomes a way of life. Killing Krazy-8 is the first step to him becoming a full blown criminal and losing his humanity.
Maybe that specific instance, but the writers gave him an out for paying for his cancer treatment 2 episodes later, then had him go into remission the following season, and neither of those things stopped him.
Great analysis. This was actually my exact criticism of New Blood. They had an opportunity to set up a moral dilemma with Dexter in jail between Harrison and Logan, yet they didn't execute it right at all.
Hello! Would you clarify what you mean? Dexter did have a moral dilemma in the jail - he killed Logan, not because he fit the code, but simply so that Dexter could escape.
@@StefanSochinsky My take on that is he could have spared Logan. Dexter wanted out of the cell, but killing Logan went against the code of Harry. I wonder if Dexter still held to that code though. I didn't like the fresh blood season to be honest, I think it did more harm than good to the legacy of Dexter. He was sharp, smart and cunning in the 8 seasons based in Miami, but in that backwater hick-town, he was a derp! Miami Dexter would not have made the asinine mistakes Derp Dexter made. But then again, it's really the writers who wrote that trash. The finale of the 8th season with Deb being tossed in the ocean really pissed me off. She deserved better. My hope was that some reconciliation would be achieved with the revival of the series, but that proved false as well. I hold an imagined ending in my mind as to what happened, and no writer can match that.
@@Maderyne Hello! Killing Logan actually DIDN'T violate Harry's Code. Rule 1: Don't get caught. And as far as Dexter's mistakes and missteps, I kind of felt like that was part of the point in New Blood - Dexter's been out of the game, so to speak, for so long that he's rusty. Granted, I thought the pacing of it could have been a little better, but I actually don't have a problem with New Blood. Something I'd like to see (despite my opinion that Dexter is completely done) is Dexter be Harrison's dark passenger.
I loved New Blood but the last 30 minutes completely ruined it. What a waste.
@@StefanSochinskyBut that would be the case for Doakes as well. Being caught. He caught Dexter. So no, it does go against the code. As per the series' own rulesettubg,
Thank you. I've been saying all of this for years. I was so disappointed at the lack of creative courage they showed in this series.
After being bombarded by the algorithm with dexter shorts, I thought about giving it another try... Last I've seen it was +10 years ago, season 5~ish. Thanks for saving my time.
The scene in which Dexter kills with Doakes unable to do anything but watch was the most horrifying moment of the series.
Great video, really love the breakdown of why S2 and S7’s dilemmas let Dexter get off easy. Have to disagree on S1 and S4 though, those seasons nail the story they’re trying to tell on all cylinders. S1 still feels the most exciting to rewatch personally, would’ve been interesting if they had Brian live like he did in the books. S2 is let down by Lila but a more exciting season than S3 but gotta point out how underrated Miguel is. Jimmy Smits gave the show some classic scenes.
Miguel’s amazing “Jesus, you have no shame - AND no case!”
@exa I guess it was a front?
@exa and he very much loved lumen
@retroRENEGADE - I just rewatched S1-8 before watching 9 and I agree that S3 is totally underrated - Jimmy Smits as Miguel Prado was a better relationship w/ Dexter than Rita ever was. They had trust, friendship, common goals, shared interests, Dexter showed him who he was, let him in on his ritual, his code, his kills, they killed together, covered for each other, even had plans to make Miami a better place ONLY when the law didn’t work and couldn’t work and he had a partner in a District Attorney that, combined with Miami Metro, had a much better chance of bringing actual justice to people one way or the other.
Sure, he turned out to be a charming liar that used Dexter and didn’t absorb his code and went to kill the lawyer giving him problems. But the average season of Dexter has a big bad monster of a killer like the Ice Truck Killer, Trinity Killer, etc. and what I loved about S2 was that Dexter was being hunted and in S3, he and Miguel were the big bads *together*.
I never connected with Rita (though she didn’t deserve what she got), mostly because the show always kept her at arms length and introduced her as a cover for Dexter and she was always preventing him from doing what he wanted to do, which is why we were watching. The actress did a great job with her; I think it was just the writing that had me cold on her. Miguel was possibly the best non-Deb relationship that Dexter had in the show, until Hannah (good or bad, at least they both knew what the other was and it was all in the open).
