That last episode took things to a ridiculous "Saw" level of silliness. It makes no sense and is just there for the dramatic "fucked-up-ness" of the reveal.
So Colin Hanks has his own Harry? Ugh. They've telegraphed it so clearly. It doesn't take a second viewing to notice how the waitress never recognizes or looks at Olmos' character.
Then Religious boy sets up an ELABORATE angel "kill" with chains and pulley that leaves the victims alive until being discovered, and remains at the crime scene to watch it being uncovered? What if the entire cast hadn't walked into that greenhouse and that random cop hadn't tripped that line? They would have removed the girl, then would have had a positive ID on the killer and then the entire mystery would have been solved. He was standing right outside. It's only to prolong the hunt/kill/mystery that any of that happened.
I was laughing at the locusts. It's so silly.
The entire episode is just filler. I'm done with this show.
Ummm...
I thought the guy wasn't remaining at the crime scene, I thought he was being interviewed. That's why Dexter talked about him at the end of the episode and why Deb or someone commented about him. I'll have to watch the last part again but that was my impression.
Anyway, I'm really loving Mos Def in this new season. He's mostly playing himself I think
Minus the murder bit I hope
but it's a character that fits really well this season.
Anyway, I'm really loving Mos Def in this new season. He's mostly playing himself I think
Minus the murder bit I hope
but it's a character that fits really well this season.
Agreed, at first I was kinda torn on his character and the general direction this season seems to take (religion and whatnot), since I myself am not religious at all, but it's really starting to grow on me.
I'm still not a big fan of the "bad guys" though..but who knows, maybe they can impress me yet.
I'm more interested in where the intern story is going.
The snakes and locust bother me because they are so obviously computer fakes. And the Saw kill was just dumb. Especially since Deb had the WTF? is wrong with you people after they ignored it. And Dex going from blood splatter guy to medical examiner is really grating as well. Don't refer to the ME and blood splatter if you're just going to ignore he's the blood guy.
I'm more interested in where the intern story is going.
The snakes and locust bother me because they are so obviously computer fakes. And the Saw kill was just dumb. Especially since Deb had the WTF? is wrong with you people after they ignored it. And Dex going from blood splatter guy to medical examiner is really grating as well. Don't refer to the ME and blood splatter if you're just going to ignore he's the blood guy.
I don't think they needed a blood spatter expert at the end of the episode to figure out how the person died. And the CG is bad but it is a TV show on SHOTIME, not some high budgeted movie.
I'm more interested in where the intern story is going.
I don't think it's going anywhere.
Before this episode I thought "man, why did she take the hand? Is she some kind of twisted serial killer as well? Was Rudy her ex-boyfriend or something like that?"
But as it turns out, nope, she just did it for the money. :rotate:
I still think she's a serial killer. It parallels to well with the episode about Dexter being obsessed with serial killers.
And they spent too much time on her and Masuka to just drop it. This isn't a show that just introduces characters or plot threads to completely drop them and never mention them again. ;-)
I still think she's a serial killer. It parallels to well with the episode about Dexter being obsessed with serial killers.
And they spent too much time on her and Masuka to just drop it. This isn't a show that just introduces characters or plot threads to completely drop them and never mention them again. ;-)
They could of just cut her off. Last night's episode seemed like it has too much plot threads going on, they even had to keep Dexter from getting a kill. They do need to tie up some of the threads or just get rid of them. Her being a serial killer seems like a really big stretch too. She's too hot and bubbly. Maybe an unlikely Masuka marriage but not a serial killer.
And in the preview for this Sunday's episode:
Dexter or somebody said the lady that was SAW'd, as this thread is calling it, worked at a Museum. What happened to waitress chick? The guy seems to get around for the religious nut that he is. Or have I just fallen victim to cunning editing?
Dexter or somebody said the lady that was SAW'd, as this thread is calling it, worked at a Museum. What happened to waitress chick? The guy seems to get around for the religious nut that he is. Or have I just fallen victim to cunning editing?
Yeah, I was confused that the preview indicated that the angel wasn't the waitress. I'm assuming the angel was planned before the waitress, and we're still waiting to see what happens to her.
I want them to be leading up to something with mentioning Brian so often - compared to almost never at all in any other season than the first - but on the other hand maybe someone in the writer's room just thought it was kind of fucking stupid how nobody ever mentions the crazy shit that goes on in this show after it's over
I want them to be leading up to something with mentioning Brian so often - compared to almost never at all in any other season than the first - but on the other hand maybe someone in the writer's room just thought it was kind of fucking stupid how nobody ever mentions the crazy shit that goes on in this show after it's over
They do seem to be referencing him/his case a lot. Seems weird to have it simultaneously just come up in both the main plot and the lab assistant subplot without it building to something. But like you said, it might just be some sort of "shouldn't we at least vaguely mention the massive amounts of crazy serial killer shit that's happened around these characters the past few years?" thing (the lab assistant also brought up the Bay Harbor Butcher and Trinity at one point).
