Top 8 Reasons Dexter is not a monster

"I live my life in hiding. My survival depends on it." - Dexter Morgan

(MAJOR SPOILERS; but if you don't plan to watch the show then I guess you won't mind)

I love Dexter. It is one of the smartest, edgiest, and most supenseful and fun shows on television. You will recall that it was in my top 3 TV shows. In case you haven't heard, Dexter centers around the titular Dexter Morgan, a mild mannered blood spatter analyst for the Miami Police Department who moonlights as a vigilante serial killer. The show focuses on his attempts to juggle a social life with family and friends while also satisfying his psychotic urges by murdering Miami's worst killers, as per a code taught to him by his cop father. Now a main element of the series that has thrived even into the fifth and current season is the mystery as to whether or not Dexter's good nature is merely an act, a building emotion, or true feelings. I'd go with the last, but here are my reasons for why.

8. He kills the evil people

Simple enough, right? If Dexter was merely a psychotic killing machine, he would have disregarded his father's code and satisfied his desires in any way he pleased. I would doubt even the sickest serial killers would want to take up the task of thoroughly investigating someone almost or just as dangerous as they are, stalking, and then killing them. Too much work, and very often risky. The fact that he has stuck with the code with such discipline and devotion, and his often strict and serious no-innocents policy, are not solid but they do make humanity somewhat evident.

7. Admittance

As the late-great and fictional John Locke once said "Crazy people don't know they're crazy, they think they're getting saner." Dexter knows he is a psychopath. He admits it very often, even to the people around him in very subtle ways. The fact that he knows, and is ashamed of the fact, that he does horrible things (killing bad guys is understandable, but there is also dismemberment) is very thoughtful for a man claiming to be an emotionless monster.

6. His longing for normalcy

One thing Dexter has always wished for is to be like everyone else. This is a wish that so far has always been so close and then taken away from him. Granted, Dexter's last nemesis, the terrifying Arthur Mitchell, also wanted to be normal and good (unlike Dexter, he never really tried). Still, because Dexter hasn't taken much pride in what he does and would give it all up if he could is a sign of humanity.

5. Sense of right and wrong

The main thing Dexter looks for in his ventures is evil, and if you've done murder you're done. Dexter doesn't let the murder of an innocent slide, not even for himself (he doesn't kill himself but the deaths do haunt him). The fact that he abides by that standard of good and evil, right and wrong that all people abide by is more proof that he is good.

4. Dreams

When his victims were found at the bottom of the sea, and the identities revealed, Dexter, called simply "The Bay Harbor Butcher" was given somewhat of a hero status. A comic book was made inspired by his deeds called "The Dark Defender." Dexter liked the idea of being a hero. Even if he does usually see himself in a negative light, he clearly knows and seems to feel at ease at the fact that he is ridding the world of true evil. Sounds like a hero to me, even if his method is vicious.

3. Kindness

Many of the people in his life (though they don't know what he does in his spare time) look upon Dexter as a true friend and an important part of their lives. His foster sister Debra sees him as the "strong one" and her best friend. Angel Batista and Vince Masuka, his cop colleagues, are probably the closest people he has to actual buddies, who both admire, respect, and appreciate him. Even his boss, Maria Laguerta, who at first only had a twisted kind of crush on him began to truly care about him. Of course the biggest impact he had was on the love of his life, Rita. He met her while she was broken and weak, and through their relationship and his being there for her (passive as it was for him in the beginning) built her up and made her a strong, confident woman again. All of this proves that Dexter doesn't have to kill the bad guys to make people's lives better.

2. Guilt

Dexter has done many things in his life that he has felt extremely guilty for. Notably when he kills innocents, Dexter is in a frantic and sort of dumbfounded state where he can't even mask his guilt and shame while in front of people. I would say however in the few times he did kill "innocents" they were usually innocent of murder (which is what he kills for) and another was a mercy killing. Then there are times when the people he really does love are hurt because of him. He murdered his long lost homicidal brother, the one person who would understand him, accept him, and love him unconditionally, in order to protect the other people in his life. After learning that him becoming the instrument of justice his foster father and mentor originally actually drove the man to suicide, Dexter was in a completely depressed and confused state. He felt his whole life was a mistake. Or very recently when his own selfishness got the woman he loved killed, Dexter murdered a vulgar stranger and then screamed his lungs out in anguish (and you could feel the pain and sense of failure he had). The monster Dexter so often described himself as would not feel guilty about anything.