"would’ve been interesting if they had Brian live like he did in the books"
Thank you! I can't stop thinking about this one. It just seems like an infinitely more interesting idea to keep him around. Not only would it make Dexter a more selfish and morally grey character if they kept him alive, but Brian also had so much more potential. He could be the one to keep disillusioning Dexter about Harry. he could keep digging into their pasts. He could be a call to the dark side. He could create so much more problems and solutions to other problems, just by the fact that he's Dexter's family and a killer *without* morals. Killing him off feels like such missed opportunity to me.
The book was SOOO much darker than the show what happened to doakes in the book was monumentally horrifying.
What happened in the books?
@@blueisasomedancer In the book, "Dearly Devoted Dexter"(2005) Doakes was the victim of a serial mutilator known as Dr. Dano. The "doctor" would kidnap people and play his version of Hangman. For every answer a person got wrong, he would remove a body part. At the end, most victims were reduced to "yodeling potatoes." He got partway through his procedure with Doakes. It was enough to get Doakes out of the picture... mostly.
@@a.houston946 dang
Glad that somebody mentions the books! I read the books before continuing to watch the show. Needless to say, I was disappointed with the latter.
@asomedancer MASSIVE SPOILERS if you haven't read it, but here's a few in even the *first* book:
The barking dog next door is...not re-homed. Dexter comes home and finds it's not barking because it's dead. Because Rita's kids killed it. Turns out, they're also deeply damaged...and he decides he needs to shepherd them in Harry's Code!
Brian kidnaps Deborah and LaGuerta. Dexter won't kill Deborah, but he lets Brian kill LaGuerta and then helps Brian escape. So Deb also *knows* he's a serial killer and has absolutely no illusions about his total lack of actual morals, except as enforced by Harry's Code, since she watches him let Brian kill LaGuerta.
Saying it follows it "pretty closely" is, imo, inaccurate. Sure, there are a lot of familiar beats, but that kind of massive change to Dexter's character means the core of it all is fundamentally altered.
Absolutely loved that you took Poirot as a reference
Thanks for putting into words the overall felling I had about the seasons of Dexter.
Really enjoy the analysis.
Great video.
🙏!!!
Season 2 was fantastic. Dexter should have been 4 seasons long and Season 2 should have been the finale. Dexter should have been willing to have Doakes turn him in but then Doakes, at some point, tries to arrest Dexter (maybe he thinks Dexter's getting cold feet) and Dexter is forced to kill Doakes to save himself.
This is what Barry improved on
This was nice to see. Back when S2 came out it killed my interest in the show for exactly the reason you lay out. It introduced an interesting moral dilemma with the two main outcomes changing the status quo and then just had it miraculously resolve itself in favour of Dexter with no consequences. At that point any tension I had about him being discovered dissolved. I knew the writers would just throw in some bullshit any time they brought up something interesting to maintain their lead character's code. The code ceased to matter because it would simply never be broken.
My friends who watched the show didn't agree and kept watching and because of their persistence I eventually ended up watching S3 a couple years after it aired. I felt nothing because I knew Dexter would "win" regardless of what he did.
You should watch Season 4 if you never did. Even if you think Dexter will "Win" it still makes amazing television, thanks to the Trinity Killer. Easily the best anatagonist of the series.
Season 3 is fucking terrible and season 4 really isn't that great, the actor who plays Trinity is just really compelling. The season still sucks.
Conversely if Dexter did break his code it also ends the show. IMO him breaking the code to kill Doakes would have killed interest in the show. A serial killer who kills to satisfy their urges and tries to not get caught is a pretty boring premise with nothing interesting to offer.
@@spicy_mintnot necessarialy. It would be boring if he just became a normal serial killer but they could have made soeething with it. Made so that by breaking his code Dexter had to grapple with what his code even meant and what to do now. They could even return to the status quo by making Dexter try to stop killing but convince himself that stopping is worse as the other serial killers won't be stopped unless he kills them (if it's true and he is doing good or not it's an audience debate), now this is frammed still by the lens of Dexter wanting to kill more people but being stopped by the morality quesiion brought by the code. So Dexter decides to do something to punish himself for breaking it once and keeps going. Except now both Dexter and the audience now he can kill innocents for selfish reasons and to question the validity of code making the payoff of Dexter choosing to die as to get the world rid of another evil (himself) better.
The show is about a serial killer that doesn’t get caught, if that were to happen there would only be one season.
“Breaking Bad sucks because I know Walter is not going to die in season 2”. Ok I guess.