I want them to be leading up to something with mentioning Brian so often - compared to almost never at all in any other season than the first - but on the other hand maybe someone in the writer's room just thought it was kind of fucking stupid how nobody ever mentions the crazy shit that goes on in this show after it's over
They do seem to be referencing him/his case a lot. Seems weird to have it simultaneously just come up in both the main plot and the lab assistant subplot without it building to something. But like you said, it might just be some sort of "shouldn't we at least vaguely mention the massive amounts of crazy serial killer shit that's happened around these characters the past few years?" thing (the lab assistant also brought up the Bay Harbor Butcher and Trinity at one point).
I think they're building up to something with this. Miami has had a lot of high-profile serial-killer cases in very few years in this show, maybe that will start to make people think something is up?
I want them to be leading up to something with mentioning Brian so often - compared to almost never at all in any other season than the first - but on the other hand maybe someone in the writer's room just thought it was kind of fucking stupid how nobody ever mentions the crazy shit that goes on in this show after it's over
They do seem to be referencing him/his case a lot. Seems weird to have it simultaneously just come up in both the main plot and the lab assistant subplot without it building to something. But like you said, it might just be some sort of "shouldn't we at least vaguely mention the massive amounts of crazy serial killer shit that's happened around these characters the past few years?" thing (the lab assistant also brought up the Bay Harbor Butcher and Trinity at one point).
I think they're building up to something with this. Miami has had a lot of high-profile serial-killer cases in very few years in this show, maybe that will start to make people think something is up?
Well, in the first episode of the first season, Dexter does mention that Miami has a crazy high unsolved murder rate. And really, does Dexter have more weird murders than all the procedural shows shown on major networks?
But I agree, all these callbacks to previous seasons is leading somewhere.
But I agree, all these callbacks to previous seasons is leading somewhere.
Maybe we'll get a split season. Doomsday get wrapped up midseason via Dex, or so we think, until the police discover another Doomsday murder that is actually the work of a copycat playing out Miami's greatest hits.
Or not, I might enjoy that though; particularly if it leads to Dex hunting his or his brother's own copycat.
0
Options
The DeliveratorSlingin PiesThe California BurbclavesRegistered Userregular
All this religion talk is making the atheist inside me very angry. Stuff like:
"You put your faith in God and I put my faith in science." (paraphrased)
and
"You can't prove that God doesn't exist."
Logic is taking a beating here.
I think you need to dial back the militant part of your atheism a bit. Logic isn't being abused here at all. If anything this season up to this point has been pretty fair to both sides, with a slight atheist slant. I'm not a believer myself, but I'm not so full of myself to say others are wrong without proof of it. "Absence of proof is not proof of absence" and all that jazz.
All this religion talk is making the atheist inside me very angry. Stuff like:
"You put your faith in God and I put my faith in science." (paraphrased)
and
"You can't prove that God doesn't exist."
Logic is taking a beating here.
he put his faith in science that his son would be healed
you can't prove god doesn't exist
where is your issue? I'm an atheist as well but it doesn't bother me. in fact I think they've done a good job of brother not pushing things onto dexter while still clearly showing an interest in converting him.
All this religion talk is making the atheist inside me very angry. Stuff like:
"You put your faith in God and I put my faith in science." (paraphrased)
and
"You can't prove that God doesn't exist."
Logic is taking a beating here.
Why would that make you angry? I thought they've been dealing with the religion issue rather tactfully, where they have Mos Def as the example of what can happen when religion goes right, and the 2 killers as examples of the horror that has been done in the name of religious belief. And then you have Dexter just trying to live his life and be happy with his son(Screw Astor and Cody). They haven't been preachy with it, and Mos Def is pretty great. I just don't see why you would be angered by it really, and I'm curious about it
I guess because science doesn't require faith, and you can't prove that God doesn't exist but it's logically super unlikely?
It didn't bother me either, though, because even though I rolled my eyes at Dexter saying that first thing I viewed it as him being typically (and sensibly) non-confrontational about an issue that isn't going to be useful to argue about.
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
yeah he could have said 'my faith in the doctor who is practicing medicine that was developed through scientific learning"
I could have been wrong but I interpreted it more as a general statement of where his "faith" is at rather than the medical situation that was going on at the time.
Kinda splitting hairs on the language, though. If my friend is struggling with her exams, and I say, "I have faith in you," that doesn't mean that I pray to her every night for divine favors, it just means I think she's going to do okay on her tests because she studies all the damn time. When Brother Sam says, "You put your faith in SCIENCE(!)," what he really means is, "You think that the doctors have the knowledge necessary to save your boy."
