On the depiction of serial killers in popular culture...

[The Lizard]

I've been watching the first season of Dexter on DVD recently (great show, BTW), and I got me thinking about how the way serial killers are often depicted in entertainment is different from the way they seem in real life.

Books, TV series, and movies are full of serial killers who are dark, enigmatic, brilliant, chaotic, terrifying and almost always charismatic.

The series Dexter features a handsome killer who has learned to focus his murderous bloody urges on escaped criminals he researches via his job as a forensic police investigator specializing in blood spatters. Dexter is mostly emotionless except when plotting a killing, but he effectively puts forth an image of normalcy that fools the mundane "regular people" in his life. His self-narration often refers to himself as the "hidden monster" in the midst of his friends.

Hannibal Lecter from the novels of Thomas Harris and the related films is of course the prime example of the suave, articulate, brilliant psychopath who is one step ahead of any attempt at bringing him to justice. Dr. Lecter is presented as more a force of nature than a human being.

Even the foul-mouthed, redneck serial killing Firefly family seen in Rob Zombie's House of 1000 Corpses and The Devil's Rejects are mesmerizing in their lunatic glee and their ability to terrify, rape and destroy their helpless victims just for the thrill of it.


Real serial killers, by contrast, often appear cowardly, ugly, pathetic and disgusting when their crimes are exposed. Ed Gein, John Wayne Gacy, the BTK killer, Jeffrey Dahmer -- all pretty much total dorks and losers who stalked, abducted and killed in cowardly ways. Not exactly a group of rocket scientists either. Often meticulous in planning and executing murders, but not geniuses by any stretch.

There are always a few exceptions of course. Ted Bundy was a law student and obviously no moron. Karla Homolka and Ted Bernardo were a very attractive couple, albeit pretty stupid.

However (and yes, here comes my point), I find it interesting -and maybe a little disturbing- that the depiction of serial killers in popular culture is often an idealized fantasy, perhaps more in line with the deluded ways serial killers see themselves instead of the ways they actually are.

Pop culture serial killers are dark forces of nature most mere humans can't understand. They are "born predators" in a world of helpless, stupid sheep. They are brilliant, evil, and terrifying in their awesome power to take life. It's almost a glorification in some cases.

This is of course the way real killers often see themselves, despite whatever their actual circumstances might be.

Does it matter that this is how we like to depict serial killers for entertainment? What does it say about our culture?

 

[The Lizard]

tl;dr version:

Pop culture serial killers are often depicted as being much more intelligent, charasmatic, and awesomely monstrous than in real life, where they are often pathetic cowardly goobers. Why? Good? Bad?

 

[The Geek Vault]

the way I see it is most the the entertainment that serial killers are portrayed in is fiction. It adds to the value ya know? The general audience is there to be entertained, and we know that the killer isn't real. Also when your stating really serial killers, you say how they appear cowardly and such. But I was thinking about this. and it brought me back to the line "it's only cheating if you get caught" in a way. It's like the serial killers u named were all caught and brought to justice. But I mean they ones who are most likely like Dexter and whatnot probably haven't gotten caught thus you don't know abgout them.

 

[The Lizard]

It's like the serial killers u named were all caught and brought to justice. But I mean they ones who are most likely like Dexter and whatnot probably haven't gotten caught thus you don't know abgout them.

Interesting point. Only the dorky goobers get caught eh? Hmm...

 

[StrainedEyes]

It's the same reason why we have John Mclaine, a badass cop, taking down a hostage situation from the inside, killing all the bad guys.

It's more interesting and more entertaining then the real thing.

