Joss Whedon’s latest effort, Dollhouse, premiered last night to an audience of almost 5 million viewers. This show has been in the works for a long time, premiered with a reshot pilot, and has been the subject of speculation and, in some quarters, anger. Fans and detractors alike are voicing their opinions on the show today, so we invited two of our contributors to offer their opinions in a new feature we’ve dubbed “Opposing Viewpoints”.
Why I’m Excited About Dollhouse — Samantha Chapman
I’ve only been a fan of Joss Whedon for about a year, but I’ve grown quickly to expect a mixture of off-beat humor, fully-developed characters and engaging storylines from his various works. Dollhouse may not be slated to be the comedy of the year, but the concept and potential for intriguing, thought-provoking stories more than anything else are what have me impatient to finally see the show.
For those of us not yet in the know, Dollhouse stars Eliza Dushku (known to Whedon fans as Faith from Buffy) as Echo, a girl whose memories, personality and experiences are cleaned away every night to leave her a blank slate. The titular Dollhouse is the secret facility where Echo and the other Dolls are kept in this blank state, to be rented out to the rich and famous for fantasies, crimes, companionship, or anything else, provided the price is right. Of course, Echo is going to have to make things difficult for her Handlers, when she begins to be self-aware and fight against her mental programming.
The murky moral ground and potential for stories involving wildly different ends of the legal spectrum are what excite me the most about the premise of Dollhouse. It’s easy to think of situations where renting a Doll would be ethically repugnant, but what if you rented one to be your counselor, someone to spill all your secrets to as therapy who will never remember? What if you rented a Doll to infiltrate a crime ring, needing someone untraceable, who can’t be found later for retaliation? The variety is endless, and I trust Joss to come up with as many situations and storylines as he needs to keep the show fresh and lively.
That’s not to say I’m not also excited for some good old-fashioned angsty drama. The potential for really tragic, heartbreaking moments is in the premise as well, and nothing gets to me more than a desperate or bittersweet moment. One thing mentioned at the Dollhouse ComicCon panel was the potential for Echo and FBI Agent Paul Ballard (Tahmoh Penikett, Helo from Battlestar Galactica) to have a first meeting any number of times, as Echo will not remember him. Assuming romantic developments (which I don’t think is too far a leap, here), it can be truly gut-wrenching to watch Paul have to deal with Echo’s memory loss, until he can finally infiltrate the Dollhouse to save her.
So overall, it’s the potential of Dollhouse that has me excited to watch it. Sure, some shows never live up to their premise, but I think that the amount of work and thought put into this one will show, and all of the possible twists and turns will manifest themselves in interesting, exciting ways. My mind has already flown about looking for plots, and I haven’t been thinking about this nearly as long as the writers have. I’ll just have to wait, watch, and hope that I’m not disappointed.
Why I’m Not Excited about Dollhouse — Genevieve Valentine
Long story short: Dollhouse offers nothing worth being excited about.
Long story: While it’s a chance for staff writers to play with their pet genres (Spies! Geishas! Hackers! Chefs!), there are so many problems that not even forgettable plots or Shakespeare quotes from that programming nerd trying not to be like any of Whedon’s other programming nerds can distract from them.
And sure, it’s a pilot, but it’s Joss’s reshot pilot; that these problems remain after a second pass does not inspire confidence.
There are the large problems: why go to so much trouble with erasable minds when many other TV secret agents have done far more than negotiate with kidnappers and dance in a short dress as the camera goes for upskirt shots?
There are the small problems: if they need another member, will they have to shift all the coffin-beds in that round bedroom? Does no one notice people climbing in and out of a huge black kidnapper van? What was the burning need for a co-ed shower?
There are the casting problems: Eliza Dushku cannot sell three of the four personas she attempts in the pilot. Tahmoh Penikett frowned manfully and took cell-phone videos, and everyone else meandered through IKEA sets dropping exposition. (This will, presumably, improve, though Dushku in the lead is a problem Whedon made for himself.)
There are the script problems: exposition was still being dropped in minute forty-five.
There are the subtext problems: our heroine’s first assignment was to be hot. (For this we need mindwiped secret agents?) Her second assignment involved a persona who had been abused as a child by the kidnapper she was going to face, which turned her into a timid victim (and, frankly, seems a pretty avoidable misstep).
And finally, there is the problem of stakes: despite the effort to attach us to Dushku’s character with a teaser about her past (an insufferable, aimless co-ed), Dushku’s performance is not compelling enough to make us care about what happens to her – not a good sign for a show.
Watch the premiere yourself:
And tell us: Which side of the fence do you fall on?
