The launch of a new Whedon show is treated in nerddom with the pomp and ceremony of a royal wedding and the build-up to Dollhouse's launch seemed a year long extravaganza of set visits, plot leaks and junketeering. But when Dollhouse finally reached the airwaves, it met very mixed reviews and stumbled to find an audience. Grudgingly, Fox brought it back for a second season, but put it on in a doomed Friday night slot.
The life of a Whedon show is only really a throat-clearing prelude to its afterlife in which the failed show is converted into a modern classic. Whedon's last show, for instance, Firefly was on the air for a mere 14 episodes from 2002 - 2003, but that was enough to fuel a big screen adaptation and eternal worship as the platonic ideal in swashbuckling sci-fi dramas.
But first must come the backlash and out there across the internet can be heard the sound a million geeks posting calls to the barricades to protest Fox's treachery, proving to them once again that commerce is the enemy of art and that something as special as Dollhouse is too good to live in such an imperfect world.
Hehe, "throat-clearing prelude to its afterlife." I can't actually judge Dollhouse, because I never tried--I just couldn't get past the premise. The whole idea of erasing a beautiful woman's memories really weirded me out.
Here's Alyssa on the cancellation:
I'm sorry Dollhouse is dead. But I'm not sure its cancellation warrants the same outrage as the premature plug-pulling on Firefly, which was remarkable from its first episode. I just hope this opens up some space for Whedon and company to move on to other strong--and perhaps stronger--projects.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
I'm actually pleased. I'd finally decided to stop punishing myself by watching it. I hope Victor and Sierra's actors in particular go on to better stuff-- they were excellent.
Totally agree. Especially about the actress who plays Sierra, because at first, I thought she was little more than a woman whose unusual features -- especially that incongruous nose -- made her incredibly hot because she was so exotic. But the last couple of episodes I watched made me realize that she's a very accomplished actor and I'm eager to watch her career thrive. And, yeah, the guy who plays Victor has a very wide range, too.
Agreed. Generally speaking, I'm a Whedon fan. I thought the Firefly cancellation was a terrible move, but Dollhouse wasn't any good. I doubt there'll be much backlash, the plot was going nowhere and the characters weren't particularly compelling. Agreed that Victor and Sierra deserve a great vehicle for their considerable talents.
I just couldn't get past the premise -- me, too, man, and thank you for saying it.
I mean: Joss Whedon - whoot! and all that, but wow. I just couldn't go there. From the Fox website: "the Actives don't just perform their hired roles, they wholly become - with mind, personality and physiology - whomever the client wants or needs them to be" -- yikes!
(On the other hand, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind was excellent. But that's not really the same thing as wiping someone's memory for your own creepy reasons, is it...!)
And almost every episode featured an Active in a sexual role.
I remember this sci fi book (Mother of Storms?) that dealt with what happened after an accidental release of the methane frozen in the arctic led to a supersized hurricane season. The science and politics were very good, but there was a godawful subplot about freelance snuff filming for fetishists that, even warned to skip those sections, soured the whole book. It was just gross, the bits of rapes I did read described in graphic "boy isn't this just terrible" detail as though the reader should secretly be getting off. I think that's the problem with Dollhouse's focus on the actives as sex slaves, with lavish shots of them having sex--you're supposed to titillated and complicit, and comes off nauseating when they aimed for challenging.
Got it in one. The mind-wipe aspect wasn't nearly as loathsome to me as the high-priced whorehouse aspect. Grisly.
I really don't see much in common between Firefly and Dollhouse other than Whedon. I can't see the latter developing anything like the afterlife of the former, which was endlessly fun and beautifuly acted.
Agreed about Sierra and Victor, too--real talent there.
I would say this in conversations, and I would get the response: "But that's the whole point! See, it's about the objectification of women, Whedon was a Feminist Studies major, etc." It always struck me, though, that there was a major contradiction between the message (objectification of women = bad) and the medium (half-naked hot babes = awesome) of this show.
Anyway, thank you, TNC, ellaesther, and Persia, for letting me know that I am not the only Humorless Feminist Who Doesn't Understand Meta-Commentary.
I'm willing to give him benefit of the doubt on the plan to use it for the purposes of subversion, from what I hear the latter episodes get better in that regard.