1. Love

Dexter does love. He had love for his father, the mother he never knew, the brother he had to kill, the sister whose always stuck by him, the woman he loved and lost, the children he's helped to raise, his own son as well. Dexter has always thought he couldn't love, but that was because he felt someone like him didn't deserve it. He cared deeply about his foster father and was always trying to make him proud in his own twisted way. He of course loves his sister, who he always backs up whenever he can and has even killed his own blood to protect her. Then there is Rita and her kids Astor and Cody. He grew to love them all over time; he was especially enraged and terrified whenever an enemy would target them. Dexter has always had a kinship with children as they sort of represent his lost innocence as a child, so he was great with Astor and Cody. He eventually arrived at a point where disappointing Rita made him feel "like the scum of the earth." and often made strides to embrace the good she saw in him. Rita was his hope and the aforementioned anguish and pain he felt after she died because of him was proof of his love for her. Dexter has a lot of love to give and usually gets it right. I think if anything love will be his guiding light, the factor that saves him in the end.

So yes, I think any Dexter fan should be able to tell that he is not a monster, more of a necessary evil. He is a good man with a bit more darkness inside than most others. Still, I would be lying if I said the world would be a better place without him. The one thing people who do or don't watch the show can grasp, the one thing those who are intrigued or disgusted by the serial killer aspect can't deny: the people he kills deserve it and got it coming.

This is the first of hopefully several Dexter posts from Your Modest Guru. Thanks for reading.

Movie Trailers 3

Round 3 of my summing up of some recent trailers that have come to light. I will of course give my opinion, so you can judge from that and ask yourself whether you might want to see these movies. Not much more to say, so here we go.

DUE DATE:
Though this movie has Robert Downey, Jr. and Jamie Fox, who are both terrific, and Zach Galifinakias (know I'm spelling that wrong) who is pretty damn funny, I think this looks kinda lame. I mean I'm getting used to trailers showcasing 70 percent of the freaking movie, but when it gives away what looks like every good joke or surprise, how do you expect me to keep interest. That and some of the lines, mostly from Galifinakias, just seem totally weak. Still these guys are capable of great comedy and a lot of this does look funny. I don't know whether or not I should try this out, though I know a great many will.

THE DILEMMA:
I was very surprised to find this was a Ron Howard film; then again, I guess he did do How The Grinch Stole Christmas time upon a once. Still this looks pretty good, Vince Vaughn and Kevin James play two best friends who love the fact they have the perfect double date thing going on with their two perfect wives, Jennifer Connelly (son of a bitch!) and Wynona Ryder (son of a bitch!). It is perfect only until Vaughn discovers Ryder is having an affair with a younger man (Channing Tatum, for you ladies) behind James' back. This has the makings of a good movie because The Dilemma actually has a good dilemma; should Vaughn tell James about his wife's infidelity? Would it be a betrayal to tell him the truth and destroy a marriage or to say nothing and let the deception last? There are even guns and fist fights in the movie. It has potential. The only downsides are the majority of the trailer is devoted to a bad case of poison ivy Vaughn gets in the film that screws up his bladder (it was kinda funny though because it seemed like Vaughn was trying to stay on the primary dilemma). And secondly, how do these two seriously get such hot wives; and it's not just in this movie, they have a damn track record (Vaughn in Wedding Crashers and Old School, James in King of Queens and Hitch). Maybe chicks really do like guys who are just funny. Maybe Seth MacFarlane and Judd Apatow's frequent pairing of babes with slobs is rubbing off on our culture. If so, there's gonna be a great many lucky guys in this world.