Language, yo.
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
I could have been wrong but I interpreted it more as a general statement of where his "faith" is at rather than the medical situation that was going on at the time.
I can't say you're wrong but I thought it was situation specific. you pray when your loved ones are sick, I go to the doctor.
As a Christian and an apologist, it causes me to roll my eyes, "you can't prove he doesn't exist." ugh. but, as said above, that is (sadly IMO) the level of understanding many have of the evidence for the faith. And Mos Def may be talking about scientism, the extreme belief that the only knowable facts out there must be known through physical science.
Glad to see people on both sides of this are rolling eyes at some of the dialog.
I'm pretty sure everyone who isn't hyper-sensitive on the subject knew what was being talked about and was pretty okay with it. Diffrn't strokes, and all that.
Regardless of whether or not the arguments that have been trotted out on one side or the other are good, they are real arguments that real people use.
Spoilers from the latest episode:
As long as the deeper point behind all the platitudes (You gotta believe in something bigger than yourself, no matter what that is) isn't stupid, I'll be fine. The scene where Dexter was watching the baptism and wondered whether it really was that simple was done pretty well, in my opinion. Here's a man who most of us would consider vile beyond belief; he's killed more people than we know about, and we know about a lot of people. But according to the Christian faith, no sinner is too vile to be beyond redemption, as long as they truly repent and change into the "new person".
So exploring whether or not Dexter is truly beyond redemption, whether it's through the Christian belief structure or another one is interesting enough to me to keep watching.
The show has always had some silly things about it. You guys who are complaining about how unbelievable some of this shit is? It has always been there, to some extent. This show is pretty mythological in how it treats serial killers. It's not intended to be a believable look through the eyes of a serial killer who might exist in real life. That show would be disturbing beyond belief. The killing that happens on this show is pretty darkly comical. There's a mythology in the Dexter universe, and yeah, if you can't sit there and enjoy your dumb serial killer thriller where fucked-up things happen and a guy says,
"Hammer time!"
just before bludgeoning a man to death, then man, you're wanting a show that isn't there.
Yeah, I think that was a perfectly normal thing for a religious person to say, and I don't take it as the writers trying to convert me.
Like, I rolled my eyes when I heard it, but mostly because I've heard it so many times before. It doesn't really sound all that odd coming from the mouth of a Floridian, reformed murder ex-con, who was saved by Jesus and took the cloth, ministering mainly to troubled inner-city minority youths.
I'd expect a bit more from Mos than well worn tripe, but as a character on a TV show written by committee? eh
But I agree, all these callbacks to previous seasons is leading somewhere.
Maybe we'll get a split season. Doomsday get wrapped up midseason via Dex, or so we think, until the police discover another Doomsday murder that is actually the work of a copycat playing out Miami's greatest hits.
Or not, I might enjoy that though; particularly if it leads to Dex hunting his or his brother's own copycat.
Just finished season two. I was fairly dissapointed overall. It started out quite good, but became utterly predictable as it went on. Especially with Lila and Doakes plotlines. I knew where their arcs were going and how they were going to play out. It just seemed like endless stringing along in the last few episodes. There were some superflous plots as well, like the new lieutenant's cheating boyfriend nonsense.
Dexter's inner conflict about who he is was interesting at first, but it eventually got to the point where it felt meaningless as he just ended up deciding that his status quo was who he is. It sort of felt like everything that happened in season two was pointless in terms of character growth and development. The only thing that really changed was Doakes now being gone.
Oddly, Deborah and Lundy's relationship was one of the only arcs that interested me the entire season.
I'm not in any rush to get into season three. I was anticipating John Lithgow's role in season four(I believe?), but not going to get there as fast as I went through the first two seasons. Unless season three startingly makes up for two.
I'm not in any rush to get into season three. I was anticipating John Lithgow's role in season four(I believe?), but not going to get there as fast as I went through the first two seasons. Unless season three startingly makes up for two.
Season 3 is one that a lot of people don't like, but I really enjoyed more than Season 2. Like you said, Season 2 is predictable and ridiculous, with everything playing out just perfectly for Dexter to get out of the scrape they put him in at the start of the season. That plotline should have been the last season (or the last two seasons).
Season 3, on the other hand, has Dexter actually trying his hand at something different and actually pitting his will against someone who isn't just toying with him (like the ITK). There's some really good cat & mouse, and the Camilla storyline was Dexter's best character growth up to that point (the fact that it would soon be overshadowed by Season 4's overload of character development notwithstanding).
Season 3 is really where Dexter proves that he's become a superhero for real; stuff that confounds the entire department is an afterthought to him, to be resolved when it starts bothering him.
