Skip to main content

I’m a survivor.

Dexter
Season 8

The arrival of the final season of Dexter was not the most auspicious of events. Coming in the same year as Breaking Bad’s denouement, there were inevitable uncomplimentary comparisons between a series that even it’s kinder critics thought had outstayed its welcome by several years and one that concluded at the height of its powers. For me Dexter peaked with Season Four, but I have no problem defending the (disappointing to many) fifth year, and Season Seven managed a rallying charge after the crippling misstep that was Season Six. Unfortunately the final year, while never quite descending to the quagmire of casting Colin Hanks as a serial killer, manages to consistently fluff decent ideas and is stranded listless by its lack of forward momentum. Worse, it delivers a final episode so shoddy that the season as a whole becomes a retrospective train wreck; Six at least managed a striking cliffhanger.


Empire magazine gave the final run a hugely snubby one star, which can only identify a series as actively terrible. I’d suggest few series (that were any good in the first place), even past their peak, fall into the territory of abject disaster. Season Six, even at its nadir, is fairly passable entertainment; it just doesn’t stand up in terms of the series as a whole. So too, most of the final run. It grasps hold of a strong central theme but keeps botching the batch. I hadn’t been aware of the general reaction to the series until dipping my toe online over the past few days. Dexterwasn’t a show that brought out the fan in me, so maybe it’s on those grounds that I’ve found the responses a tad on the strong side. It wasn’t a great series, but apart from the finale, was it really that bad? I guess I’m not invested enough in the show as a whole to see the final year as a travesty. In contrast, the final episode of Lost (which is more deeply disappointing than actively terrible) had a far more profound effect. That was a series I cared about, but in the final analysis it was revealed to be profoundly shallow (which the more discerning, distanced critics, had been proclaiming nearly from the first; I’d kept my fingers in my ears).  


Ballsed-up denouement or not, there is definitely a whole load of pestilent plotting and meagre motivation throughout the final season. Repeatedly, strong ideas are clumsily executed. Added to this, the foes faced by Dexter are the of the least formidable variety, and lacking in charisma or distinctiveness. If you’re sending off your (anti-) hero, you should do it with a worthy opponent or two. In the early stages of the season I had a vague hope Dexter might face a compendium of super-killers, all former patients of Dr Vogel. A kind of Dexter Sinister Six. It might have been silly, but at least there wouldn’t have been much pause for reflection. That wasn’t to be, and by attempting to nurse a more considered “just” fate for its protagonist the writers expose their severe limitations.


In the best of previous years the sense of escalation and momentum (the first two years especially) was breathless. To such an extent that the holes in the plots were easy to ignore. There was a feeling that Dexter was permanently on the verge of being discovered, lending the series an abiding tension. Perhaps the most curious misstep of the last year is the glaring absence of any such vein of drama. The idea of Dr Evelyn Vogel, the Dr Frankenstein to Dexter’s semi-benign monster, is a sufficiently strong one and, in other circumstances, might have ensured a fitting send off for the character. Charlotte Rampling was a good casting choice, and she does her best to lend Vogel an enigmatic quality.


Unfortunately she’s scuppered by a characterisation that makes her field of Hollywood psychology appear only a few steps more advanced than Hitchcock’s frequently mirthful rendering of the practice in Spellbound. Her “insights” are mostly banal, and Dexter – who if nothing else over the previous seven years has announced a clarity and perceptiveness through the voiceover monologues that marble the show – is frequently made to look unnaturally foolish by listening to her. Of course, there’s the argument that the realisation of his unnatural mother has shaken up his world. Plus, the idea that he is “more than a mere psychopath” merits exploration if approached in any other than the inept, sign-posted manner of Vogel’s pronouncements. And the need to keep Debs close, as she does everything to distance herself from him, has shaken the foundations of his world. But if you’re going to attempt to breathe substance into those ideas you need to do more than pay lip service to them or drop them when you have “better” plot lines to introduce.