TANGLED:
An upcoming Disney animated film, Tangled seems to be taking that old fairy tale story of Rapunzel and throwing into, well, the Disney style. Our heroine with the elongated hair and our hero who climbs up the elongated hair begin in that Han and Leia phase it seems and their adventure begins as hijinks ensue. Though the trailer gives way too much away, leaves no real mystery to how the story will play out, and it even pretty cliche at times, it still looks really fun and funny. With the voices of Zachary Levi and Mandy Moore in the leads, I think Tangled could be a very enjoyable Disney movie.

THE TEMPEST:

The Tempest right off looks like a movie I will like. I love new takes on old classics. Though I've read very little Shakespeare, his work is kind of alluring, and this is his last work so there's that as well. The stories can be revised in so many unique ways. The story features several colorful and unique characters as they get into misadventures on a tropical island (a storyline I am in no way familiar with). Many of the characters seem to be terrorized or manipulated by the sorceress Prospera (Helen Mirren, playing what was originally a male character). A great cast is in this: David Straitherin, Alan Cumming, Chris Cooper, and Bill Conti play Prospera's apparent shady victims; Russell Brand and Alfred Molina play a couple of weird, idiotic, but mostly hedonistic wanderers; Ben Whisha is a violent supernatural entity; and Djimoun Honsou is Prospera's eccentric island rival Caliban. The director is Julie Taymor, who directed another revisionist Shakespeare story, Titus, to much acclaim. This looks pretty good, engrossing. Some thought provoking fantasy perhaps, with themes defined as only Shakespeare could.

THE TOURIST:

This looks like a good thriller again because of the cast. Johnny Depp, Angelina Jolie, and Paul Bettany. Depp plays a regular tourist seduced by an alluring femme fatale (Jolie) into a North by Northwest type of scenario, while a determined agent (Bettany) strives to solve this mystery. The trailer gets the fundamentals in: Depp is seduced, framed, on the run, and yet still can't seem to not trust Jolie (well as good as she looks neither would I), but the nature of what is happening isn't clearly stated. Still it looks witty and action packed, not to mention well directed. It's got people I like saying and doing things I think are cool. I like the fact that Depp is being the nervous Cary Grant character while Jolie is the mysterious badass, when first hearing about the film I thought it'd be the other way around (either that or a Mr. and Mrs. Smith type movie); I suppose, though, Depp is more fun when he's frantic and Jolie is more fun when she's luscious and lethal. Might have to check it out sometime.

LEGACY:

Legacy looks like my kind of thriller. Suspenseful, enigmatic, claustrophobic, good action, intriguing performers, and an interesting story. The plot involves an ex-black ops commando (Idris Elba) on the run from bad guys and possibly even his old comrades. He is held up in a hotel room, living in fear, and being contacted by various people, including an old lover, friends, journalists, and his politician brother. The trailer isn't loud and action packed (though there is action scenes), it is more atmospheric and visual friendly. It gets the fundamentals down but makes them intriguing; I'm invested in Elba's character just watching the trailer, that's the mark of a good trailer. This looks like the first time I will really enjoy Idris Elba's acting, I've seen a few of his movies and his fine performance as Stringer on The Wire, but this is one where he looks particularly intriguing. Clarke Peters from The Wire is also in the movie, so that's awesome too. I am very interested, it looks intense as hell.

YOGI BEAR:

...This is not my expertise. Well, kids are gonna like it I suppose. They got Dan Ackroyd and Justin Timberlake as Yogi and Booboo. So that's weird, but they seem to be pulling it off. From a kid's point of view this probably looks like some good cheesy fun with talking animated animals, but my adult mind is telling me this could either pan out as decent children's film or The Country Bears 2 (shudder).

THE DEBT:

Here might be a really thrilling thriller aka espionage actioner. The story deals with two timelines, one which deals with young Mossad operatives (Jessica Chastain, Sam Worthington, Martin Csokas) who are on a secret mission to capture a Nazi war criminal in the 1960s. The other timeline focuses on the now older operatives (Helen Mirren, Ciarin Hinds, Tom Wilkinson) in the present as they are revered for their actions during the mission. I think the main plot comes about when proof arises that they actually made a horrible mistake during the mission (which we will no doubt so play out in the past) and have to make sure whatever secret they kept stays kept. The Debt looks intense, shadowy, and subtle, a bit like Legacy. Plus there are actors here that I like, which you've been and will keep hearing a lot.

HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS:

Okay, I've never been that interested in the Harry Potter series, book or film. I stopped watching around the fourth or fifth film because it was just kinda repetitive to me. Maybe I will follow up and watch the whole damn series at some point, like I plan to do with Twilight. Still no matter what old reservations I have for this series, this trailer looks epic as hell. I don't even know what the hell is going on but it looks cool. I only know that the pivotal fight that they were building up to since Philosopher's Stone between Harry and Lord Voldemort is gonna come to a head. A friend once described the ending of the book series to me, because these kinds of fans can't help it, and I had a hard time understanding (and this is the guy who thought Lost made sense). Still with cool visuals, locations, special effects, and a cast of just about every European actor or actress I adore, and of course a series fans around the world are in love with, I don't think this movie can go wrong.

SKYLINE:

Okay, this is one of my many cases where the teaser trailer for the film looks far greater than the theatrical trailer. Remember Inception's teaser which gave little to no clue as to what the movie was gonna be about, just that it was gonna be freaking amazing? Yeah, that's what I mean. Both trailers feature city-folk looking up in awe as alien ships begin hovering over every other roof everywhere, open up those doors of theirs, and start sucking people in. Now you just leave it at that, I'm in. But the theatrical came along and ruined that image. It keeps the image and a few other cool visuals, but then it goes on into clear bad acting, overly cliche story, and action that crosses War of the Worlds with Snakes on a Plane. It has actors I like, sure, like the underutilized Eric Balfour, Donald Faison from Scrubs, and the great David Zayas from Dexter, but even they don't seem to be saving this movie. The monster effects are shit too. So yeah, Skyline, you had me going there for a second, then you just went and cheesed it up. Hope I'm wrong.

THE ROOMMATE:

Single White Female much? This is indeed a pretty clear remake of Barbet Schroeder's Single White Female, only set in a college campus. So our recently crowned Sexiest Woman Alive, Minka Kelly, stars as a new student in your standard dream movie college. She has a nice roommate, Rebecca (Leighton Meester), goes to flashy night clubs, and even has a cute guy (Cam Gigandet). It all seems perfect, until it turns out her roommate is obessessed with her and will do anything to keep her for herself. Then the horror, oh the horror, begins. Though this trailer has some really intense and scary moments, it is hard to take seriously. I can handle the spiritual remake aspect mostly because I haven't seen Single White Female, but you know the story. For one thing, key scares from classic horror movies and thrillers are rehashed here; the Rebecca chick fades in out of darkness behind the heroine like Michael did in Halloween, stabs a guy to death during sex like in Basic Instinct, there is that cool "Go check it out!" shot taken from The Shining, then of course the trademark stalker stare. Also, I can't take Leighton Meester, the uppercrust Blair from Gossip Girl, as a friendless psycho. Why? She is hot as hell, even when trying not to be; more like 200 friends on Facebook. Oh yeah and for us guys there is apparently a kiss scene between Kelly and Meester (there's something to look forward to). The thing that really freaked me out is that my friend is in college and her roommate was a chick named Rebecca (watch your back, jk jk).

HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN:

This looks like a grindhouse movie that'll put the actual Grindhouse movie in it's shadow. Hobo with a Shotgun is based off of the Canadian faux trailer submitted to Grindhouse for its collection of faux trailers. Now it has evolved into a full blown, crazy ass movie. The movie looks like a collection of hardcore violence and action. It puts Rutger Hauer as the Hobo in a city that is on a fast track to Fallout 3 territory. He finds a shotgun, sees the violence corrupting his world, has nothing better to do. The choice looks simple. So we pit the Hobo against the cities worst and it looks like cartoonishly graphic exploitation at its strangest. I mean, I really don't know whether to watch it or shy away from it. It looks too crazy actually, but in a good way. The one thing that really sells me on it is Rutger Hauer, an actor who will never cease to be intimidating and awesome. The trailer mainly features a monologue he gives to a hospital nursery full of newborn babies, as he bitterly laments their likely bad futures. It'll be good just to see him be a badass again. I am pumped as hell.