But making a television show just to subvert the premise seems a really roundabout and tricky way of doing things. Buffy subverts horror films immediately because she kicks butt. This premise puts off the satisfaction, perhaps counting on bring in a larger audience via the medium and then actually bringing them around via the message. That's just a tricky idea to pull off, it seems like a better idea for a TV movie or miniseries followed by a series that starts with the subverted premise.
I always thought it would make a better movie than series for just that reason, GregSanders. If they'd done a full-length version of the "Epitaph One" world, how much more interesting would it have been?
" I am not the only Humorless Feminist Who Doesn't Understand Meta-Commentary."
It's entirely possible to understand the metacommentary and still be very squeemed out about how it's executed. Even as a Whedon fan, I'm aware of his desire to eat his cheesecake and still have her, too. Joss might rack up dozens of hot, sexy fetishgrrrl scenes before ever (*if* ever) showing something as brutally true as Sharon Agathon's treatment in BSG by the Pegasus interrogator's. Yes, yes, the Dolls are being enslaved, but we and Joss somehow spend more time compliant in their exploitation, "enjoying" their exploitation, than reviling it and hoping for its end. (However noble the ultimate escape might be, the season grind is just watching the Dolls grind.) We end up being akin to Adele and Topher far more than the FBI agent .
In fairness, the central metaphor of the Dolls being sex slaves was something many found to be icky, but the show eventually dealt with the ramifications of that. If you wanted to catch up, skip to episode 6, "Man on the Street." The memory/personality stuff in the final televised episode ("Omega") was very interesting as well.
Its really not fair to compare this to Firefly. Firefly died because it was mishandled by Fox from day one with the original pilot getting canned, the episodes being shown out of order, and the timeslot constantly changing. Its premature departure was the sad end to a tragic story as it really was a great show.
Dollhouse by comparison was given a fair shot with plenty of network support overall (even if they did refuse to air the orignally filmed season one ender that Whedon loved so much) and just didn't make it, though I hear it had been getting better recently.
The last episode before the hiatus was still pretty problematic. It was the best episode yet, I think, and featured a woman getting the crap beaten out of her and willingly going back to sex slavery, and...yeah. There's a line between critique and exploitation and I was never confident that Dollhouse was on the right side of that line.
Seems Whedon simply bit off more than he could chew. In the end, he wasn't clever enough to pull off the kind of subtlety that his premise would have required to be anything other than misogynist. I think this might have been assuaged a bit if the top-end, corporate plot had moved faster and Echo's revolution had gotten on with it sooner. But it seemed clear the writers had no idea where the show was going. You can't milk a premise like that with no master plan or you end up with, well, what they ended up with. A lot of 'stories of a sex slave' one off's.
I say good riddance. The show wasn't good until the un-aired episode (Epitaph One), and this season has only been good insofar as the supporting actors carried it to victory.
I think Joss Whedon and Fox deserve this cancellation for choosing Dollhouse over the Sarah Connor Chronicles. Dollhouse wasn't really that amazing, but SCC's very strong second season was worth more of an investment.
If these comments had a "like" button, I'd be clicking on that. I was sad when SCC was cancelled (Brian Austin Green?! Who knew!?) and bitter when I learned Dollhouse was not.
Sigh.
PS, when is 24 coming back, anyway? (heh.)
I liked that show. Casting Eliza Dushku as basically a robot was an optimal use of her talents.
If it makes you feel any better, the eff'd up-ness of the situation was a great part of the premise. The mindwiping was painted as an unambiguously bad thing that eventually destroys the planet (the ability to take an entire person's memories and download them into a body not only results in evil puppeteering, but also body snatching where people would take their memories and live out their lives inside the young and beautiful. The powerful might take multiple bodies at once).
However, this did not stop the show from being incredibly uneven. I was a big Firefly fan and I watched Buffy for the first time over the Summer. It's less apparent in Firefly; those characters have baggage, but they're (mostly) normal. But in Dollhouse and the later seasons of Buffy, this sort of weirdness seeps out. His examinations of female power can be very disempowering. What I'm trying to say is that the thing that Spike tried to do to Buffy (in case there are others who've never seen it), made me decide there's something wrong with the man. I'll totally watch his next show, though.