 

[The Geek Vault]

Interesting point. Only the dorky goobers get caught eh? Hmm...

yeah exactly it's like this you turn on the news and you hear how this fat 50 year old serial killer who slashed ppl's throats from the back so they didn't see him gets caugh and you think "wow that guy is a loser **** who doesn't deserve to live" also it helps make law enforcement look good. Now imagine situation B: you turn on the news and hear that some serial killer has outsmarted a whole unit of law enforcement AND the FBI. He's still on the loose, and we have NO IDEA WHO HE IS.
or for the REALLY GOOD killers who make it look like an accident and are never even named as a suspect.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Most serial killers lack even a basic high school education. They're stupid, poor, usually act out of passion and or unchecked emotion and they rarely, if ever have MOs, "calling cards" or even plans. All the serial killers you listed (the real ones) are the exceptions, not the rules. Most serial killers depicted on television, including the ones who make it to the six o'clock news are presented because they are dramatic.

 

[Hobgoblin]

I think a major difference in reality vs fiction is the killer's ability to control themselves. Movie serial killers are cold, calculating in their crimes: emotionless. They hold their s*** together. Real serial killers, I think, arent so in control of themselves. The neighbor's dog tells them its time to kill and they do it, whether it is safe to or not.

In that regard, I think movies/TV does "elevate" serial murderers. They are almost superhuman in how they control their impulses. Real killers are, well, more pathetic. In a way, they are helpless in their psychosis.

 

[Arcturus]

I think for the most part, popular culture likes to "jazz" things up making serial killers into unstoppable forces.

 

[The Lizard]

Are we, as a culture, perhaps taking a risk in widely "elevating" the character of the serial killer in our entertainment media to the levels that the real killers might fantasize about themselves?

Or is that just another "violent video games cause violence" type paranoia?

 

[SLVRSR4]

Are we, as a culture, perhaps taking a risk in widely "elevating" the character of the serial killer in our entertainment media to the levels that the real killers might fantasize about themselves?

Or is that just another "violent video games cause violence" type paranoia?

In the interest of making things interesting yes.

 

[bullets]

These characters are often portrayed as the anti hero and so you sometimes find yourself somewhat identifiable to the character.

Other times you want to see the villian fall or get captured but he has
to be interesting enough to keep the story going .

I don't think that it's a poor reflection of our society because most of us are smart enough to know the difference between an actor and a real
monster.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Are we, as a culture, perhaps taking a risk in widely "elevating" the character of the serial killer in our entertainment media to the levels that the real killers might fantasize about themselves?

Or is that just another "violent video games cause violence" type paranoia?

Is it tasteless? Yes. (I'm a hypocrite for writing that, I love "killer stalks horny teens" movies.) Is it dangerous? Maybe, but I do think the threat gets over hyped. Violence is oddly enticing. The Romans loved it as entertainment and no one would read the original Grimm fairy tales to kids today. (Ok, some would. ) Having all entertainment safe and sanitized wouldnt work for long. People want adult entertainment: Blood, boobs and bad words.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

I think a major difference in reality vs fiction is the killer's ability to control themselves. Movie serial killers are cold, calculating in their crimes: emotionless. They hold their s*** together. Real serial killers, I think, arent so in control of themselves. The neighbor's dog tells them its time to kill and they do it, whether it is safe to or not.

In that regard, I think movies/TV does "elevate" serial murderers. They are almost superhuman in how they control their impulses. Real killers are, well, more pathetic. In a way, they are helpless in their psychosis.

While it's usually not the neighbor's dog, yeah you've gotten it right about self-control. They don't kill because they like doing (necessarily), they kill because they lack the capability to make a rational or informed decision. In some cases it's directed at the opposite sex, for obvious reasons.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

We also tend to think of serial killers as organized, when most aren't (disorganized). This becomes prevalent in literature (i.e. Batman), because the protagonist(s) need some way to find the villain and stop him. If C.S.I, Law and Order, or The Dark Knight were dealing with real serial killers and criminals the shows/movies would make a lot less sense. Batman finds one dead body, maybe another, never actually catches the guy in the act, then one day he's stupid enough to speed through a red light and when they book him they find out he's the killer. Yeah, sounds almost as awesome as the Joker.

The truth is if you're smart, organized and have skills you've probably found a decent way to make a living off of those things and don't need crime. There are some, like Jeffery Damer, who were successful and say killing as some kind of release or game, but they are few and far between. I'd hardly try to base my perception of crime off of very special cases that rarely exist in the real world, and usually only come about in fiction.

