I felt the first two seasons were watchable. Like Breaking Bad, it had a premise that’s really only good for two season but unlike Brekaing Bad, they stretched the show into 8 seasons (and now there’s a reboot/continuation of sorts.)
My fundamental problem with the show is the: flagrant dishonesty. Our protagonist is billed as a dark antihero of sorts, a ‘serial killer,’ but the discerning viewer such as myself can clearly see that he’s nothing of the sort: he’s a classic CHAD superhero not unlike the Batman.
His alleged serial killing is a nonsense gimmick.
He’s Dirty Harry in some ways.
The voice overs are so annoying.
Just show much of what happens on the show rings false: from the characters to the plot.
Little details like: he his omniprescient computer which apparently has can give him almost any informtation he seeks.
Maybe you’d like to tell us what a “CHAD superhero” is. Unless you think those people who don’t already know are too stupid to be allowed to post in this thread.
I made it through about ten minutes of Dexter. It literally starts with surgical torture, which is one of my worst nightmares. I’ve heard it’s a great show, raising philosophical questions about the nature of good and evil. Chalk it up as one of the best shows I’ll never get to see.
I only saw the first couple of seasons. I thought it was kind of a silly premise and they changed the “rules” of his “condition” over time. I’m also surprised that it lasted 8 seasons.
Personally, thought there was plenty of meat in the premise of Breaking Bad. My canonical example of a series that should have ended after one or two seasons is Homeland.
I thought Dexter was a good single-volume novel about a provocative concept (a serial murderer who’s a good guy). It had enough content for a potentiallly very good movie. But they tried to milk it dry.
Parts of the series were very good (the episode arc featuring the couple who owned the auto graveyard was phenomenal with its O. Henry ending. As was the smoldering rivalry with Sgt. Doakes, and its resolution).
But there was too much filler. They introduced love interests and romantic triangles to attract young-adult viewers.
In contrast, Breaking Bad never strayed from Vince Gilligan’s goal: “Take Mr. Chips and turn him into Scarface”. Gilligan was given free rein to make up the plot as it came to him, keeping the story fresh.Characters were added only in service to the story. I consider BB much better than Dexter.
They make some comparisons between Dexter and comic book vigilantes in later seasons. I think the first few seasons of Dexter were pretty good but the quality starting dropping and towards the end it really went off the rails. It’s on my top ten list for worst series endings ever. But in the first few seasons, Dexter is hardly a CHAD superhero. The code isn’t a moral compass it’s just the method Harry used to direct Dexter’s proclivities.
I’ll give you that one. But you can base a television series off of a nonsense gimmick as long as it’s well written and entertaining.
Googling doesn’t suggest it’s an acronym. I know that, among incels and other groups, “Chad” is slang for a particularly good-looking, successful, and/or competent guy, and depending on context, one who is also successful sexually with women. In other words, the “alpha male” that the OP mentioned.
Exactly this. I’ve mercifully forgotten the details, but I do remember trying to watch it and feeling somewhere between queasy and revolted after I tried to watch it.
I was OK with the early seasons, even tho some parts annoyed me. But I didn’t bother watching the last 3 seasons, so I have no idea how they decided to wrap it up. I didn’t like the story arc that had him getting married and having a kid, and I really didn’t like his sister thru most of it. But I thought John Lithgow was a great villain in whatever season featured him.
I don’t think it’s a great show. I think there are issues with the concept, and as others have mentioned, it’s not a tightly woven story. But it’s a good show that lots of people enjoyed.