3 years later the show is in hype again and i rly love Dexter
I have an idea they could've used if Dexter killed Laguerta. Like you said "He isn't a good serial killer anymore, he's just a killer", they coul've used what seemed to me a good idea in season 6 : make Bryan replace Harry in his mind. It was underused in season 6, but it could've been great to see a Dexter tortured by his brother's illusion, trying to force him to let it go and kill whoever he wants to.
That’s why he always WAS he kills because he likes killing
It’s Harry that made sure he killed those who “deserve it”
How is this still lost on people lol
I think you're exactly right and you've got the point about how they re-introduced Bryan (one effin' time!) as another "Dark Passenger". They could've even had Harry and Bryan acting as the angel and devil on your shoulders wrestling for control with Harry slowly fading away. Eventually Dexter left to himself and Bryan and then eventually have the Dark Passengers leave. It could be left ambiguous if they will return to Dexter's mind one day or if the "Dark Passenger" was just always a facade Dexter's mind made to rationalize his carnal nature.
I started watching TV Show because of Dexter. It's like I was looking for another equally exciting Shows, but never found one.
If you love the cat and mouse chase of season 2, may I recommend Death Note if you haven't already seen it? Please don't let it being animated put you off, I never thought I could enjoy an anime until I watched it. It's genuinely got one of the best plots I've ever seen in fiction and will scratch the Dexter itch
I highly recommend Mr. Robot if you liked Dexter. I'm a big fan of inner mono-logging and Mr. Robot does that with the lead Elliot character as well. Also you may like The Shield. It has some similarities in the show structure, but unlike Dexter the main character is a bit of scum bag. But I think the show may share some of the same writers and that show has so many actors that turn up in Dexter as well.
@@funkyfranxturns trash after L dies
@@funkyfranxNo you may not.
@@Monke1312_It turned trash about 1 second into the intro during episode 1.
This was actually really cathartic. I remember watching it as it was first airing and while I didn't conceptualize their blunder to this degree at the time I remember thinking "They just bailed him out! What the Fuck?!". Season three was like the aftertaste of the end of season two and a pretty lousy reset of the stakes and I only stuck around for season four for John Lithgow. I jumped ship without even trying season five and wondered until I heard how they ended it whether I should give the rest a go.
I was wondering again today until I saw this video.
Thank you for your service o7
“Dexters story has always been a tragedy”
Exactly, because he DID lose something, pretty much everyone he was ever close to.
That’s what his choices cost him.
Dexters tragedy is irrelevant to his choices, he watched his mother and some other people get chainsawed to pieces in front of him and was left to die in a pool of blood and gore. His humanity was stolen from him before he ever had a chance to live.
@@g00gleisgayerthanaids56 Nah. Dexter's core issue is he really doesn't like not being in control. Killing is not the only way to get a sense of control. It's just the one Dexter was drawn to first because he didn't know anything else. Harrison decided that the traumatized child's first impulse was correct and molded Dexter's whole lifestyle around it and taught him to hide his feelings. HORRIBLE FATHER. By the time Dexter was wise enough to reflect on himself he was addicted to murder. This doesn't make his choice to succumb to his addiction any less his own. Quitting is painful but possible especially since his addiction is hurting his family
@@krag3405 its like you didnt actually watch the show... dexter was killing and torturing small animals before harrison ever even started on the code. Not only that, but dexter is supposed to be a murderous psychopath, thats the show... bad writing or inauthentic acting doesnt change anything. Harry worked with a clinical psychologist to keep dexter on the "straight and narrow" so to say who also gave him an official diagnosis. The books this show was based on also had some supernatural elements to it, as the dark passenger, was a real entity that infected dexter.
@@g00gleisgayerthanaids56 Read it again, Dex decided to start killing dogs but Harry didn't try to fix Dex and instead just doubled down on it and made Dex an extremely efficient killer. Dex isn't broken being repair like Harry says, the entire point of the show is that Dex could've been 'normal' but he had an awful father that led him deeper into the darkness.