Kinda splitting hairs on the language, though. If my friend is struggling with her exams, and I say, "I have faith in you," that doesn't mean that I pray to her every night for divine favors, it just means I think she's going to do okay on her tests because she studies all the damn time. When Brother Sam says, "You put your faith in SCIENCE(!)," what he really means is, "You think that the doctors have the knowledge necessary to save your boy."
Language, yo.
This is for all the people who claimed Dexter meant confidence or trust when he said "faith."
That might have been possible if he ONLY said "I put my faith in science." He actually said "You put your faith in God, and I put my faith in science."
Given the sentence structure, it makes no sense that he's using two definitions of faith. It's not clever wordplay. He's drawing a direct parallel between faith in God and faith in science. And faith in God is by definition religious faith. Moreover, it was Dexter who said it, who should have known better. The reason this makes me angry is that there is a mistaken belief that scientists worship science the way Christians worship God, and I took the above as evidence that the writers are making the same mistake.
As for the second point:
Brother Sam said, "They say I can't prove God exist, but you can't prove he doesn't."
What bothers me about this sentence is that you can replace God with Tooth Fairy, Bigfoot, Aliens, Gnomes, Pokemon, etc. and the argument would still be valid. Note that it's almost impossible to prove a negative. That's why, in these kinds of cases, the burden of proof lies on the people making the implausible claims. Scientists shouldn't need to go out of their way to prove God's non-existence.
That's why I think logic was being stretched here, though "rationality" might be the better word. Strictly speaking, Sam was completely correct when he said there is no proof God doesn't exist, but from an atheist point of view, that has nothing to do with anything. And since Dexter - an atheist - is narrating the show, I expected some acknowledgement of that fact that Brother Sam made a very weak argument.
So, do I think the writers are out to convert me? No, I don't think that. In fact, I didn't even allude to this possibility. Do I think it's unrealistic that Brother Sam would say what he said? No, I'm sure it's a thing religious Floridians say in real life.
However, I do think both religion and atheism could have been better represented. I would have structured my arguments differently, and I'm sure that there are religious scholars out there who could have made a much better case than Brother Sam did. I'll admit that this is very much a meta-criticism, as both Brother Sam and Dexter were in taxing circumstances within the story, but given the sensitivity with which religious extremism was handled (as compared to Brother Sam), I expected more from the writers.
Kinda splitting hairs on the language, though. If my friend is struggling with her exams, and I say, "I have faith in you," that doesn't mean that I pray to her every night for divine favors, it just means I think she's going to do okay on her tests because she studies all the damn time. When Brother Sam says, "You put your faith in SCIENCE(!)," what he really means is, "You think that the doctors have the knowledge necessary to save your boy."
Language, yo.
This is for all the people who claimed Dexter meant confidence or trust when he said "faith."
That might have been possible if he ONLY said "I put my faith in science." He actually said "You put your faith in God, and I put my faith in science."
Given the sentence structure, it makes no sense that he's using two definitions of faith. It's not clever wordplay. He's drawing a direct parallel between faith in God and faith in science. And faith in God is by definition religious faith. Moreover, it was Dexter who said it, who should have known better. The reason this makes me angry is that there is a mistaken belief that scientists worship science the way Christians worship God, and I took the above as evidence that the writers are making the same mistake.
As for the second point:
Brother Sam said, "They say I can't prove God exist, but you can't prove he doesn't."
What bothers me about this sentence is that you can replace God with Tooth Fairy, Bigfoot, Aliens, Gnomes, Pokemon, etc. and the argument would still be valid. Note that it's almost impossible to prove a negative. That's why, in these kinds of cases, the burden of proof lies on the people making the implausible claims. Scientists shouldn't need to go out of their way to prove God's non-existence.
That's why I think logic was being stretched here, though "rationality" might be the better word. Strictly speaking, Sam was completely correct when he said there is no proof God doesn't exist, but from an atheist point of view, that has nothing to do with anything. And since Dexter - an atheist - is narrating the show, I expected some acknowledgement of that fact that Brother Sam made a very weak argument.
So, do I think the writers are out to convert me? No, I don't think that. In fact, I didn't even allude to this possibility. Do I think it's unrealistic that Brother Sam would say what he said? No, I'm sure it's a thing religious Floridians say in real life.
However, I do think both religion and atheism could have been better represented. I would have structured my arguments differently, and I'm sure that there are religious scholars out there who could have made a much better case than Brother Sam did. I'll admit that this is very much a meta-criticism, as both Brother Sam and Dexter were in taxing circumstances within the story, but given the sensitivity with which religious extremism was handled (as compared to Brother Sam), I expected more from the writers.
1: They're not talking about worshiping God or worshiping science. They are saying that Mos Def believes that God will take care of his needs, and that Dexter believes that science will take care of his needs. Faith does not equal worship. Worship is the exercise of your faith.