Part of the attraction of the first few episodes was the possibility that Vogel herself was behind the brain removals; it felt like an obvious solution and therefore one the writers would probably be unable to resist. That they didn’t go that route might have been the only surprise I encountered during the run. At least Rampling as the mastermind would have been a worthy arch-villain. But the writers didn’t have anything of equal weight to her. Even having Dexter suspect her might have been something. Instead, we were given an ultimately tiresome interplay whereby Dexter becomes the estranged teenager, continually absconding then returning to his absent parent. If Vogel’s “psychaitrist’s chair” manner fails to convince, her weak-willed parenting when confronted by her long lost son beggars belief. I don’t doubt that the writers’ argument is her piercing insights fall by the wayside when faced with emotional truths, but did she have to be made quite so ineffectual? She falls apart, and the most distinctive new character of the season (almost entirely down to Rampling) is immolated.


It didn’t help any that, since the latter stages of the sixth season, poor Debs has never recovered as a character from being forced into an inexplicable yearning for her foster brother. More than anything, this may have broken the back of the show. I like the character of sweary Debs, and Jennifer Carpenter is a good actress, but she’s been hamstrung into having her world revolving around Dexter when previously she was an independent spirit. Our first glimpse of her, hitting the substances in her role as a private detective, was a fresh and considered approach to dealing with the fall out from the Season Seven cliffhanger. But after that her development goes from okay to total destruct. After two episodes of her being a waster she’s becoming a bit of a bore but, even worse, the therapy sessions she receives from Vogel are the kind of thing old Debs would have had zero time for, especially as their miraculous success in reuniting brother and sister makes you wonder how much bullshit the writers thought we’d swallow (along the way there’s the amusing “attempt to drown Dexter” incident; amusing for all the wrong reasons). But the flip-flop of “I hate you and I can’t stand the sight of you” to “How will I survive with you in Argentina?” over the course of a mere few episodes takes some swallowing (as does Dexter’s opposite dependency direction).


If the supporting characters are generally undernourished in this run, the attention Debs receives does her character little service. The choices of the last couple of episodes make sense on paper; as the character that deserved a ray of hope, cutting it from under her and leaving Dexter still standing makes a perverse sense. That he should be punished for making a positive choice even more so. But the detail of this map is completely skewed; Debs turned into a cabbage off screen, her fate told by a tearful Joey? Dexter given a dopey deathbed moment before taking her out to sea? The delivery is all wrong. A series that had been so tonally sure of itself careers off the rails and ends up looking faintly ridiculous. The overcooked CGI of the oncoming storm doesn’t help matters either (Steve Shill, who has done solid work over the years on series including Deadwood, Rome and The Wire, completely drops the ball).


Dexter was always as much about the (reflection of the) prey as the hunter, so it’s a shock to find so little of either in the last year. The only memorable aspect of serial killer Yates (Aaron McCusker) is the appealingly goofy manner of his demise (skewered through a bed by a curtain rail). Actually, although I said Vogel was the most distinctive new character of the season, it’s probably Zach Hamilton (Sam Underwood). While his is the classic example of getting rid of a character before they have fulfilled their potential, Zach’s exuberant, upbeat version of the Dexter’s moody murderer was a breath of fresh air. Indeed, Zach’s probably there somewhere if there’s a genuinely funny scene during Season Eight (he even nearly makes the clumsy, telegraphed line “Are we there yet?” in the episode of the same title bearable).


As I say, I’m not au fait with Dexter fandom, so I hadn’t realised that Hannah McKay (Yvonne Strahovski) had found disfavour. I liked her in Season Seven, and there was good chemistry between Hall and Strahovski. But in Eight they reintroduce her with nothing (interesting) for the character to do. The one aspect of Dexter’s changing disposition I almost bought into was that the discovery of genuine feelings for an individual was supplanting his bloodlust.  The problem is, again, that it is translated in such a clueless manner. You can’t maintain a viewer’s respect if every choice draws attention to lazy construction and motivation (so of course Dexter leaves Oliver Saxon in the operating chair rather than does the sensible thing and ensure Debs is safe; it’s not that he decides he doesn’t need to kill that’s the problem – even though this is introduced with insufficient forethought – but that it’s accompanied by “No, don’t go in there! Look about behind you!” moronic plotting).