The Spike scene actually came more from the showrunner at the time; the 'logic' behind it was still twelve kinds of messed up. Agreed on the 'empowerment' not always being as labeled, though.
Good to know. I'll have to reassess.
Joss was still ultimately responsible for all of it. I really hated Season 6 because it seemed to violate all that the series was supposed to stand for...I'll leave it at that!
I thought that "thing" Spike did made perfect sense, in terms of both Spike's own development and Buffy's story for that season. But then, I've never been in the "Spike's a saint" camp. He's more interesting my way.
Fans sometimes blame anything they don't like in BTVS seasons 6 and 7 on Marti Noxon; but Joss always came up with the main plotlines and character arcs, and had right of final approval over all the details.
I thought that "thing" Spike did made sense too. I didn't like it, but it was a logical progression given storyline.
I actually liked the darkness of season six. I kinda wish season 7 had focused more on the original characters instead of bringing in all the new folks, given that it was the final season, but all in all BtVS was a great series.
There's a million evil things he could have done that would have acted as a wake up call for Spike's character, but it just seemed really exploitative and engineered to bring Buffy down a peg in a skeevy way. Also, not necessary in order to add vulnerability to her character.
Yea, I could never really get with the Spike scene either. Mostly, because it didn't jive with his genuine love for her. Joss and Marti made a crucial mistake in that scene of trying to convince the audience that his love made him crazy, but that kind of behavior isn't about love. And it was totally out of character for Spike at that point.
That said, I think Season 6 was a stellar one. It made sense to me that things became more brutal, more human. It also made sense that Willow would do what she did and that there are limits to Buffy's power. I think a part of examining gender in that show was examining the limits of power, regardless of whether you are a woman like Buffy or a male Giles. I don't think that makes it a lesser show, in fact it's depiction of the excesses and limitations of patriarchy (be it in Buffy or the Initiative or the Watchers' Council) felt more feminist than "make a girl stronger than all the men" concept that was ill-fitting in the first couple of seasons.
See, I think Joss and Marti chose very well for Spike -- better than his more ardent fans probably would have done. Spike, the vampire whom True Love turns into Buffy's perfect white knight who would never ever hurt her? BO-ring. But the Spike who is honestly in love with Buffy, yet remains a vampire with a vampire's concept of love, who doesn't understand Buffy as well as he thinks he does, but regains just enough humanity to finally realize he has to change ... now HE is a character worth watching.
But I agree with you about season 6 overall. It's often described as the season when the good guys were their own Big Bads, but that might be missing the big thing. In every season character development was more important than the struggle against the villain, but season 6 was the only one where the characters really experienced the bad parts of growing up.
I enjoyed Dollhouse, but not enough to be upset at its cancellation.
The geek boards I read are about evenly divided: half believe Fox is the devil for shitcanning this generation's Orson Welles, the other half is engaged in a little schadenfreude concerning this living testament to Hollywood nepotism.
I never watched the show, but it does strike me that if you want to get a groundbreaking show cancelled, Fox is the place to go.
Arrested Development--Never Forget
Don't forget Brisco County, Jr. I can't.
To be fair, they kept Arrested Development around for a long time considering how expensive and unprofitable the show was. Yes, it was a great show, but I don't think it suffers from a relatively short run. There's something to be said for a short run. 53 episodes is enough for any show that can be great to be great. And it's just few enough to avoid the inevitable decline. Look at the American Office vs. the original. The original had two six episode seasons and a two hour reunion special. There was a simple storyline with two or three character arcs and then it was over. The American version is hobbling through its sixth season on it's way to 100 episodes. It's still better than most things that show up on NBC, but it's nowhere near as good as it was in its second and third seasons, even then, it wasn't as good as the twelve episodes of the original.
And to be fair, Fox has kept the Simpsons on air for 21 seasons. And at least 10 of them were great.
I didn't watch the series until very late in the game, after months of wailing and gnashing of teeth over the cancellation of the GREATEST SHOW EVER!!!!, but my God is that show overrated.
I'm one to lament the cancellation of great shows in their prime, (Freaks and Geeks, Life On Mars (US)), but why so many insist on hitching their wagons to that mediocre star is beyond me.