@jaskaranbajwa8443 youre just flat out wrong on all accounts. The entire point of the show is to have fun with the idea of a "necessary evil," by showcasing a psychopathic serial killer that the audience can get behind and root for. It makes for good entertainment. Dexter, as a show has no real main thesis or underlying message its trying to show or tell, its a character driven series that has fun with its characters by putting them in ridiculous situations... the bay harbour butcher is the forensics guy, "looking for himself" cmon... theres no groundbreaking story here. Its pure entertainment. You cant expect sane, normal people to be able to come together to actually write/act/perform authentically psychopathic characters, not only is it nearly impossible, it wouldnt make for good tv. Your entire argument hinges on small, tiny details/breaks in character, and attempt to change the entire narrative with them. Dexter had to walk a fine line between making watchable, gripping tv, and promoting a serial killer that objectively does the job better than law enforcement... sacrifices of the story and narrative and performances are going to be made for the sake of actually having a successful show.
This video essay is outstanding: It's well explained, the production value is as good as anyone else's in the writing craft space, and it's entertaining. Looking forward to more. Subscribed.
I never really liked Dexter but I recognize he is the vehicle for the show's plot to keep going. James Doakes still remains my favorite character in Dexter, tied with Batista but no one after him really hit the same energy or presence for me. Erik King friggin' KILLED it (pun intended) as Sgt. Doakes.
Bautista was a great character. Masuka was funnier in the early seasons
Wait what why didn’t you like dexter Morgan? 🤔I think he’s one of the best tv characters ever. He’s actually my favorite character ever
Anti-White bigotry clouds your opinion
@@raymondsims7042He hates Dexter because Dexter is White. They just hate people over skin colour.
Batista was unremarkable
Nice to hear some love for Poirot :) David Suchet is so, so good in that role.
This is such an on point analysis. Well done!
Love the comparison with Poirot's moral dilemma!! David Suchet brought that character to life with style and hilarity, seeing him struggle with a real moral/ethical/religious decision was incredible and no other actor in the role is worth even a footnote.
As for Dex... Agree completely about S2's finale being a bit of a let down, but it worked for S7 because Deb had been wrestling with her own morals and code that entire season too and Jennifer Carpenter was phenomenal in that scene and when she first found out the whole truth...
I think the real Dex would have used the excuse of Doakes' history with Black Ops to try and justify killing him, and it would have made S3 better with him grappling with the knowledge that he is capable of bending the code in that way.
S4 is better than you rated it, they did an excellent job with the twists, cat and mouse of Dex vs Trinity, Dex's arrogance getting Rita killed etc.
I think if S6 and S5's main plots had been flipped, then people would be more forgiving of the Lumen storyline, but it came too close on the heels of Rita's death, which was a devastating blow to viewers, especially with the tragedy of Dex only realising he loved her when she was already gone. We needed more time to see him deal with that, before they introduced another love interest.
I also think the finale of S5 was another cop out: Deb faced her own moral dilemma which was great, but I think she should have actually seen them and then come to the same conclusion. Then we could have had Deb accept those particular kills, but still grapple with the idea of Dex going outside the law, slowly becoming more suspicious etc until she finds the blood slides and flips out. That would have made it much more believable than her buying Dex's bullshit about the DDK and helping him cover it up.
The less said about S8 & 9 the better.
Suchet brought such a cheerful optimistic nature to the character, that seeing him shook like that really gets to you.
Its like seeing Superman bleed
I didn't watch past season one, but this is such a great video essay. I feel like the obvious ending is for dexter to kill himself, realizing that he has become someone who will not violate the code and choosing to sacrifice himself to save his family the pain of further exposure and Maria from death. I actually think that would be kind of beautiful, for him to realize that he will never stop killing and be the bigger person and remove himself from the equation to protect everyone he loves.
SPOILERS AHEAD
This is how Dexter New Blood ends, in a sense. He has the character in the end of the show shoot him, as a way to atone for all his supposed horrid actions. Dexter does realize he's the problem, and dies for it, but this correct ending can't make up for the disasters of the show that came before it. Like, if it happened far far earlier, maybe after Trinity, now that would be an ending alright.
@@LuciaS_VA ....
.
...
..
...not to mention all the shit he pulled in NB alone. Granted, he caught a monster while he was at it, but still...
Doesn’t dexter love nobody? He’s a psychopath
I think both the writers of the show and the character (Dexter) himself probably believes that he's incapable of love or caring about others, but he did care about those in his day to day life. He's not a soulless machine, just really messed up from a young age with the worst possible parent teaching to control his urges instead of getting him help.
There are a million other ways that Dexter could have processed his traumas, or dealt with his personality of being impulsive and harmful, but he did not need to murder anyone. I think that's what makes Dexter a great character if you consider that his childhood was so fucked up and his adoptive father really messed him up instead of just getting him help, but who knows, maybe he sees what kind of help people like Dexter would have gotten so he dealt with it his own way, creating the monster he decided to end his life over, realizing what he did was a huge mistake and that he enabled a killer, regardless if the killings are justifiable or not.