THE GOON:

Based off of the popular comic book (which I've not read unfortunately), The Goon is an animated film that will feature too cartoonish but nevertheless badass partners, the musclebound and gruff Goon (Clancy Brown) and the stout and talkative Franky (Paul Giamatti) as they go to work fighting supernatural forces. The trailer shows their daily activities: passing beers and playing games around a bar, killing zombies, and looking back on the old days when vices weren't as messy. The last featuring The Goon and Franky piling through a street filled with zombies, firing off tommy guns and swinging baseball bats to the sound of country rock sold me. It is also being produced by David Fincher. It looks like a fun, graphic, and clever little movie.

SUCKER PUNCH:

From the mind of Zach Snyder, here comes a movie that looks freaking awesome but doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I won't try to describe Snyder's premise so here's some things featured in the trailer that will catch people's interest: guns, swords, WWII, mental patients, gangsters, robots, dragons, samurai, martial arts, gun fu, 50s culture, and, above all else, a cast of scantily clad young women who can kick some ass. And every nerd in the world jizzed in their pants. The main cast of girls include Emily Browning, Vanessa Hudgens, Jena Malone, Abbie Cornish, and Jamie Chung, as well as Carla Gugino, Scott Glenn, and Jon Hamm supporting. Sucker Punch looks like every style choice Snyder has ever put into a film evolved times ten and thrown together to make a CGI laced action picture that looks as if it seeks to outdo Sin City or 300 or even Kung Fu Hustle. I mean all the trailer really is is action, pure, fast paced, and heavy hitting. And damn if I am not ready for it.

BLACK SWAN:

Okay, now this looks fucking crazy. The trailer seriously freaked me out. This is Darren Aronofsky's new film, a psychological thriller centered around a paranoid star ballet dancer (Natalie Portman). Portman's character has been rising high in the ballet industry. Succeeding a previous star (Wynona Ryder), she becomes her handsome director's (Vincent Cassel) grand pupil. Her insecurity kicks in on a dangerous level however when the director seems to have found a new rising star in another dancer (Mila Kunis), resulting in a possibly unstable state of mind. The trailer features such surreal, horrifying imagry that I imagine it will be hard to sit through this movie. The last visual suggests a Cronenberg-esque body horror aspect. Aronofsky's direction, no matter the genre he pursues, seems to be very stark and powerful. The acting looks tremendous, Natalie Portman in a type of role I don't think I've seen her in before, looking frantic. Mila Kunis needs a role in a movie that looks this dark and edgy, a right career move. The supporting cast of Vincent Cassel, Wynona Ryder, and Barbara Hershey will no doubt add to the movie's success and outcome. I think this movie looks like a haunting, surreal, thought provoking thriller. I will definitely want to see it. One thing though: does every film these days have to feature a lesbian kiss? Is it like an obligation? Don't get me wrong, I am just as ready for a Portman/Kunis lip-locking anytime, but still I just find it odd. I think it's probably just a cheap route to draw male audiences in (and its working, though the movie looks great anyway). Maybe trailers should feature more kisses between gay men; somehow I think the result would come back negative?

HEREAFTER:

Clint Eastwood's new film, and most times that's all I'd need to say. For the past 20 years, Eastwood has in more ways than one confronted life and death within his films, and with Hereafter it seems as if he is making a film primarily about the subject. It centers around various people who have had different experiences with death, as we all have. Many of these people look to a once renowned spirit medium (Matt Damon) for help, but he has his own troubled conscience to deal with. The subject of death is particularly interesting for a film to base itself around, especially since we all think about whatever hereafter there might actually be. If it's Eastwood I'd imagine this is gonna be a bold, emotional, compelling movie that definitely leaves an impression like the majority of his movies. Though I certainly hope this won't be his last one.

TRUE GRIT:

I know I will have to see the John Wayne original beforehand, but still how can I not be totally pumped for this movie. A remake of the classic western, revisioned by the masters of the craft, The Coen Brothers, and featuring Jeff Bridges as the A Number 1 badass. I'm in all the way. With Matt Damon and Josh Brolin in the supporting cast, this just looks like a terrific western and I'm glad as hell that there are still terrific westerns (it's just a totally classic genre). So yes only three words needed to sum up why this movie is gonna be great: Coens, Bridges, Western.

