New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

One of the bigger examples of modern mythology is the superhero genre. Unfortunately, the traditional superhero story seems suited more to the big screen than the small. Despite some satirical offerings like The Tick, and some animated versions of popular Marvel and DC names, the only real prime time effort is the mediocrity of Heroes. It's ironic, considering the serialized nature of comic books from which they're spawned, but there has yet to be a fairly effective treatment of them on home screens. There is, however, a pretty damned good show, which, to me, seems to be a bit of a deconstruction of the iconography of the superhero, and that show is called Dexter.

Now Dexter has no super powers, so perhaps the hero with whom we can draw the most parallels is Batman. They both have similar origins, having seen a parent or two killed before their eyes. They both operate both within and without the law. They lead double lives, a charming public face countered with a dark secret existence. They both adhere to a moral code that doesn't quite align with society's. They both kill in the name of the greater good. Both are pretty much insane.

Really, where do you draw the line between the two? How is Dexter really any worse than Bruce Wayne? Yes, Batman works with Gordon to bring villains to justice, but so does Dexter work with Miami law enforcement. Batman often brings evildoers to justice, and, in the darker interpretations of the character, kills others. No different than Dexter Morgan. They funnel their inner rage into what might seem to some to be a constructive outlet.

Really, the only difference is in the interpretation. Bob Kane and DC present Batman as a heroic vigilante, avenging his parents by donning a bat suit and stopping bad guys. Jeff Lindsay and Showtime, on the other hand, show us a serial killer, trained to only kill baddies in order to make him a useful member of society. So Batman is a good guy because he's avenging a wrong. Dexter's not because he's just like Alex DeLarge, a Clockwork Orange. Left to his own devices, he'd be just your ordinary, run-of-the-mill serial killer.

Of course, the ethics of both characters are questionable to say the least. When first approaching the character of Dexter, I thought we'd be encouraged, as the audience, to root for this madman because, after all, he's only killing killers. And I was right. What surprised me is that, unlike his Gotham City counterpart, we are made to feel very uncomfortable by his actions. We cheer Batman on and, if one of his adversaries has to die, so be it, they're bad guys anyway. Yay Batman!

On the other hand, when Dexter offs another one of his victims, we don't get heroic battles, a rescued damsel, a triumphant score, and an assurance that the streets are now safer. We get a calculated, violent crime scene - Dexter slaughtering people without benefit of trial, and an almost orgasmic sense of release on Dexter's part. It's filthy, unsettling, grim, and bloody.

What's going on here? Didn't Dexter just kill a killer? Why aren't we cheering? Even more to the point, why are we so compelled watching this sadistic butcher?
The thing is, Batman and Dexter are doing the same thing. They're exacting violent vigilante justice. One kind makes us cheer, one makes us cringe, yet somehow, we're rooting for both. Not to get too political, but both characters appeal to our human desire for the concept of an eye for an eye. I don't think either character represents a repudiation of the conceit. Batman, however, makes it palatable, heroic, and entertaining. Dexter says, not so fast, you want vengeance, you want justice? Go right ahead. But you also have to take a look at all that goes with it.