2. Mos Def isn't trying to make an argument. And as an atheist you should know better than most that there is no strong argument for God's existence. If someone were to ask me why I believe in God I can't give them charts and crap outlining why I believe. All I can say is that I wake up every day to a beautiful world full of beautiful people and amazing things. There is bad within this world(And I've lived it) but for the most part I believe it is good and that there is a reason for that good. I believe the reason for that good is because there is a God.
Now you may think that's an incredibly stupid reason and that is totally fine. I get it. My point is there is no strong argument for God's existence and to ask for one is a wild goose chase. Belief in God isn't about being convinced and if someone can convince you into believing in God then you're doing it wrong
I'm wondering if the professor is a double bluff, and has actually been real all along. Otherwise the writers must think we're stupid, because they haven't been particularly subtle about him being imaginary.
Next week's preview
has Dexter finding out Travis is the doomsday killer, so the plot will be over pretty quickly if there isn't a second killer. He's not likely to delay taking this one out after the Rita incident.
Kinda splitting hairs on the language, though. If my friend is struggling with her exams, and I say, "I have faith in you," that doesn't mean that I pray to her every night for divine favors, it just means I think she's going to do okay on her tests because she studies all the damn time. When Brother Sam says, "You put your faith in SCIENCE(!)," what he really means is, "You think that the doctors have the knowledge necessary to save your boy."
Language, yo.
This is for all the people who claimed Dexter meant confidence or trust when he said "faith."
That might have been possible if he ONLY said "I put my faith in science." He actually said "You put your faith in God, and I put my faith in science."
Given the sentence structure, it makes no sense that he's using two definitions of faith. It's not clever wordplay. He's drawing a direct parallel between faith in God and faith in science. And faith in God is by definition religious faith. Moreover, it was Dexter who said it, who should have known better. The reason this makes me angry is that there is a mistaken belief that scientists worship science the way Christians worship God, and I took the above as evidence that the writers are making the same mistake.
As for the second point:
Brother Sam said, "They say I can't prove God exist, but you can't prove he doesn't."
What bothers me about this sentence is that you can replace God with Tooth Fairy, Bigfoot, Aliens, Gnomes, Pokemon, etc. and the argument would still be valid. Note that it's almost impossible to prove a negative. That's why, in these kinds of cases, the burden of proof lies on the people making the implausible claims. Scientists shouldn't need to go out of their way to prove God's non-existence.
That's why I think logic was being stretched here, though "rationality" might be the better word. Strictly speaking, Sam was completely correct when he said there is no proof God doesn't exist, but from an atheist point of view, that has nothing to do with anything. And since Dexter - an atheist - is narrating the show, I expected some acknowledgement of that fact that Brother Sam made a very weak argument.
So, do I think the writers are out to convert me? No, I don't think that. In fact, I didn't even allude to this possibility. Do I think it's unrealistic that Brother Sam would say what he said? No, I'm sure it's a thing religious Floridians say in real life.
However, I do think both religion and atheism could have been better represented. I would have structured my arguments differently, and I'm sure that there are religious scholars out there who could have made a much better case than Brother Sam did. I'll admit that this is very much a meta-criticism, as both Brother Sam and Dexter were in taxing circumstances within the story, but given the sensitivity with which religious extremism was handled (as compared to Brother Sam), I expected more from the writers.
1: They're not talking about worshiping God or worshiping science. They are saying that Mos Def believes that God will take care of his needs, and that Dexter believes that science will take care of his needs. Faith does not equal worship. Worship is the exercise of your faith.
2. Mos Def isn't trying to make an argument. And as an atheist you should know better than most that there is no strong argument for God's existence. If someone were to ask me why I believe in God I can't give them charts and crap outlining why I believe. All I can say is that I wake up every day to a beautiful world full of beautiful people and amazing things. There is bad within this world(And I've lived it) but for the most part I believe it is good and that there is a reason for that good. I believe the reason for that good is because there is a God.
Now you may think that's an incredibly stupid reason and that is totally fine. I get it. My point is there is no strong argument for God's existence and to ask for one is a wild goose chase. Belief in God isn't about being convinced and if someone can convince you into believing in God then you're doing it wrong
1: So, you think faith means "believing X will take care of one's needs," where X does not necessarily need to be anything religious. Well, I think that's a very liberal interpretation of that sentence. I disagree, but this is a matter of individual interpretation.
2: Yes, he is making an argument.
This is the entire exchange:
(Transcribed by me. Interpretation within parentheses by me.)
Dexter: Thanks for staying. You didn't have to.
Brother Sam: Not a problem. I wanted to. I'm glad the little man is alright.
Dexter: Yeah, me too.
Brother Sam: I know. Thank God. (Emphasis)
Dexter: That's just an expression. (Hesitant disagreement)
Brother Sam: I know. (Ruefully) Just another marvel of modern science.