1 • Cat Rambo said:
February 14th, 2009 at 7:15 pm, permalink
I’m going to wait and see – I liked Buffy, Angel, and Firefly enough that I’ll give Whedon a few episodes to win me over.
I’d rather see Firefly revived, tho…
2 • Kathy Sedia said:
February 14th, 2009 at 9:13 pm, permalink
I ahevn’t seen since the premise doesn’t interest me. I was never a Joss Whedon fan though.
3 • Jonathan Ashline said:
February 14th, 2009 at 11:32 pm, permalink
Gasp, how can you not be a fan of Joss Whedon?
I got into Angel about midway through the series and absolutely loved Firefly so I was totally on board when I heard about Dollhouse being developed. My only hope is that FOX gives it more of a chance than they did Firefly.
4 • Lucien E. G. Spelman said:
February 15th, 2009 at 9:12 am, permalink
It’s an interesting premise, but I’m not much on Dukshu, and there was waaaay too much exposition in the writing. The concept isn’t that difficult, do we need to be beat over the head with it?
I’ll keep watching for a while to give it a chance, because I liked firefly.
5 • Adela P said:
February 15th, 2009 at 8:43 pm, permalink
I’m pretty excited about this show — I think, like Samantha Chapman said, it will be interesting to watch how Joss balances all of the human trafficking metaphors, and it will be particularly interesting to watch how the characters deal with the Dollhouse crossing endless ethical and moral boundaries.
6 • Ben Francisco said:
February 16th, 2009 at 1:09 pm, permalink
The two of you have perfectly captured the ambivalence I felt about the pilot and the show’s prospects. The premise has so many great possibiities, and there were some nice moments in the pilot, but a few too many weak ones. Hopefully things will only get better as Joss and his team get warmed up.
The dollhouse itself, with the coed showers and bizarre coffin beds, was actually my favorite thing. yes, it makes no sense, but that’s the kind of wonderfully surrealist touch i love in Whedon’s stuff.
7 • Tanya McDonald said:
February 16th, 2009 at 3:55 pm, permalink
It took me a while to shake the idea that Echo wasn’t just Faith in a weird spin-off. I’d like to say that I enjoyed the show, but in truth, it did not hook me like Joss Whedon’s other shows. I’m finding it difficult to care about any of the characters, knowing so little about them. Hopefully “Dollhouse” can find a bit of humor to balance it out. I’m hoping to be swayed by future episodes, which I’ll watch as long as they appear on Hulu, but I too would like to see a return to “Firefly.” Or if not that, then more “Dr. Horrible.”
8 • Paul Jessup said:
February 16th, 2009 at 4:33 pm, permalink
It’s odd, but this didn’t feel like a Joss Whedon show. I think it’s because he excels in quirky characters, and this show has none to speak of.
I don’t know, I’m giving it a few episodes, but in the end I just feel meh.
9 • Paul Jessup said:
February 17th, 2009 at 9:27 am, permalink
Oh- and is it just me, or is “echo” just a rehash of River Tam? Like an exact exact rehash. Like, science makes killer robot babes that speak in baby talk kind of rehash.
And also (I swear, this is it)- why can’t Joss Whedon make a strong female character who is not abused? The abuse/rape seems to be the only impetus he knows about for making women into soldiers/fighters/paladins/whatever.
Why can’t they just do it because they want to? My ex-sister in law joined the army because she thought firing a gun was fun. Had no “bad history” at all. If it works in real life, why not on television?
So, yeah. This show was a let down.
10 • Silviamg said:
February 18th, 2009 at 4:32 pm, permalink
I think it’s an established convention in sci-fi and fantasy that no woman becomes a killer/soldier/rogue agent unless she has suffered sexual abuse.
11 • Andrew Kno said:
February 19th, 2009 at 6:27 pm, permalink
I, too, was disappointed. I’ll gladly watch the remainder of the season, but so far I have diminished expectations. I’ve given up on seeing a return of Firefly, though at this point it’s by far the better show.
12 • Carbonel said:
February 20th, 2009 at 6:56 pm, permalink
Although Ms. Valentine ’s concerns with the script (pacing was problematic) and casting (the challenge for any lead actress/actor in this show’s design are huge) are spot on, she does demonstrate that yes, we do need “dumbed down” T.V. and movies. Audiences, even bright and presumably genre-savvy ones, simply don’t or won’t pay attention.