 

[Hobgoblin]

While it's usually not the neighbor's dog, yeah you've gotten it right about self-control. They don't kill because they like doing (necessarily), they kill because they lack the capability to make a rational or informed decision. In some cases it's directed at the opposite sex, for obvious reasons.

I was referencing the Son of Sam killer, btw. But yeah, I agree with you.

 

[Motown Marvel]

Karla Homolka used to babysit my friend. wild. creepy.

 

[The Lizard]

Karla Homolka used to babysit my friend. wild. creepy.

I heard she's living somewhere in the west Indies under a new identity since she was released. Scary thing is, I'm sure there are lots of weird guys who would love to date her.

Oops, the West Indies, not the US.

 

[C. Lee]

However (and yes, here comes my point), I find it interesting -and maybe a little disturbing- that the depiction of serial killers in popular culture is often an idealized fantasy, perhaps more in line with the deluded ways serial killers see themselves instead of the ways they actually are.

Pop culture serial killers are dark forces of nature most mere humans can't understand. They are "born predators" in a world of helpless, stupid sheep. They are brilliant, evil, and terrifying in their awesome power to take life. It's almost a glorification in some cases.

This is of course the way real killers often see themselves, despite whatever their actual circumstances might be.

Does it matter that this is how we like to depict serial killers for entertainment? What does it say about our culture?

The entertainment business is all about fantasy.....no "real/true" story is ever shown real or true (except in documentaries).....Hollywood wants an interesting story to show people....and showing the protaganist as an ugly cowardly cretin makes it hard to draw in the general audience. It usually only succedes in bringing in the kind of people who look for this type of entertainment in the first place.

 

[The Lizard]

The entertainment business is all about fantasy.....no "real/true" story is ever shown real or true (except in documentaries).....Hollywood wants an interesting story to show people....and showing the protaganist as an ugly cowardly cretin makes it hard to draw in the general audience. It usually only succedes in bringing in the kind of people who look for this type of entertainment in the first place.

Should the killers appear as the protagonists in the first place? (Assuming you meant to say protagonist instead of antagonist that is.) Dexter is obviously the protagonist of his series, as are the killers in exploitation films like The Devil's Rejects. Lecter is an antagonist to Clarise Starling, but also an ally.

Of course, there's always the notion that villains are inherently more interesting than heroes, or that a hero is only as intriguing as his nemesis...

 

[C. Lee]

Years ago the serial killer was always portrayed as the antagonist. These days....Hollywood seems to prefer portraying them as protagonists. There also used to be a rule in televison (not sure about motion pictures) where the bad guy was not allowed to be shown to get away with it. That doesn't seem to be in effect anymore...so you have shows like dexter where he can be a murderer and yet the star and 'hero" of the show. I'm not saying one portrayal is better than the other....only that the rules for how things can be shown have changed over the years.

In either case....I think the folks of Hollywood just think it makes better storyline to show a suave debonier killer than a drooling butt scratching one.

 

[terry78]

Dark tv shows and movies with anti-hero type protagonists have become par for the course these days. Look at House....the guy isn't exactly a serial killer, but he's not a very likeable dude either, and the same with Nip/Tuck.

 

[C.F. Kane]

Pop culture is turning real-life serial killers into mythological entities. The idea of pure evil as charming and seductive is a pretty old one with plenty of precedent: Satan, the Big Bad Wolf, Dracula, and so on.

Characters like Dexter, Hannibal Lecter, and Patrick Bateman are playing more on mythological precedent than real-life psychological cases.

But if you look at some of the earliest depictions of serial killers, Norman Bates from Psycho, the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and the like (which *were* based on real killers) they tend to be socially awkward, uncharismatic and neurotic. Serial killers in pop culture recently are just taking those character's concept and running with it.

 

[Prison Mike]

Mr. Brooks is another movie that portrays the serial killers as a "normal, seductive" person. Ever since Nip/Tuck I got interested in the anti-hero as the protagonist. I love those type of shows.