I'm wondering how many of you guys have been watching the
Dexter series on Showtime.
Though I hear discouraging posts about posting on movies and
am sure this applies to TV shows, I KNOW that the subject
matter of Dexter and the handling of it has to appeal to many
of us on the list. Fact is, I've thought since the first
season that Dexter is one of the best shows around and --at
the very least--picks up where Sopranos left the bar for a
series: the highest level. This is absolutely crime fiction
on the screen and I actually think that the additional time
in episodes that the series format allows makes for a much
more complicated, developed and intricate plot line than a
movie or a couple of movies could allow. Actually, I think it
makes the TV series even more complex than the books.
The two big factors in how a twelve-episode series season
excels over a two plus hour movie are that more plot threads
can be developed and, with this, more characters can be
developed in greater detail. Ultimately, I think it's the
character development as a result of the added time to work
things out that I think makes this series much more than just
good tv. And the character development comes from leaving
Dexter's head and exploring different scenes that take place
even when Dexter's not around. This is a freedom that even
the book doesn't give itself.
Aren't these two factors, multiple threading and a more
complex social network of characters, much more than just
good TV? I'd even say (and I've seen others post about this
here) that the series is even better than the books. On the
most basic level, the books never leave Dexter's head. Sure,
we can really get into his stream of consciousness and how he
thinks about what happens, but I think the added benefit of
having the characters around him-Doakes, LaGuerta, Deb,
Lundy, Rita and Paul, Angel-developed into much more than
flat types, into real feeling three-dimensional characters
that we can sympathize with makes this series so much more.
Take Sgt. Doakes for example: though he's a major antagonist
in the second series, we've spent enough time around him to
see his strong points and good qualities as well as his
single-minded pursuit of Dexter. He's a character part of us
needs to root for.
The strength of the book comes in how we can root for Dexter,
even as he's a serial killer. In the TV series all the
characters are crucially flawed, and ALL of them are worth
rooting for on some level (Ok, well most of them). In the
first book, LaGuerta is really pretty flat. Even as she
changes a bit at the end, she's still two dimensional. In the
series, she's got a lot more to offer, particularly as her
connections to Doakes become more involved and ultimately get
questioned.
In any case, it strikes me as very interesting here that the
TV series has gone so much further than the book. This seems
like new ground, to me at least. If you think of a great book
and then the movie, usually there's a lot left out, or at the
very most it'll bring in most of the elements of the book. I
can't think of many cases where a movie-definitely not any
case of a tv series-doing it better, adding more complicated
development to what was in the book.
But this is definitely happening with Dexter. I'm curious how
many others of you are watching it, and what you think of its
complexity. The series makes me think more of Pride and
Prejudice in how the characters are all thoroughly explored
then it makes me think of Jeff Lindsay's books. Certainly
leaving the head of the main character has enabled a great
deal here.
Full disclosure: I've been rereading and thinking a lot about
Steven Johnson's Everything Bad Is Good For You where he
analyzes contemporary TV (not Dexter) and how much more
complex it's gotten in the last 20-30 years. It's got me
doing a lot of thinking.
Seth Harwood
PS: If you haven't watched Dexter and don't have cable, I'd
recommend renting the first season on DVD and checking it
out. It's available.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 05 Dec 2007 EST