The Dollhouse cast aren’t secret agents. They aren’t (really) super-specialists: they’re disposable people. How do you get “the best” in the field, when what you want is to make that person disappear as soon as you’ve gotten what you wanted from them? Not to mention that “control freak” and “ultra-rich amoral person” probably go hand-in-hand fairly often. Of course, if the premise of the Dollhouse’s ability to create whatever skill set + persona the client wants is that they are able to mine real people for characteristics, every so often they’re going to get “minor” “it’s a 1-in-a-million chance” details that can make a scenario go sideways. I could go on, but the show is detail-rich in both explaining issues (beyond the genre-convention that “powerful Evol agencies / corporations / departments can exist and do misdeeds in Total Secrecy” which is about as bogus as trans-light speed, but hey, I liked Star Trek, Star-Gate, &etc.) and showcasing potential within-story problems. If, that is, you were paying attention. But do you want to?
Because, as Valentine pointed out, the WAY the info was doled out to the viewer was not particularly well-done…
At the moment, none of the dollhouse characters are “strong women,” (unless you’re willing to grant that people w/out personal integrity are strong: I’m not, so that leaves out the boss) All the dollhouse women are broken people, who’ve now become disposable people. These are “secret agents” sans personal agency. The promise is that Echo will regain her integrity and agency and become strong in the course of the show.
Can Whedon & Co solve the structural problems; can the cast shake down and grow into their roles before the audience capable of paying attention (obviously not a very large percentage of the market share to begin with) runs out of patience?
“Let’s see what happens”
P.S. Came by for the D&D webcomic review; still exploring…
13 • Constance said:
February 23rd, 2009 at 11:50 am, permalink
[ "Assuming romantic developments (which I don’t think is too far a leap, here), it can be truly gut-wrenching to watch Paul have to deal with Echo’s memory loss, until hecan finally infiltrate the Dollhouse to save her." ]
And this is just one of the off-putters.
Love, C.
14 • Davien said:
March 1st, 2009 at 3:08 pm, permalink
I disagree with Carbonel that television must be inherently “dumb” for the American audience to enjoy it. While CSI is hardly a doctoral dissertation, its content is clearly above the average intellectually, and it has one of the largest television followings. The same could be said for ST:TNG. What is disappointing to me is the assertion that television must be dumb to be enjoyable, and that is the reason Dollhouse has been a failure.
No, Dollhouse is a failure because it does not meet with the expectations that have been set for the fan base by the creators. It is not smarter than any other show. It does not require additional investment in thought than an average action drama. It fails because, with the exception of the excuse to objectify the actress as a mechanism of plot or theme, it’s boring. The witty dialog that made Angel, Buffy, Firefly, and Dr. Horrible so enjoyable is almost completely absent in Dollhouse. Character interaction is minimal. Instead of a rich and zany universe heavily laced with dark irony, we’re given a sober and boring re-envisioning of the universe in which we already live– a universe that takes itself far too seriously. This is a problem compounded by the fact that other shows with similar plotlines have been explored (and recently) with failure (My Own Worst Enemy, for example, whose sense of humor was much better than Dollhouse all said). Even the characters fail to be distinctive because of the very device that drives the plot.
No, instead of offering a sympathetic character, Dollhouse offers a pound of flesh. Dushku has a limited range of acting and can not sell the diversity of character this show requires. But, they can show her “nearly naked” or in teasingly erotic costume during every commercial break, teaser trailer, or Hulu promotion, and that should be enough to make people want to watch, right? Jennifer Garner did this better in Alias and even she succeeded in being a real person during the show.
The overall premise could be a compelling one, but the handling is far too shallow. The mystery of who Echo is, and who is looking for her, and why she did this to herself isn’t explored well enough to carry the show. Instead, we see droll examples of how a Doll can be used in a predictable and ultimately boring episodic mash-up with the mystery as an occasional side item. The only exploration of the broader context of the show is handled through dry and long exposition, boring monologue, and the far too obvious egotism of the chief computer geek who is The Exact Same Character that Whedon Always Uses.
I would not blame this failure on Whedon. I believe he is creative and competent as a writer. But, maybe this is a sign that his creative flow is wedged in the wrong machine.
15 • Randy Henderson said:
March 14th, 2009 at 3:35 am, permalink
I’m a Whedon fan. Like Cat, I’ll give the show a chance. But here are my concerns:
1. Dushku is Dushku. She doesn’t have a lot of range. At least, I haven’t seen anything to convince me otherwise. So this is exactly the wrong role for her — one where we have to believe she’s someone different every week.
2. Whedon excels at ensemble shows. The witty banter and evolving character interactions are core to his success. BUT how do you truly form a group around or have relationships and witty repartee with someone who doesn’t remember anything, who has no sense of personality or self, no pop-cultural references, no memories of being happy or angry with you, etcetera? Everyone just seems at odds, and not in a fun way.