Freaks and Geeks, that reminds me of another great Fox one-seasoner--Undeclared.
I put Judd Apatow slightly above Joss Whedon. And I don't put Joss Whedon all that high up there. Freaks and Geeks was good. Undeclared, I thought, was all right. But I think both of these shows are made better by leaps and bounds by the fact that they were not given the chance to get weak. I mean, Freaks and Geeks, for everything that was great about it, was a period-set highschool dramedy. That show may have died too soon. But it may also have died just in time. Undeclared, I'm more or less meh on.
F&G was much better than Undeclared, though.
I think they could have at least gotten 1 more season out of Undeclared...the problem is, who was the audience really? Freaks and Geeks made sense because it was more nostalgic and high school was a more universal experience. Albeit, it wasn't the average sitcom. I'm not knocking Freaks and Geeks, but something about Undeclared I just liked better.
And btw, it's worth noting that if either of those shows were a big success, we may not have had the 40 year old virgin or Knocked up. Funny people we could do without.
"the problem is, who was the audience really?"
Well, it wasn't me, because it aired about 6 months after I graduated from college, and I wasn't quite that nostalgic just yet.
F&G was also a period piece, so you had the nostalgia for a) your high school years and b) the 80s (or, really, nostalgia for any "simpler" period).
I couldn't bear watching Dollhouse in weekly episodes. DVDs of it are a much better medium. The show seemed forced and grasping for deep meaning in its off-kilter theme. And, frankly, the only role that Eliza Dushku done justice to is Faith. I'd rather watch Dr. Horrible over and over -- or Tahmoh.
Dichen Lachman and Victor who's-name-I-can't-remember were the breakouts for me.
I thought Amy Acker, too. She never impressed me as much on "Angel" but she really did on this. Enver Victor Whats His Name was really, really, really good. Olivia Williams was, too, but no one is suprirsed by that.
Enver Gjokaj
(en-vair, jo-kai.)
And he's effing brilliant. I want one of my very own.
And, if you watch Epitaph One, from S1, Fran Kranz (Topher) can bring it when he's given half a chance, too.
Yeah, Fran Kranz was good; I sometimes forget because I hated his character so much. When they had Enver do 'Dominic-in-Victor's-body' I was blown away.
Trying to Reply to Persia about Victor-as-Dominic
Yes. Amazing. He does some stuff in "Belonging" and "Belle Chose" that will hit the reset button on your brain. Fantastic.
Ditto on Fran Kranz. He played that classic Whedon troupe (a moral, anti social funny man) with panache and surprising depth. By the time I stopped watching, I liked him despite myself.
I've been following on TelevisionWithoutPity, debating later getting the dvds versus not wanting to watch the dolls be sexually exploited while waiting for the interesting parts. So I'll weigh in: On TWOP they knew the show was doomed when it went off the air in November with special two-episode burn offs in December. And looking at the ratings, people accepted that it was inevitable; they just hope for some closure. Epitaph One is widely revered as a really cool and interesting place for the show to get to, but watching Echo play yet another flavor of sex slave instead just was not working.
I think the first reviewer is too snarky about Firefly, which I got on dvd and absolutely loved. That show was dicked around with episode order, badly promoted, and killed off before it could build an audience. Its dvd viewings are huge compared to its ratings for its brief on-air life. The Dollhouse dvds came out and have not had anywhere near a Firefly level of "check this out--so cool!" hooking new viewers. It got a second season and viewers, even with the delayed viewers added in, kept dropping.
I think Whedon is working with really interesting ideas of identity and technology (the tv parallel--given a technology that can do so much its used for sex and entertainment) and in Epitaph One social questions. But you have to wade through lots of women being degraded to get to the interesting ideas.
My wife says the same thing about starting at episode 6 and she'll be very disappointed. I'm the geek in our family and I gave up on it about 3 episodes in because I thought it was just plain boring and Eliza Dushku doesn't have anything close to the acting skills needed to play a character who becomes a different person every week.
The confused-over-remembering-too-much and vacuous-brainwiped Echos were done well, but otherwise it's all "she has a prim and uptight personality this week...see because her hair's in a bun and she has librarian glasses."