Hannah’s only good scene in the season is her first, where she has drugged Dexter and Debs. Everything else is tiresomely reactive, borderline damsel-in-distress. From the too brief appearance of Julian Sands to the dogged pursuit by The Shield’s Kenny Johnson (does he have bad luck with characters meeting nasty ends or what?) And then there’s the tiresome rush to the ER when Harrison cuts his chin. Of all the things the final season might have become, the least expected was a domestic disaster. It seems like half the season was spent planning a trip to Argentina. I won’t even go there with regard to Hannah’s basic inability to change her appearance as a means to avoid the clutches of the law; maybe Strahovski refused to muss with her lovely blonde locks?


Former Young Indiana Jones Sean Patrick Flanery’s slightly sleazy tec Jacob Elway had the potential to become a decent adversary, in that he’s the only character with sufficient (intentional) irritation factor to build up a dislike towards. So why the writers didn’t realise what they had and ensure there was a nasty fate in store, I don’t know.


There was absolutely noting distinctive about series foe Oliver Saxon (Darri Ingolfson). I don’t think Ingolfson did anything wrong, he just had nowhere to goi with the part. Intentionally appearing early on as a piece of misdirection and then, when he appears, nursing an all to familiar fixation with the mother who abandoned him, there was never the time to turn him into a foe of substance. And the DNA match twist had appeared way earlier, to superior effect. I did like the swift, tidy final dispatch Dexter visits on him but it hardly makes up for predictability of what went before.


The other regulars were almost reckless disregarded. Joey (Desmond Harrington) had the glimmerings of a case when he was in pursuit of Zach, but he was relegated to romantic tribulations with Aimee Garcia and her body double. David Zayas is a big roly-poly pile of inconsequence, while poor C.S. Lee was finally given a proper subplot but it turned out to be a shit one (his daughter Niki -Dora Madison Burge – is introduced). There was at least a larger role for James Remar as Harry Morgan but even then his vanishing because he is no longer needed was strangely perfunctory. Like most of the season, the writing and realisation were at best a little off and at worst tipped over into a crevasse.


As for Dexter’s fate as an Oregon lumberjack with a glue-on beard, my first thought was that they writers were inspired by Man of Steel. If inspired is the word. I don’t know. He’d really leave his son – who meant everything to him – because he felt responsible for losing Debs? The best I can summon is a shrug; that’s the best they could come up with?  Perhaps it was a case of low expectations; series of late have tended to end on greater or lesser missteps so I’m somewhat inured. I assume disappointment. By struggling to come up with a profound place for Dexter to finish, the writers succumbed to the most facile of options. In the end, there isn’t even the gentle let down of Hall’s reassuring voiceover (his steady delivery can make even the most stodgy dialogue palatable). I referred to the finale as a train wreck but, for all its impact, it’s more like falling off your bike and grazing your knee. A momentous episode shouldn’t leave the viewer underwhelmed and unaffected.



Dexter Seasons Ranked:

Season Four:


Season One:


Season Two:


Season Five:


Season Seven:


Season Three:


Season Eight:


Season Six:


Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

Other monks will meet their deaths here. And they too will have blackened fingers. And blackened tongues.

The Name of the Rose (1986) (SPOILERS) Umberto Eco wasn’t awfully impressed by Jean Jacques-Annaud’s adaptation of his novel – or “ palimpsest of Umberto Eco’s novel ” as the opening titles announce – to the extent that he nixed further movie versions of his work. Later, he amended that view, calling it “ a nice movie ”. He also, for balance, labelled The Name of the Rose his worst novel – “ I hate this book and I hope you hate it too ”. Essentially, he was begrudging its renown at the expense of his later “ superior ” novels. I didn’t hate the novel, although I do prefer the movie, probably because I saw it first and it was everything I wanted from a medieval Sherlock Holmes movie set in a monastery and devoted to forbidden books, knowledge and opinions.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the