It's actually kind of why the show had bad writing at points, they couldn't let Dexter grow, to make himself accountable, or to change in any meaningful way. It also means the show couldn't go on when it reached an actual end point. That was the biggest issue with the series was that people wanted more of Dexter but didn't want him to change.
It's why, even now, with an ending befitting of Dexter in New Blood, that people still find it a bad ending because of a multitude of reasons, one I hear being "Why can't you just make Dexter good again?"
They just wanted him to kill more people, they don't care about his journey or growth or fall into depravity. I think that's what puts a show like Breaking Bad above Dexter in terms of writing. You get to be manipulated by Walter White and realize just how much of a monster he is over and over again and see how far he will go to reach his goals. @@J-Rush
@@J-Rush Only in the first season and even then he clearly loves Deb.
Poirot's self-violation is an underrated piece. Thank you for including that.
This is a great video essay. Very well done! The parallels to The murder on the orient express and breaking bad were amazing. A new perspective on the moral delimas they face.
10:51 I always love how Doakes gets yeeted by the explosion. He's flying!
Really enjoyed the video. I agree with all points. But a secondary view (kinda backed up by the new series) of the show is that it explores how Dexter reacts to how his actions effects others. I think that point is made by deb in Dexter's head of "Everybody near you dies."
I've got to watch the new series! 🙏
@@davescripted3796and make a vid about it!!!!
Left a like because you clearly know how the algorithms work, this is a top 20 vid I've seen on TH-cam at this point.
🙏😃!!!
That’s a great work youve created. Good for you! Great analysis and storytelling. Keep it up honestly!
Basically, the spider-man dilemma. Bad guy knows protagonists' secret identity, so they are going to die, but it won't be the protagonists fault.
One of the reasons why Daredevil is the better option to read stories about a vigilante super hero. There's always a copout for Spider-Man, but Daredevil not only has been found out to be Matt Murdock (which put him in the moral dilemma of him having to accept the fact he's addicted to being Daredevil because he can't stop even if his loved ones are in danger), he has also killed a person accidentally.
I know Spider-Man faced the dilemma of having accidentally killed Venom but then it turned out Venom faked his death.
You wont find good, or satisfying writing in a comic book.
@@g00gleisgayerthanaids56 Read Watchmen, the Killing Joke, Dark Knight Returns
@@g00gleisgayerthanaids56That’s a bit harsh.
I always liked his relationship with his sister in the show, I found it more relatable than any of the love interests
If you think about, Better Call Saul also had a big dillema in the last season. Saul could just keep on the run, or give himself in, which was something he didn't want to do.
I've been showing my husband Dexter because he's never seen it. We are on season 4, which I think is undoubtedly the best the show ever was. And while my husband is enjoying John Lithgow's performance, he just doesn't really care enough to keep going. This wasn't always the case, and I am pretty sure that he stopped caring once they killed off Doakes in the way they did. He was such a fun character and it brought so much tension to things to have someone who clearly sees through Dexter from get go. To get rid of him by allowing Lila to kill him was such a waste. There were so many ways that storyline could have gone. Could have framed Doakes and dealt with the aftermath of him trying to prove his innocence. Dexter would have to be on his best behavior and that could drive him a bit crazy until he does something impulsive, and it fucks everything up. Could have HIM kill Doakes and deal with the aftermath of that. But no. We got what we got.
Ya season 3 and 4 were so good and i think season 4 was 1 of my favorites. The guy in the video mentions that just season 1 and 2 were good and then it fell off lol. I dont think i ever met a single person who thought that about the first 4 seasons. You could say the show fell off after season 5, but not before that. I think season 4 absolutly destroys season 2. Lilah got really annoying for me and season 4 was such a breath of fresh air. The trinity killer was so cool and complex and that guy suffered his own mental problems with family, life and killing. I think this guy in the video worries about moral dillema way to much. Not everything needs a moral dillema lol.
Doakes was dexters greatest foil, they really screwed the pooch by killing him off early but they didnt have 8 seasons planned out from the get go and didnt know if thered even be a season 3 or 4... so they wanted to cash in on doakes vs dexter before they got cancelled or fall into irrelevance. It just turned out that people loved the show so they just kept going.