Dexter: Yeah, you put your faith in God, and I put my faith in science. (Agree to disagree)
Brother Sam: It's cool. We don't need to believe in the same thing, but... gotta keep an open mind. You may say I can't prove that God exists, but you can't prove he doesn't.
Dexter: Hmm.
*Handshake*
Brother Sam: You take care, Dex.
He's clearly defending the existence of God here, pointing out that there is a small loophole in the principles of science that allow for the possibility of God, because God is impossible to disprove. The fact that you - and I agree - don't believe this is a valid line of reasoning doesn't necessarily mean that Brother Sam agrees. It could also mean that Brother Sam made a weak argument.
Now, maybe Brother Sam doesn't realize his argument is weak, or maybe the writers genuinely thought they were being deep, but you need to search very far for a different interpretation of the script.
This is what I was trying to say two posts ago: Brother Sam made a weak argument, and it made me angry to hear that weak argument on a show I like.
PS: I don't think your reason for believing in God is stupid. I mean, I think it's irrational, and you apparently agree with me, but it's better than most I've heard. Personally, I think a little irrationality is necessary to maintain our sanity, so I have no problem with religion so long as it's wedded to a humanist code of ethics.
I think the conversation is two people who like each other but disagree upon a big issue deciding not to be dicks to each other over it.
Seriously. That was not an argument, that was one friend comforting another in a time of stress. Honestly, who expects a man to play point/counterpoint in a hospital waiting room?
I think the conversation is two people who like each other but disagree upon a big issue deciding not to be dicks to each other over it.
Seriously. That was not an argument, that was one friend comforting another in a time of stress. Honestly, who expects a man to play point/counterpoint in a hospital waiting room?
Yeah. Dexter said he didn't mind the distraction, and it was basically an open invitation for Sam to talk about what he felt. They can be friends and still hold very different beliefs, and it's okay for them to talk openly about it.
Posts
Ummm...
Anyway, I'm really loving Mos Def in this new season. He's mostly playing himself I think
Check out the Penny Arcade World of Tanks thread to join us in some fun times.
Agreed, at first I was kinda torn on his character and the general direction this season seems to take (religion and whatnot), since I myself am not religious at all, but it's really starting to grow on me.
I'm still not a big fan of the "bad guys" though..but who knows, maybe they can impress me yet.
The snakes and locust bother me because they are so obviously computer fakes. And the Saw kill was just dumb. Especially since Deb had the WTF? is wrong with you people after they ignored it. And Dex going from blood splatter guy to medical examiner is really grating as well. Don't refer to the ME and blood splatter if you're just going to ignore he's the blood guy.
*Blank looks*
I almost expected Dex to say: "Who?"
That would of been the best. Is there anyone who actually likes Astor?
I don't think they needed a blood spatter expert at the end of the episode to figure out how the person died. And the CG is bad but it is a TV show on SHOTIME, not some high budgeted movie.
Check out the Penny Arcade World of Tanks thread to join us in some fun times.
I don't think it's going anywhere.
Before this episode I thought "man, why did she take the hand? Is she some kind of twisted serial killer as well? Was Rudy her ex-boyfriend or something like that?"
But as it turns out, nope, she just did it for the money. :rotate:
And they spent too much time on her and Masuka to just drop it. This isn't a show that just introduces characters or plot threads to completely drop them and never mention them again. ;-)
They could of just cut her off. Last night's episode seemed like it has too much plot threads going on, they even had to keep Dexter from getting a kill. They do need to tie up some of the threads or just get rid of them. Her being a serial killer seems like a really big stretch too. She's too hot and bubbly. Maybe an unlikely Masuka marriage but not a serial killer.
And in the preview for this Sunday's episode:
Check out the Penny Arcade World of Tanks thread to join us in some fun times.
They do seem to be referencing him/his case a lot. Seems weird to have it simultaneously just come up in both the main plot and the lab assistant subplot without it building to something. But like you said, it might just be some sort of "shouldn't we at least vaguely mention the massive amounts of crazy serial killer shit that's happened around these characters the past few years?" thing (the lab assistant also brought up the Bay Harbor Butcher and Trinity at one point).
I think they're building up to something with this. Miami has had a lot of high-profile serial-killer cases in very few years in this show, maybe that will start to make people think something is up?
Well, in the first episode of the first season, Dexter does mention that Miami has a crazy high unsolved murder rate. And really, does Dexter have more weird murders than all the procedural shows shown on major networks?
But I agree, all these callbacks to previous seasons is leading somewhere.
"You put your faith in God and I put my faith in science." (paraphrased)
and
"You can't prove that God doesn't exist."
Logic is taking a beating here.
Or not, I might enjoy that though; particularly if it leads to Dex hunting his or his brother's own copycat.