3. I’m giving Whedon a little time to address the morally and ethically questionable aspects of human female “dolls.” I think he will. If he doesn’t, I’ll be very disappointed.
4. Is it too soon to have a musical episode?
5. Guaranteed, if anyone does find true love, he’ll kill the love interest. Tara, Anya, Cordelia, Winifred, Wash, Penny — what? You’ve found your perfect soulmate? Bye bye. As certain a flag of doom as a red shirt. I think Whedon must have really had his heart ripped apart at some point.
16 • Jonathan Ashline said:
March 14th, 2009 at 6:52 pm, permalink
Randy, I just wanna point out that there are male “dolls” as well. Just because the show is focused around a female doll becoming self-aware doesn’t mean that there aren’t ethical questions to be raised about the use of all the actives, whether male or female.
I’m sure Whedon intends to address the moral and ethical implications in due time. That’s pretty much what the whole show is centered around.
Oh, and Firefly didn’t get a musical episode in their 14 episode run so I wouldn’t expect Dollhouse to have one until next season at the earliest.
17 • Rachel said:
March 23rd, 2009 at 3:26 pm, permalink
I’ve watched all the episodes so far, and I do think they are improving. While I have many of the same concerns expressed above, the steady improvement of the show gives me hope that they will be addressed. For example, they started to address some of the moral/ethical implications last week (SPOILER) when one of the handlers was having sex with his charge. Someone (I think it was the handler) asks why it’s okay for their clients to have sex with Sierra b/c she thinks she’s in love with them, but he can’t do it.
I miss the normal witty Whedon banter, but I’m starting to know some of the characters as people and there are enough interesting plot lines to keep me watching. The person I’m most intrigued by is DeWitt. She truly cares that the dolls aren’t abused in their inactive state, but she can be very uncaring when they’re active. The fact that she’s willing to loose face to warn the other dollhouses about the sexual abuse problem is just one recent facet that I find interesting.
I also want to see if my guess for the insider at the Dollhouse is right. I think it’s Ivy, but my opinion is tainted by the fact that the actress who plays Ivy was Agent Lee on NCIS who turned out to be a double agent. We shall see
18 • Jon G said:
March 23rd, 2009 at 4:05 pm, permalink
I’ve been following Dollhouse from the inception. It’s got layers, and more is going on under the surface than is apparent. There’s Alpha, a Doll who went rogue and killed everyone he met, except Echo. Why?
Then there was the latest episode where Echo meets Pennikett and tells him the Doll House is real, and that she was programmed by someone inside.
The business is about renting out Dolls, but that’s not the purpose of the Dollhouses. There’s stuff here waiting to percolate up, and given his history, I’m willing to wait and see what happens. So far, I’m pleased with what I see on the horizon, and the episodes, while not Firelfly or Angelesque, are engaging.
19 • Foxessa said:
March 25th, 2009 at 4:33 pm, permalink
A progress report, review, assessment of Dollhouse so far, particularly episode 6, the most recent episode, on Alas a Blog. The episode appears to be about rape. It’s a rave. You can see it here.
Anyone else see the episode and agree with the poster’s take?
20 • Foxessa said:
March 25th, 2009 at 4:37 pm, permalink
A progress report, review, assessment of Dollhouse so far, particularly the most recent episode, on Alas a Blog. The episode appears to be about rape. It’s a rave.
Anyone else see the episode and agree with the poster’s take?
You can see it here.
21 • Rachel said:
March 25th, 2009 at 7:09 pm, permalink
@ Foxessa
Thanks for pointing out that review. I thought it was very interesting, and there is a good discussion going on in the comments. I hadn’t even considered the institutional rape aspect.
22 • Foxessa said:
March 31st, 2009 at 12:40 pm, permalink
If anyone’s interested there’s another Alas, A Blog, discussion re Dollhouse here.
Love, C.
23 • Jaym said:
April 2nd, 2009 at 8:41 pm, permalink
Dollhouse has failed to catch more than passing interest from me, despite the fascination I have with former Whedon shows. There is no perception of strong characters so far, unlike Spike or Mal, who nearly scream character the moment they step on-screen.
On the other hand, how difficult must it be to have a show as great as Firefly just suddenly yanked? A lot of Dollhouse seems to be “hey, look, this is traditional TV, maybe it will stay on-air!”. If Dollhouse stays on air for a while, maybe the plot will loosen up and Whedon will find his stride with a non-fantasy/science-fiction plot.