The basic premise was acceptable to me because it's not strictly men doing to women. There were male Actives as well, and the people behind the operation included women. But I found the episodes themselves a little too interested in placing female Actives in situations which, even if not explicitly sexual in nature, involved a lot of sexual display and vulnerability.
And eventually I think you just run out of plots when you are stuck with that premise.
i watched one episode of dollhouse with my wife. the show was awful. i wanted to smash my television set. it took a lot of convincing to get me to try battlestar galactica -- and it was great -- but after seeing that one terrible, terrible, awful episode of the glorified a-team, i don't think any amount of convincing will get me to try "firefly".
Firefly was all right; I think they might have been able to do good things with it if they'd had the chance. Dollhouse was basically a chance the team frittered away.
I liked Battlestar Galactica and loved Firefly. It really is a charming show taking the whole "sci fi's are just westerns" idea one step deeper. One thing that saved it for me is that the crew felt like they each carried a world of backstory. First officer Zoe, pilot Wash, mechanic Kaylee--all nuanced and interesting. Tough guy Jane was not nuanced but was played by the awesome Adam Baldwin who plays Casey on Chuck. Took me about four episodes to recognize him. Polar opposite character but with the same talent for deadpan humor.
It's worth trying out the tv show. (Which is set before the movie.) The discs have the epidodes in the right order. And it's a modest little thing of 13 episodes. Some world-building details were poorly thought out, but that's the sort of thing I noticed on a fourth viewing.
I sort of liked the first season or two of Buffy, and I have seen a few eps of Firefly, and it was enjoyable but Whedon's stuff tends to get old fast to me.
But really, the best thing about Firefly? Nathan Fillion's "Space Cowboy" joke on Castle's Hallowe'en episode. OK, so I'm not a fan of Joss Whedon and I watch a *lot* of police procedurals instead...but come on, that was frickin' hilarious!
Please don't say that about Firefly. ITS THE BEST TV SHOW EVER. Seriously! Give it a try. The DVDs are twelve bucks at Best Buy. I really wanted to like Dollhouse because I like Whedon so much. But I gave up after 4 episodes. Like Te Nehisi, I didn't love the premise. Eliza Dusku is a mediocre actress. It just never grabbed me. But Firefly was brilliant and its cancellation was all kinds of unjust.
I always feel bad when a show with a devoting following gets cancelled, particularly stuff that isn't a by-the-numbers-sitcom or cop drama, but (and I'm sure this hurts my geek cred) I've never seen the appeal in the work of Joss Whedon - I tried Buffy and Firefly, but the glib dialog was absolutely unbearable. The beautiful art saved his mediocre X-Men comics. The concept of Dollhouse was too unappealing for me to even attempt to watch it.
Nice thing is, there's so much smart, innovative television being produced these days - and a lot of fantasy/SF/superhero genre-y stuff- that this doesn't seem as much of a loss as it would've been 10 years or so ago.
I generally like the work of Joss Whedon, but I really don't get the single-minded devotion of many of his fans.
Perhaps the problem with Dollhouse was that it didn't go far enough into sex-bot territory. Charlie Stross's Saturn's Children was a far better exploration, albeit in book form.
But who reads books these days?
In the first few seasons, those crazy kids in Buffy read books all the time. It was one of the attractions. Similar to their wit, it showed 16 year olds as intelligent and capable of addressing challenges as adults.
Well, I never watched the show myself so I won't be missing it. And from the tenor of the reviews it sounds like this wasn't a "Firefly" quality show being unjustly yanked before its time.
On a brighter note, maybe this means Whedon will return to comics. His Astonishing X-Men was rock solid (Cassady's art was a great help, of course.) and I'd love to see his take on another superhero book.
Sady at Tigerbeatdown has a really great analysis of Dollhouse as a metaphor for patriarchy. Given some of the discussion on here of late about how the village shapes the individual, a lot of you will probably be interested in this analysis, and it might make you want to give the show another look- in particular, "Man on the Street," "Epitaph One," and "Needs," from S1, and all the Amy Acker stuff from "Omega," and, I believe, "Instinct."
http://tigerbeatdown.blogspot.com/2009/04/dollhouse-joss-whedon-and-strange-and.html
Also, Spy in the House of Love was one of the best hours of TV EVAR. =D
From the post:
Um. I hope my quotes work.
Whoa.