127 HOURS:

I think this might be the movie I'm looking forward to the most. Based on a true story, Aron Ralston (James Franco) is a young adventurer always looking for new obstacles in far away places. During a hiking trip in the desolate terrain of Utah in 2003, he literally gets stuck between a rock and a hard place when his arm is crushed by a boulder while between a narrow canyon wall. Low on supplies, with no help coming, Aron will be forced to go to the extremes in order to survive. Though having a cast with Treat Williams, Amber Tamblyn, Kate Mara, and Clemence Poesey on the side, the movie will primarily feature a solo act from the great James Franco. For a movie about a guy stuck in one place, it looks intense and exciting as hell. I unfortunately know the outcome of this story however. I can't imagine how its gonna be on film, but I'm sure it will be effective. This is the latest film from the master filmmaker Danny Boyle, director of Trainspotting, 28 Days Later, and Slumdog Millionaire. I am excited as hell for this movie. It looks amazing.

So those are some recent trailers to movies coming our way soon or a little ways down the road. But these are just my opinions, you have yours and I advise you to see what you want.

The Underrated: Freddy Got Fingered

"Argh! My characters are lame, my characters are lame! I'm a loser! I WISH I WAS DEAD!!!" - Gordon "Gord" Brody

For those who have actually seen the film, and are about to turn away from this article in disgust, allow me to plead my case. I watched the Tom Green written, produced, directed, and starred movie Freddy Got Fingered a long time ago and then rewatched it a year or so back. I liked it both times. I then came to realize that I was in the minority having liked it. I wouldn't even say I "liked" it now as I have a fresher opinion on it. Putting a thinking man's analytical sights on this movie, I've come up with a bit of a reasonable argument for why, like it or hate it, this film is not necessarily terrible and why it is, indeed, underrated.

A brief synopsis: The film stars Tom Green as Gordy, a slacker in his mid-to-late thirties who cycles back in forth to pursuing his dream of being a cartoon show artist and part time cheese sandwich factory worker to returning home in failure to his disappointed parents. It already sounds a little absurd and a little dramatic, but Gordy embraces every failure, every misstep as if it were a new opportunity to change the world in some ridiculous way that is even worse than his bigger "goals." This leads him on a very strange and deranged journey to find himself and make peace with his father, played by a very eccentric and angry Rip Torn. I won't lie there are some very stupid, mind boggling, disgusting, twisted, and just absolutely horrifying things that go on in this movie. Things that, if viewed back to back, would make you wonder why the movie isn't rated far lower than it already is. But again, there is my case.

First I will quote Roger Ebert in his damnening review of the film: "The day may come when Freddy Got Fingered is seen as a milestone for neo-surrealism. The day may never come when it is seen as funny." I can agree as much as I can disagree. The film is no doubt surreal in its own way. But I am one who always says that certain things can be seen as funny if the audience can accept the context in which it is trying to be funny. That being said, Freddy Got Fingered is in the retarded complex. Please, don't take offense to my usage of the word "retard," if you've seen the film you'll know I'm not wrong.

I do in fact label this movie as retarded. Despite what we may think, there are very few things we can label films these days. We mostly constrict labels to old genres. In that sense, I don't necessarily see Freddy Got Fingered as a comedy. I honestly think it can be seen as a horror movie as much as a comedy. I will describe a few "jokes" in the movie: the movie opens with Gordy laying on a bed narrating some actually well done drawings, losing focus and giggling at his own story in dopey glee; in the wake of his failures he pretends to be a scuba diver looking for teasure in his shower, or constructing a device that allows him to play piano (badly) while dangling stringed up sausages in front of his mouth to eat with not hands; he accidentally kills, purposefully mutilates, and wears a moose in order to "get inside his characters"; a go-lucky kid is horrifically injured throughout the film; Gordy at one point delivers a baby, swings it around a room by its umbilical cord, then chews the cord off; near the end of the film he somehow jerks off an elephant to a grotesque effect. People laugh at this, I laughed at this. We aren't laughing because it is funny, we are laughing because it is absurd, or laughable; we can't take it seriously. And because we cannot take it seriously, we can laugh; we accept the film's twisted sense of humour, or sense of story.