24 • Tweet said:
April 11th, 2009 at 11:49 am, permalink
I’ve continued to watch Dollhouse because writers and actors that I enjoy work on it. But week to week I am increasingly dissapointed in the shallow conceit of passing rape, submission and torture off as escapist fun because it’s housed in a hermetically sealed designer showcase. At the end of each show the “good guys” (FBI, NSA) fail and the “bad guys” (pimps, handlers and abusers of Dollhouse) win. As in The Prisoner, Gilligan’s Island and The Fugitive each episode ends with the heroes being thwarted in their escape and/or mission. As nice and sweet as Ballard is his job is to take Echo out so she can be at the mercy of men who rape, beat and hunt her like an animal — he may rescue her when things rough but only so that he can help the Dollhouse pimp her out again.
What’s truly troubling is the appeal this show has to the disturbed men who fantasize about kidnapping, drugging and raping women. These aren’t dolls or robots, they are real people. And sadly there are real criminals who probably think they’ve died and gone to serial killer heaven with this show. Any woman who’s been a victim of such abuse is not going to find the Dollhouse empowering. All it does is feed an abusive fantasy that probably should be left to SVU where at least the rapists get jail time. Why does a so-called feminist like Joss make a show that celebrates and glamorizes hurting women and men in this way? I guess that’s what I find the saddest. He should work the phones at a rape counseling service for a few hours and see if he finds the Dollhouse so enchanting after he hears from real people who were drugged into being submissive and were then raped.
25 • Stephanie said:
April 13th, 2009 at 11:01 pm, permalink
The hardest thing for a fan to see is their favourite writer trying something new or different from the style or stories that made the fan fall in love with them in the first place. I read through a number of the reviews and so many people seem to be so disappointed in Dollhouse and they have a right to their opinions of course, but some of the comments make me frustrated. You can of course like or dislike a show based on what it is, but how unfair is it to dislike it because it’s not like previous shows from that writer?
Dollhouse is a fascinating show and I think it really demonstrates Whendon’s willingness to try something new. It’s scary and he should be commended for that. Though it doesn’t have the witty one liners that Buffy and even Firefly were riddled with, it’s not really supposed to have that tone to it. He’s doing something serious and he WANTS it to be serious. It is effectively a comdedy/fantasy/sci-fi writer attempting to move out of his comfort zone and write a modern day mystery with a touch of the future mixed in. He’s addressing a fascinating idea and demonstrating just how scary our world could become with what he’s doing. Even the issues he is looking at and exploring are questions that may one day need to be answered.
Right now he is using people as examples, calling them dolls and exploring what it means if a person is effectively treated like a machine. Is it right to program someone, an actual person, to be something they aren’t? There are advances in robotics in a number of places, to the point where they now have “sex dolls” being created, robots who are created solely for the purpose of sex. Sound familiar? I think Whedon should be commended for Dollhouse and I really hope it continues until he’s finished exploring what he wants to explore with his writing.
Generally, if you don’t like his current work that’s fine, that’s totally up to you, but give him some credit at the very least for stretching himself as a writer and doing something different. Firefly was fantastic, so was Buffy, but the biggest thing I have to keep in mind with Whedon is that he likes to start things off in the middle of things, it’s not often he starts at the beginning of a story. Even Buffy doesn’t technically start at the beginning of Buffy’s introduction into being a Vampire Slayer. Give it a chance and I’m sure Dollhouse will start to pull people in. He doesn’t write true one shot stories, and that is a strength as far as I’m concerned. I for one can hardly wait to find out what happens next!
26 • Fantasy Magazine » Taboos And Tropes: Part II “Rhetoric And Writing About Rape” said:
April 29th, 2009 at 8:26 am, permalink
[...] will be quick to respond, as in the following excerpt from Fantasy Magazine’s column, “Opposing Viewpoints.” I’ve continued to watch Dollhouse because writers and actors that I enjoy work on it. [...]
27 • The Deviant, Disappointing, Often Dim-Witted Debacle of Dollhouse 1.0 | Fancast News said:
August 21st, 2009 at 10:31 pm, permalink
[...] Genevieve Valentine rather succinctly offered up in a point/counterpoint discussion at darkfantasy.org: “Our heroine’s first assignment was to be hot. For this we need mind-wiped secret [...]
28 • Examined: What Went Wrong With Dollhouse? said:
September 26th, 2009 at 8:41 am, permalink
[...] Genevieve Valentine rather succinctly offered up in a point/counterpoint discussion at darkfantasy.org: “Our heroine’s first assignment was to be hot. For this we need mind-wiped secret [...]
29 • Examined: What Went Wrong With Dollhouse? said:
September 26th, 2009 at 8:41 am, permalink
[...] Genevieve Valentine rather succinctly offered up in a point/counterpoint discussion at darkfantasy.org: “Our heroine’s first assignment was to be hot. For this we need mind-wiped secret [...]