That Tigerbbeatdown post was fantabulous. Thanks so much for linking it. I really do see her point about Buffy maybe not being as feminist as it's supposed to be. I always loved it for the interesting characters, the geekiness, the hilariousness and monsters as metaphors (esp. in season 1-3), than Strong Women Kicking Ass. But I'm a guy.
And she lays out what makes "Dollhouse" interesting so. damn. well.
Glad you enjoyed it. =)
She doesn't post as much anymore, but she's a fantastic read.
In a lot of ways, Dollhouse feels like an SpecFic-ized illustration of second wave feminism, which is fascinating in it's own way.
I'm not so broken up. Parts of season 1 were just bad, ie, most of the stand alone episodes. Parts were insanely good. I'd been liking season 2 a lot more so far.
I'm a Whedon guy. I'll give anything he puts out three or four chances, because Buffy is second to only "The Wire" on my all time greats list and "Firefly" could have been as good.
But, there aren't really so many of us. The guy's never created anything that appealed to something like a mass audience, even Buffy. And there's no reason to think no that he will. Seems to me the wise thing would be for networks to stop letting him try and for him to go make his niche shows on a niche network, where I will happily watch them or by getting the DVDs. That's not the best thing for Joss Whedon's bank account, but it would be best for me, his audience.
Wow. At 26 I'm out of the loop. You say Dollhouse I think Isben.
I've just never been a Joss Whedon guy. I don't know. The only thing he's ever been a part of that I thought was truly great was Toy Story, and his role in that production, while important, was not so large that I even feel comfortable calling that a Joss Whedon thing. That was much more a John Lasseter thing.
Joss Whedon's real stuff always seems somehow too clever by half to me. It never strikes the right balance for me between light and heavy. I don't know. Everybody's welcome to like what they like. This guy's work has never been my bag, as I think some people say.
I always called him "Food Court Sorkin," with the just-close-enough-to-not-be-totally-laughable dialogue that usually makes me want to end my life.
Yeah, Sorkin's another one. Sometimes his stuff works, but when it doesn't, I find it just unbearable. I can't stand, for instance, Sports Night. My mother and my sister (the latter is mad about Joss Whedon) act as if I have something terribly wrong with me because I think that show is a tonal mish mash -- a sitcom with major pacing problems that's simply not very funny. Oh, and when you get Sorkin, even if it's a show about sportscasters, you're in for a lecture every one or two episodes.
Yeah, I don't understand the cult praise for Sports Night. It seems like a joke that people grew to take seriously.
I have to agree with most of the posters on this thread - Dollhouse was never as good as it could/should have been. Partly because of the exploitation at its core (which was never explored with the moral depth that it deserved - indeed, the moral implications were just hinted at here and there with occasional "Adele Has Second Thoughts" or "Topher is a Sociopath" vignettes) and partly because of the weak acting of the main star. And how do you care about the Dolls, people who really are non-persons, at least for the duration of the show? It was possible to object to what they were subjected to without caring for them in the least, even if you could tell at any given time whether their "selves" were breaking through or whether they were totally imprinted.
But I also agree that Enver Gjokaj and Dichen Lachman should get lots of great parts in the future. I think they were awesome.
I actually never had a problem getting really invested in the dolls- their blankness, their helplessness, made me feel protective and extra-outraged about the stuff that happened to them. (I realize I am very much in the minority.) Enver Gjokaj in Omega, esp., with that...that FACE. "How can I be my best?" I just wanted to cuddle him and maim everyone else all at once.
He's just a golden find. Did you watch "Belle Chose"? From serial killer to Girl Gone Wild in 3 frames, didn't bat an eye.
A big problem with the show was its pacing. Deep down, I think, it wanted to be a mini-series, not a weekly serial. It started off bumpy in season 1, then got its sea legs, then suddenly veered into some philosophically challenging and suspenseful territory. When it came back at the start of season 2, it was as if it had reverted all the way back to the start of season 1. Everything that had made it compelling toward the end of season 1 was dropped like a hot rock. Why? Because you just can't start a season that way, not if you want to have someplace left to go during sweeps month and the season finale. But without its philosophical arc, Dollhouse's subtitle isn't Being and Nothingness, it's Meat Puppets on Parade. Which is boring and squicky.