I justify the "retarded" label because the things Green's character does and the situations he gets in are absolutely ludicrous, stupid, and even disturbing. But to see it is to be overcome with an urge to laugh because it is ludicrous, because it is stupid. The disturbing part is just the bad after-taste. Even the title doesn't make sense; the "Freddy got fingered" plot point is pretty miniscule in comparison to the other things that happen in the movie. From one point of view, yes, Freddy Got Fingered is a bad film. I watch and I know it is a bad film. But why then should it be a hated film? There are plenty of bad movies that are absolutely beloved by some people. This movie is like the Eraserhead of the Y Generation; it is absurd, but creative in its absurdity. Creativity is beginning to be a hard thing to come by in Hollywood. I would much rather watch Freddy Got Fingered for sheer amazement and shock/entertainment value then Vampires Suck, a movie that you can tell from promotional material is going to be horrendous and not even entertaining (save for the people and fandom it is mocking, ironically). When it comes down to it, would you rather watch a bland bad movie or an out of this world bad movie?

Now, a hater would immediately jump to conclude that I must be some kind of cult fan of the movie or something. Not at all. Just because I saw the movie, realized what it was, ran with it, and enjoyed it doesn't mean I rank it with comedy classics like Dr. Strangelove, Annie Hall, and The Jerk. I just saw it differently then other people. So I don't think I quite like it just for how retarded it is, but the ambition behind its retarded outcome. Freddy Got Fingered is underrated in relation to the aspects I have detailed above. Do I recommend it, that depends on what you thought of this article.

This has been the longest Underrated article thus far from Your Modest Guru. Thanks for reading.

The Event: Premiere Review

Okay, I'll admit, even I was a little intrigued by the enigmatic promos for this new NBC show. The show's own title was a slogan: "WHAT IS THE EVENT?" Though I knew it would more than likely be one of the many ambitious shows that will try to imitate my favorite (you know the one), I still figured why not give it a chance. Maybe this one will succeed where others failed and live up to what it tries to be, or, better yet, become something of its own. With that, I've watched the first two episodes of The Event.

(Possible spoilers)

STORY

I was just shaking my head and rolling my eyes a lot after a bombardment of familiar set pieces appeared such as a sunny Island where bad things are going down and an airplane in peril. I was wondering if they were even trying.

One thing you will notice right off the bat is that this show is extremely, extremely non-linear. I mean, you thought Lost jumped around you should think again. The show's BAM-BAM-BAM approach to present and jumbled past situations will be very disorienting for those who aren't used to and won't immediately roll with it. What makes up for it is that there are at least interesting things going on in this madness. Okay, in the flashbacks we are shown the point of views of two different groups. Group 1 includes this show's everyman Sean Walker, his beautiful girlfriend Leila, and her family. Sean and Leila are going on an Island vacation together (where Sean plans to propose to Leila, of course) while Leila's parents watch over her daughter... or her sister (I wasn't really clear on it). I don't think the show is ballsy enough to go Chinatown and be both. While on their vacation, Sean and Leila's calm is hampered by another couple who are shady without being shady. Eventually, Leila disappears and Sean is on the run. Meanwhile, gunmen descend on Leila's parents and daughter/possible sister. Okay, now the more interesting Group 2 involves the President of the United States Elias Martinez, a newly elected, no nonsense, and idealistic man who has recently become aware that his shady lieutenants and successors have detained a massive and mysterious group of people in an Antarctic facility. Now in the present, we are shown Sean and Leila's father on board a plane with Sean, armed and trying to rally help because Leila's father is about to crash the plane into Martinez's press conference. The press conference that Martinez hopes will expose the false imprisonment and shed light on this "mysterious group," with the group's soft spoken leader Sophia Maguire as a representative.

Now I really thought of this as a simple government conspiracy story, like Persons Unknown mixed with a little 24 and Lost. But the very end of the episode more the anything is what will bring people back for another viewing, while also reminding fans of the pivotal plane ride of Lost's fifth season.