I think you need to dial back the militant part of your atheism a bit. Logic isn't being abused here at all. If anything this season up to this point has been pretty fair to both sides, with a slight atheist slant. I'm not a believer myself, but I'm not so full of myself to say others are wrong without proof of it. "Absence of proof is not proof of absence" and all that jazz.
he put his faith in science that his son would be healed
you can't prove god doesn't exist
where is your issue? I'm an atheist as well but it doesn't bother me. in fact I think they've done a good job of brother not pushing things onto dexter while still clearly showing an interest in converting him.
Why would that make you angry? I thought they've been dealing with the religion issue rather tactfully, where they have Mos Def as the example of what can happen when religion goes right, and the 2 killers as examples of the horror that has been done in the name of religious belief. And then you have Dexter just trying to live his life and be happy with his son(Screw Astor and Cody). They haven't been preachy with it, and Mos Def is pretty great. I just don't see why you would be angered by it really, and I'm curious about it
Check out the Penny Arcade World of Tanks thread to join us in some fun times.
It didn't bother me either, though, because even though I rolled my eyes at Dexter saying that first thing I viewed it as him being typically (and sensibly) non-confrontational about an issue that isn't going to be useful to argue about.
but it was far more straightforward.
Man, we need some sort of combination of an analyst and therapist to help us figure this out. An analrapist, if you would.
Check out the Penny Arcade World of Tanks thread to join us in some fun times.
Kinda splitting hairs on the language, though. If my friend is struggling with her exams, and I say, "I have faith in you," that doesn't mean that I pray to her every night for divine favors, it just means I think she's going to do okay on her tests because she studies all the damn time. When Brother Sam says, "You put your faith in SCIENCE(!)," what he really means is, "You think that the doctors have the knowledge necessary to save your boy."
Language, yo.
I can't say you're wrong but I thought it was situation specific. you pray when your loved ones are sick, I go to the doctor.
Glad to see people on both sides of this are rolling eyes at some of the dialog.
Spoilers from the latest episode:
So exploring whether or not Dexter is truly beyond redemption, whether it's through the Christian belief structure or another one is interesting enough to me to keep watching.
The show has always had some silly things about it. You guys who are complaining about how unbelievable some of this shit is? It has always been there, to some extent. This show is pretty mythological in how it treats serial killers. It's not intended to be a believable look through the eyes of a serial killer who might exist in real life. That show would be disturbing beyond belief. The killing that happens on this show is pretty darkly comical. There's a mythology in the Dexter universe, and yeah, if you can't sit there and enjoy your dumb serial killer thriller where fucked-up things happen and a guy says,
just before bludgeoning a man to death, then man, you're wanting a show that isn't there.
Like, I rolled my eyes when I heard it, but mostly because I've heard it so many times before. It doesn't really sound all that odd coming from the mouth of a Floridian, reformed murder ex-con, who was saved by Jesus and took the cloth, ministering mainly to troubled inner-city minority youths.
I'd expect a bit more from Mos than well worn tripe, but as a character on a TV show written by committee? eh
Dexter's inner conflict about who he is was interesting at first, but it eventually got to the point where it felt meaningless as he just ended up deciding that his status quo was who he is. It sort of felt like everything that happened in season two was pointless in terms of character growth and development. The only thing that really changed was Doakes now being gone.
Oddly, Deborah and Lundy's relationship was one of the only arcs that interested me the entire season.
I'm not in any rush to get into season three. I was anticipating John Lithgow's role in season four(I believe?), but not going to get there as fast as I went through the first two seasons. Unless season three startingly makes up for two.
Season 3 is one that a lot of people don't like, but I really enjoyed more than Season 2. Like you said, Season 2 is predictable and ridiculous, with everything playing out just perfectly for Dexter to get out of the scrape they put him in at the start of the season. That plotline should have been the last season (or the last two seasons).
Season 3, on the other hand, has Dexter actually trying his hand at something different and actually pitting his will against someone who isn't just toying with him (like the ITK). There's some really good cat & mouse, and the Camilla storyline was Dexter's best character growth up to that point (the fact that it would soon be overshadowed by Season 4's overload of character development notwithstanding).
Season 3 is really where Dexter proves that he's become a superhero for real; stuff that confounds the entire department is an afterthought to him, to be resolved when it starts bothering him.
It's kind of neat in a novelty sort of way, but the prices are so out of line with that, that I'm not sure who would buy it.
Like a $110 paperweight.
or $40 2gb thumb drive.
This is for all the people who claimed Dexter meant confidence or trust when he said "faith."
That might have been possible if he ONLY said "I put my faith in science." He actually said "You put your faith in God, and I put my faith in science."