@@Killercoldice22the issue is this guy cant see the forest for the trees... too focused on the moral dillemma argument to consider outside factors and influence.
Subscribed the second you mentioned Poirot. Great video!
The biggest dramatic outcome would've been for dexter to debase himself by increasingly flauting his code, becoming a twisted version of himself, _and_ for that to be the lynchpin that gets him outed, forcing him to run and hide anyway. The only way he could redeem himself, even someonewhat, would then be for him to turn himself in, possibly as a sacrifice for the protection of his family.
Doakes was such a good character for Dexter to go against and it truly seems like Dexter was only meant to be 3-4 seasons long. I kept watching until the beginning of season 8 and it seems like Dexter is never allowed to have an end to his internal struggles. At the beginning of each season, he just starts his struggle again with no real conclusion. You're right that he never changes, and it made the show duller.
The idea of Dexter turning himself in (or being caught) reminds me a lot of how Barry handled its season 3 finale leading into the entire concept of season 4. Would've been interested to see the series continue with Doakes' presence and/or Dexter shifting his entire perspective after breaking the code. Great video!
What disappointed me the most was that he ran away and nothing he did was discovered. It would have been great if everything he did was discovered, like Breaking Bad when the whole world finds out who Walter White really was. It was very impactful, the big secret that was the whole reason for the series to exist was discovered. To me, Dexter would have had a great ending if he got more and more violent and used less of his code, only to be discovered and die.
They wanted to keep it open ended so they could revisit the character in the future... still, he shouldve just gone down to argentina instead of abandoning his son. He thinks he would damage the kid, so he leaves him with... a murderer??? They need to just retcon all of newblood and the season 8 finale. Deb shouldve had DNR in her living will, so dexter doesnt have to euthanize her and then he is free to travel down south as nobody at miami metro wouldve blamed him for wanting to get away.
Season 4 was best IMHO. Trinity had me on the edge all season. Dexter could kill Doakes out of desperation, that's understandable. At the end of the day, he's still a serial killer. He can easily justify it by saying it preserves the code... More work to be done.
Trinity was my favorite season too. John Lithgow just nailed it, but yeah I have always thought like... Killing doakes is the only choice. There's a reason the first rule is don't get caught, that's how I could see him justifying it. Glad they kind of did that in the new blood series
Season 4 was when the homIcide department acted like dumbasses and we saw more of the personal relationship drama which was so so boring. The cat and mouse game between Trinity and Dexter however was handled beautifully.
@@Vivi_9 That's all I needed!
Great analysis! I loved the potential of this series, but you're right, it was never properly executed.
@gretaenglish3519 I guess, with seeing so many despicable characters get away, I couldn’t take half Dexter victim seriously because they never seemed as threatening as others
The directors/producers who created this series based on the book really set up Michael C. Hall to become a heart throb if you ask me. His actions give a sense of justice as the viewer is painfully aware of the men and women who have performed heinous acts against people, especially women and children. So, though a vigilante breaking the law via murder, Dexter supposedly makes sure that these people are in fact guilty of the heinous acts involved and performs a terrifying murder upon the guilty perpetrator to reveal the horror he or she visited upon others. It basically is a bit of a twist as it makes the viewer look forward to Dexter killing that next serial killer and wanting him to get away with it. In some way, I think it is Dexter taking vengeance upon whomever killed his mother, repeatedly. In a world where we all have witnessed predators, con artists and selfish people who have sabotaged others for selfish gain and no thought of the pain they've caused, it really does satisfy a person's desire for justice to watch the series. Of course I love the series and the actor Michael C. Hall, but of course it helps to keep the distinction between what is real and imaginary, as I'd always mistrust someone who gets a rush from murdering people. LOL! It's a great show though and it amazes me how I am able to watch it as I typically hate slash 'em up violent shows. It has caused me to analyze myself for liking it! Hence the analysis above. There is definitely a theme in the series to make one consider the psyche of human beings, how a person can be affected by childhood trauma; etc.
I LOVE THE POIROT shout out. One of the all time greats.
Yeah pretty spot on breakdown and analysis. The way i wanted the show to end was for Dexter to come to realisation that what was best for his son was for him to turn himself in and take responsibility for his actions (all of them). I also really wanted a scene between Dexter and an Angel who finally knew the truth.
bro just explained why Dexter so good
slop slop slop no progression stale slop