The second episode builds on Sean's on the run storyline, culminating in his capture for a murder he didn't commit. Meanwhile, Martinez and his advisors are led to believe that a long missing faction of the "mysterious group" is responsible for all of these events, although apparent group leader Sophia proclaims that the group actually saved them from the plane attack. She won't elaborate more, of course. A task force is set up to find the missing faction, which is led by CIA Agent Lee, who we get wind early on that he is actually a mole for the "mysterious group." We do however get some elaboration on the "mysterious group" in flashbacks. They are an apparant missing link in the human species, having a .1 percent difference to our DNA. They are no doubt above us in many ways. In this light I assume they could be called Homo Sapien Superior, or Mutants of X-Men fame. The only really interesting traits behind them is that they have superior and unparalled technology backing them up and they age much slower than normal people; Sophia, for instance, has gone from 1944 to 2010 and has only gotten a few wrinkles.

This episode ends on just as big a cliffhanger as it shows the shocking conclusion to the plane in peril arc. This insures I will come back, naturally, as I am easily persuaded by shows like this.

CHARACTERS

Though Sean Walker is your standard reluctant, everyman hero, I gravitated towards him because he is acted by Jason Ritter correctly. I felt more for him in the second episode as he desperately pleads his unbelievable case. I want him to get through this. Elias Martinez, played by Blair Underwood, is also likeable. He's like what we all expected Obama to be; the badass diplomat, the shining knight whose gonna fix the system. He's a guy who tries to do the right thing and not compromise, though both could come with risks. And for us guys, Leila is played by Sarah Roemer, who pulls off the role just as well as Ritter as Sean (neither one requires much of anything special, they're just correct). Laura Innes shrouds herself in calm mystery as the mysterious group leader Sophia, trying to protect her people but not make waves with the masses. Sophia is no doubt a principal player. Second to her in the mysterious group is Clifton Collins, Jr. as a renegade member who would prefer to go Magneto on everyone. If this series takes off, I'm at least glad it is vehicle for Collins, Jr., an actor who doesn't get as much praise or as many roles as he should. Zeljko Ivanek, who I think has made a career off of playing corporate douchebags, plays what I believe to be Secretary of Defense with all the smug cynicism and cold calculating nature he brings to just about every role. Tony Todd was there as a general or something for like a second (way to utilize a good actor). All the characters are good so far, we just have to hope that they aren't expendable episodic drifters who die in their second or third appearance.

PROS

The story has potential, but then again so did FlashForward and Persons Unknown. The characters and the situations they are in are all cryptic as hell, which guarentees that the curious ones will stick around to figure why these things are happening. Also the dialogue is pretty good, sharp, intelligent, believeable; again, something those other shows screwed up on. There is a high level of compelling mystery that can capture an audience's intrigue as well as characters you can kinda care about. So that's two things you have to keep an audience, namely me, but both of those things need improvement.

CONS

I've already mentioned the uber-nonlinear story structure. The Event's frantic need to be on the go and not slow down will either increase tension at an over the top rate or completely lose people. And each episode's flashbacks aren't to something specific but mainly just keep jumping around from anywhere to 10 minutes ago to 60 years ago. I mean Lost had flashbacks, but this is a little much. This also means there may not be enough time to fully get to know characters and thus not care as much about them or their predicaments. Speaking of characters, there have already been about three who introduced right off, given a little depth, and killed very soon after. I hate that. Also there is just a high level of confusion. I don't if the "event" the show is titled for has just happened, happened a long time ago, or if it is still coming. And you probably noticed I had little clue of who some of the characters were and what it was they did (I'm currently watching the third episode and I guess Sean is all of a sudden a former computer hacker...ok!). So there's that.

ALL IN ALL

The Event is no "new Lost", but it does have its own brand of mystery and intrigue and can at least keep me interested when I'm watching. Despite its somewhat incoherent story and pacing, The Event is well written, acted, and shot. For now, at least. I will keep watching unless it eventually sinks into the same slump other "new Lost" shows find themselves in sooner or later.

This has been an update from Your Modest Guru. Thanks for reading.