Given the sentence structure, it makes no sense that he's using two definitions of faith. It's not clever wordplay. He's drawing a direct parallel between faith in God and faith in science. And faith in God is by definition religious faith. Moreover, it was Dexter who said it, who should have known better. The reason this makes me angry is that there is a mistaken belief that scientists worship science the way Christians worship God, and I took the above as evidence that the writers are making the same mistake.
As for the second point:
Brother Sam said, "They say I can't prove God exist, but you can't prove he doesn't."
What bothers me about this sentence is that you can replace God with Tooth Fairy, Bigfoot, Aliens, Gnomes, Pokemon, etc. and the argument would still be valid. Note that it's almost impossible to prove a negative. That's why, in these kinds of cases, the burden of proof lies on the people making the implausible claims. Scientists shouldn't need to go out of their way to prove God's non-existence.
That's why I think logic was being stretched here, though "rationality" might be the better word. Strictly speaking, Sam was completely correct when he said there is no proof God doesn't exist, but from an atheist point of view, that has nothing to do with anything. And since Dexter - an atheist - is narrating the show, I expected some acknowledgement of that fact that Brother Sam made a very weak argument.
So, do I think the writers are out to convert me? No, I don't think that. In fact, I didn't even allude to this possibility. Do I think it's unrealistic that Brother Sam would say what he said? No, I'm sure it's a thing religious Floridians say in real life.
However, I do think both religion and atheism could have been better represented. I would have structured my arguments differently, and I'm sure that there are religious scholars out there who could have made a much better case than Brother Sam did. I'll admit that this is very much a meta-criticism, as both Brother Sam and Dexter were in taxing circumstances within the story, but given the sensitivity with which religious extremism was handled (as compared to Brother Sam), I expected more from the writers.
1: They're not talking about worshiping God or worshiping science. They are saying that Mos Def believes that God will take care of his needs, and that Dexter believes that science will take care of his needs. Faith does not equal worship. Worship is the exercise of your faith.
2. Mos Def isn't trying to make an argument. And as an atheist you should know better than most that there is no strong argument for God's existence. If someone were to ask me why I believe in God I can't give them charts and crap outlining why I believe. All I can say is that I wake up every day to a beautiful world full of beautiful people and amazing things. There is bad within this world(And I've lived it) but for the most part I believe it is good and that there is a reason for that good. I believe the reason for that good is because there is a God.
Now you may think that's an incredibly stupid reason and that is totally fine. I get it. My point is there is no strong argument for God's existence and to ask for one is a wild goose chase. Belief in God isn't about being convinced and if someone can convince you into believing in God then you're doing it wrong
Check out the Penny Arcade World of Tanks thread to join us in some fun times.
Next week's preview
1: So, you think faith means "believing X will take care of one's needs," where X does not necessarily need to be anything religious. Well, I think that's a very liberal interpretation of that sentence. I disagree, but this is a matter of individual interpretation.
2: Yes, he is making an argument.
This is the entire exchange:
(Transcribed by me. Interpretation within parentheses by me.)
Dexter: Thanks for staying. You didn't have to.
Brother Sam: Not a problem. I wanted to. I'm glad the little man is alright.
Dexter: Yeah, me too.
Brother Sam: I know. Thank God. (Emphasis)
Dexter: That's just an expression. (Hesitant disagreement)
Brother Sam: I know. (Ruefully) Just another marvel of modern science.
Dexter: Yeah, you put your faith in God, and I put my faith in science. (Agree to disagree)
Brother Sam: It's cool. We don't need to believe in the same thing, but... gotta keep an open mind. You may say I can't prove that God exists, but you can't prove he doesn't.
Dexter: Hmm.
*Handshake*
Brother Sam: You take care, Dex.
He's clearly defending the existence of God here, pointing out that there is a small loophole in the principles of science that allow for the possibility of God, because God is impossible to disprove. The fact that you - and I agree - don't believe this is a valid line of reasoning doesn't necessarily mean that Brother Sam agrees. It could also mean that Brother Sam made a weak argument.
Now, maybe Brother Sam doesn't realize his argument is weak, or maybe the writers genuinely thought they were being deep, but you need to search very far for a different interpretation of the script.
This is what I was trying to say two posts ago: Brother Sam made a weak argument, and it made me angry to hear that weak argument on a show I like.
PS: I don't think your reason for believing in God is stupid. I mean, I think it's irrational, and you apparently agree with me, but it's better than most I've heard. Personally, I think a little irrationality is necessary to maintain our sanity, so I have no problem with religion so long as it's wedded to a humanist code of ethics.
Seriously. That was not an argument, that was one friend comforting another in a time of stress. Honestly, who expects a man to play point/counterpoint in a hospital waiting room?
Yeah. Dexter said he didn't mind the distraction, and it was basically an open invitation for Sam to talk about what he felt. They can be friends and still hold very different beliefs, and it's okay for them to talk openly about it.
I was fine with the whole thing.