And I say this as someone who really liked Buffy and adored Firefly.
I never watched the show because after working with Eliza Dushku for many years I am determined to never have to see her again in life. Call it "Post Hollywood Stress Disorder," if you will.
I did really like Buffy, but I'm not losing sleep over this one. In the case of Ms. Dushku, it couldn't have happened to a *worse* person.
I loved Buffy, Angel and Firefly/Serenity, but this one just didn't do anything for me.
I do enjoy seeing the actors in other things. I recently got caught up on all the episodes of "Bones" and I'm intriged by "V" with Morena Baccarin. Several other actors having regular gigs on tv too.
I think we have a situation in which Whedon didn't really figure out what this show was until much much too late. In that sense, Dollhouse is not dissimilar from Buffy. Both shows didn't find their sea legs until the second season (in Buffy's case, the moment Buffy lost her virginity and Angel became Angelus the show became something grander and more beautiful than most tv shows that came before it).
The last two episodes of Dollhouse alone make me sad it is going away. Because Whedon has figured out that to make this show truly work he must acknowledge that the premise is reprehensible and that his characters must be either loathsome or victims to make the show work on both a story and "deeper" level.
I suspect that Firefly and Angel sprung fully formed because they were co-created with other geniuses (Tim Minear and David Greenwalt, respectively) who could temper Joss' excesses and embellish and deepen his concepts.
Dollhouse is a loss because, at its best, it was a beautiful, complex, and oftentimes painful, exploration of man's capacity to destroy itself.
Plus - Enver Gjokaj is remarkably versatile and a thrill to watch.
I watched some episodes of “Dollhouse”, here and there.
I think the main problem with the show can be summed up in the article I read, that first broke the news of its cancellation. In the AP blurb, it described the dollhouse itself as a “high-class prostitution service”.
That’s it, right there. I highly doubt either Joss Whedon or Eliza Dushku, the two creative forces behind the show, ever conceived of the original premise to be so focused on sex. But you can’t have much character or plot development when the actives are getting wiped at the end of every episode. And it’s a network show, where you seemingly live and die solely by ratings and you have an attractive female lead best known for a “bad girl” role, so what do you do? If you don’t have an episode where Echo is kicking someone’s @ss, what else is there to put in previews but Miss Dushku in a skimpy costume?
And when you have the dollhouse being mainly a prostitution service but one where the prostitutes are largely robbed of their free will, who do you actually invest in as a viewer? Adele and Topher are basically pimps, as is just about everyone else who works there. The actives are largely victims but the wiping process kills character continuity. I know they started to correct that by having the wiping process break down a bit but maybe it was too little too late?
I asked my wife, she has watched every single episode. She admits the show was never that great but has a bit of a crush on Eliza Dushku and got a kick out of the getups they put her in.
If anything, perhaps the case of Dollhouse tells us how hard it is to put a show on broadcast television and have it be good, particularly if it’s not a comedy, A drama on a broadcast network already faces near-fatal restrictions on content in terms of violence, sex & nudity and foul language. Add to it the high-stakes rating game that doesn’t allow shows to plan out as many long-term story archs and it’s no wonder there is so much crap out there. (Maybe it’s worth noting that “Buffy” was a mid-season replacement show on the WB network. Expectations weren’t all that high the first season I’m betting.)
I’ll ask the question, are dramas with multi-episode story threads dead and buried on the various television networks? The only dramas I can think of are cop shows, where every new episode is a completely new story, just like a sitcom.
On broadcast networks, mostly dead. You still get the occasional supersuccess, like 24 or Lost or Heroes, but the restrictions of broadcast, coupled with the need for great ratings, tend to burn such shows out into repetitive husks.
The place for sustained dramas is cable. Far fewer creative restrictions. Less fixation on sky-high ratings. (Dollhouse on Friday night outranked BSG and Fox News primetime ... Good enough for cable but not enough for broadcast.) Cable tends to do 13 episode arcs of higher quality rather than burn out over 22-24 episodes each year. Cable's where you get the Shield, the Wire, Mad Men, Rome, Farscape, the L Word, BSG, Sopranos, and so forth.
In that regard, cable network drama is in a Golden Age. Broadcast, only so-so.