Delightfully Disturbing Dexter?

Acclaimed American TV series Dexter hits our screens on Wednesday night. In case you don't know the series is about Dexter Morgan (Michael C. Hall, of Six Feet Under fame), a forensics expert for the Miami police and he is a serial killer who kills the bad guys that the police can't catch.

Such a programme is bound to cause some controversy and it probably will attract complaints as some people like to complain about anything to OFCOM (take Holly Willoughby's dress for example). Still looking at "Dexter" it does contain elements of very dark humour, and I'm sure it will be argued that murder is not something which should be joked about.

In America, there have been requests by parents associations to boycott "Dexter". The complaints are because it is screened on CBS in the last hour of primetime, 10pm and many children do see it. Surely it is the parents' responsibility to ensure that their children do not see these kinds of programmes? ITV, who will be showing "Dexter" in Britain have taken this into account and it is going to be screened at 10:30pm, a time when it is obvious that adult content is likely to be included. Then again, that raises another issue of whether black comedy about a serial killer is even adult content and whether it should be exposed to anybody? Fred A. Miller from The Ithaca Journal is definitely against "Dexter":

"Nothing justifies using the publicly owned broadcast airwaves to expose potentially hundreds of thousands of children to a series that glorifies a ruthless, bloodthirsty killer."

And he goes on to say:

"The biggest problem with this series is something they can't get around with any amount of editing: i.e. the series compels viewers to feel empathy for a serial killer, to root for him to prevail, to hope he doesn't get discovered."

I, personally have seen the first series and have read the first two books ("Darkly Dreaming Dexter" and "Dearly Devoted Dexter") and in a sense I can agree with what Mr Miller says, because whilst watching/reading, I was rooting for Dexter to get his hands on his victims and "bring them to justice" as it were.

The show was originally shown on FX, but now for the first time will reach mainstream British television audiences and I think the ITV advertising campaign does a good job of letting the viewer know what they are getting themselves into. The show has been accused of glorifying serial killers but what must be remembered is that it is not real.

In defence of "Dexter", it is one of my favourite TV series and the books are also good. Within the story Dexter stresses that he is not human and does not possess any of the characteristics of an average human being and he does not feel emotion. He calls himself a monster. If anybody is affected by this programme and feels an urge to reenact the scenes in "Dexter" then surely they possess similar characteristics and can also be called a monster.

I enjoyed the programme greatly and have recommended it to many but does that make me a bad person for enjoying a programme about a murderer? It isn't for me to say but the success of the show in America, and to a lesser extent in the UK, prove that I am not the only person of this opinion.

The End of the Spice Girls

After years of anticipation, the Spice Girls finally put any supposed tensions to bed and reformed last summer and played a huge world tour throughout the winter, and now they have decided to cut short said tour, and now they seem to have decided to call it a day altogether.

Now, you would think that this would disappoint thousands, maybe even millions, but there have been suggestions that the tour was cut short amid a lack of interest in it, but it is difficult to know who to believe.

Ever since the reformation of the Spice Girls the media have sought to stir up tensions between the members of the band. The split has generally been blamed on a rift between the five girls but whether the truth has been published, who knows?

Their official reason was family commitments and fair enough, they do have families, but for years they have done nothing and they knew when they made the tour dates that they would still have families to contend with, and predictably, the reaction has been negative to say the least. "Angry Spice Girl fans have started a vicious Internet hate campaign after the girls cancelled the rest of their world tour after bitch fighting." (Metro)

A story in the Daily Mirror claimed that the tour was cut short because of rows and that they were even staying in different hotels, and they were not the only publication to make such a claim.

Strangely enough, the Sunday Mirror claimed that the remainder of the tour had been cancelled due to a lack of interest. So the Mirror has published two reasons why the tour was cancelled, in two different articles. To me, this just smacks of desperation for a big story for the Mirror.

In my humble opinion I think it's wrong that the Spice Girls have cut short their tour and decided to msplit up. They made a commitment to play concerts to their fans who paid a hell of a lot of money to see them and they have turned their back on them. I take the point about families and needing to send the kids back to school, but they have husbands/boyfriends/friends who could look after the kids for a while. The comeback has been a major success and perhaps its premature end has tarnished it somewhat, but I think they have surprised a lot of people because I do not think a lot was expected from this tour performance-wise but they have received rave reviews despite the media's hopes that it would be a gargantuan failure.

Despite the uproar of recent events, the legacy of the Spice Girls is still in tact and they can be proud that they did themselves justice but the music consumers are what matter in the music industry but the Spice Girls don't seem to have recognised this and whilst, although I am an outsider to the situation, surely the girls could have finished the tour and ended their musical careers (at least as a group) on a high instead of under a cloud.