[Bad-example]

A nice read on Dexter and Showtime.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...&sn=015&sc=189

Showtime is now officially a pain in the backside for viewers who like high-quality television -- and that's not a wallet-specific reference.

With the dark, creepy but utterly compelling "Dexter," you could argue that Showtime has a trifecta of top-notch series worth shelling out money to see -- "Weeds," one of the best shows on television; "Brotherhood"; and now "Dexter." The pay channel has been searching for an identity for ages and is slowly proving that you can't just ignore it anymore.

However, an argument can be made -- though Showtime won't want to hear it -- that until it gets two more high-end series, the option to wait and get the episodes on DVD or Netflix might be more appealing than shelling out the monthly charge. "Sleeper Cell," "The L Word" and even "Penn & Teller: Bull -- !" are fine in their way, but when it comes to the cold, calculating decision making based on cash, they are not nearly enough.

At least with "Dexter," starring Michael C. Hall from "Six Feet Under" and based on the novel "Darkly Dreaming Dexter" by Jeff Lindsay, there has to be a legitimate discussion of ponying up for the goods. ("Weeds" alone is worth that for some people, but a one- or two-season commitment to a series is not the way to build long-term confidence; viewers want to know they can hang onto something for four or five years. That said, "Showtime" did pick up a 10-episode second season of "Brotherhood" when the numbers hardly merited it, so that's a positive sign.)

"Dexter" will no doubt divide an audience, what with the premise being that by day Dexter is a blood-splatter analyst for the Miami Police Department -- an expert in his field -- and by night, well, he's a sociopathic killer. Also an expert in that field.

The twist, as it was laid out in Lindsay's book, is that not long after young Dexter Morgan is taken in by a foster family, his foster father, Harry (James Remar in a low-key role), a Miami police detective, comes to understand that Dexter is different. He's killing animals. And chopping them up. Before he came to the Morgans, something was lost for good in the boy. As he got older, that desire to kill grew, and Morgan senior took the unique (but loving) route of teaching Dexter to direct it at those people who really deserved it -- killers, rapists, serial drunken drivers, etc.

"Dexter," then, is a case study in situational ethics. What's the difference between rooting for him and rooting for Tony Soprano, the mob boss and killer? Dexter is solving a lot of crimes in his day job. And while committing a lot of crimes at night, he's cleaning up a lot of paperwork. Vigilante justice? Sure. But it goes beyond that. Dexter likes it. He really likes it.

What makes the series work so well is twofold. Hall is magnificent; it's another sterling performance from him. But instead of being pent up yet emotionally explosive, like his David Fisher on "Six Feet Under," he's cool and calculated and entirely without compassion as Dexter. That makes him alluring, in a strange way. That he kills bad guys is the free pass to like him, unless you're hung up on actual justice and against, say, strapping bad people on rubber-clad, plastic-wrapped killing tables and sawing them up but good.

The second element is humor. As Dexter's voice narrates the series, his inner world is revealed. He's dryly funny. He has a spot-on representation of himself -- he knows he's "a monster." But he clings to Dad's teachings -- his retribution killings are the only good way to handle his need for blood.

Or as Robert Greenblatt, entertainment president for Showtime said: "It's not your mother's 'CSI.' " Indeed not. Though it does contain more than enough gruesome lab scenes and a certain fanatic vengefulness about dissecting others, so that if you have a yen for forensics, your interest might be piqued.

Of course, anything as daring and original as this should be trumpeted to the masses if it indeed does cross a social line that will be discussed in supermarkets and dinner tables (and water coolers) everywhere. People will be talking about "Dexter." Maybe not rabid endorsements. But it will be dissected. As well it should. "Showtime" has taken a unique, bold premise and put just the right actor into the role, while testing the boundaries of what people will find acceptable. That's always the ultimate challenge -- providing grown-ups with difficult fare.

"Dexter" certainly fits that bill. It forces viewers to buy in or opt out on the whole situational-ethics thing. It makes them cringe by being shown depravity but also entertained because it's funny, well written and smartly paced.

Also, one of the clear drawbacks of the premise is addressed early. Specifically, is this really going to be a every-episode kind of arrangement? Will he kill each week? And won't that be boring, not to mention a deal-breaker at the church social? "You watch what? And you like it?"

A mystery that involves a serial killer unfolds and ensnares Dexter in it. The killer begins to leave messages and hints, taunting Dexter to solve his bloodless crimes. Dexter, in turn, is very impressed. And very curious. It's impossible not to like where that's headed.

So, yes, Showtime has another gem on its hands. The channel's batting average is rising, along with its standards. That may be good for quality, but it's a real pain for people who want to see high-end drama without paying for something that's not HBO.