Whedonesque : Comments on 16312 : (SPOILER) Zap2it reviews Dollhouse pilot script.

Dollhouse comes across as darker in tone and slower in pace than anything Whedon has previously attempted and while there's humor sprinkled throughout, the sensation at the end is one of overarching menace and also sadness.

Further cementing my suspicion that we're going to see, at least to some degree and in some fashion, the after-effects of Joss' one-time comment that BSG made him feel like returning to writing school. This is, after all, the first Joss TV since he said that.

theonetruebix | May 13, 00:51 CET

This sounds absolutely glorious, just the type of thing I've been craving, even though I'm sure I'll miss some of the gleeful quippy-ness that made all of Joss's other shows so much fun. But the description does sound worrisome as far as getting new viewers on board. It doesn't sound like the kind of show that will draw in the kind of numbers it will probably need to keep it around.

Then again, maybe I'm wrong in underestimating the viewing public.

But glancing at TV Guide to see what's on tonight, I kind of doubt it.

Lirazel | May 13, 00:54 CET

Somewhat unrelated, but literally a few minutes ago I was thinking about how cool it would be to have a good old Shakespearean tragedy-style television series. Where there are no happy endings, where the only good things that happen to our characters just set them up for a further fall. I don't know, I just think that kind of thing is missing from television these days. We seem to be in a rut where, however bad things get, in the end there's always a silver lining...

Anyway, for me, that's what I'm hoping to get out of Dollhouse. I dare say for other people, that might be the least thing they'd want. It's still anyone's guess at this stage, of course.

MattK | May 13, 01:07 CET

How spoilery is this review? Are we talking major plot twists revealed? I wanna read, but I don't wanna be overly ruined. However, I don't consider things like character names or episode premises to be spoilers... so...

I dunno. How bad is it?

Jobo | May 13, 01:08 CET

It's not too spoilery. I think you'll be fine Jobo, go ahead and read!

[ edited by RCM on 2008-05-13 03:01 ]

RCM | May 13, 01:18 CET

I'd like that kind of thing too, MattK. I always admire people who aren't afraid to go for the sad ending.

swanjun | May 13, 02:00 CET

I'm also a fan of the sad endings, however I do like a little happy mixed in there every so often. The dark tone of the show's got me excited. I certainly wasn't expecting it.

Supersymmetrical | May 13, 02:16 CET

Well, people who want to go for the sad ending only exist in soaps, or anyone who watched "The Wire", but not on mainstream prime-time TV. Some viewers want the happy ending because it gives them hope, something reality doesn't always provide. I am hoping Fox gives "Dollhouse" a fair chance to show that it can be the "maverick" network it claimed to be 20 years ago. Considering that we can always turn to cable for that, it could convince the networks to make that move.
While I am sure people will see "Echo" as a woman who rebels against a "society" that decies who see is and what she'll be, what will they think if
she can't...at least not before sweeps? I suspect this could be where Joss will be aiming his overall plan, with the story of a "doll" that tried to be a real live girl..but didn't make it. Can we respect such a show, or at least have the chance to do so? I hope we can.

impalergeneral | May 13, 02:25 CET

It sounds totally [insert non-gender specific term of wow]!

Sh'boom.

Pointy | May 13, 02:26 CET

"...a profound meditation on identity."

Oh, yeah - that's what I'm talkin' about.

And also, as has been mentioned, it occurs to me that it makes sense if Topher ends up being the "Joss" character - Joss the writer is "imprinting" Eliza-the-actress with all of the roles she plays on the show.

It's got a nice - albeit also creepy - meta resonance, or something like that...

Whatever the what... I am looking forward to this whenever it happens... I ain't going nowhere - that I know of.

QuoterGal | May 13, 02:50 CET

And also, as has been mentioned, it occurs to me that it makes sense if Topher ends up being the "Joss" character - Joss the writer is "imprinting" Eliza-the-actress with all of the roles she plays on the show.

*backs away from this road of discussion*

I'm quite looking forward to this show. In some ways, it reminds me of the X-Files endings: nothing was usually resolved, leaving a sad, bittersweet, unknowing feeling.

I miss that.

korkster | May 13, 03:05 CET

Cynical, tragic shows, like "The Wire", and "Battlestar Galactica" tend to be excellent, but even on cable have a hard time finding decent sized audiences. I have a bad feeling this may too.
Still, even if "Dollhouse" doesn't make it, I love the idea of the dark, tragic tone, and would rather have a few episodes like that than a long running show that conforms to normal network garbage (not saying all network shows are garbage, just most).

RCM | May 13, 03:17 CET

I'm getting more and more excited about this! Joss already made our hearts stop so many times with cruel cruel things, that I can't wait to see what he'll do with us telling a story with a darker tone!! [and I know this sounds quite masoquist, but u all get what I'm talking about].

maxsummers | May 13, 03:40 CET

If it doesn't catch on at least we're guaranteed seven episodes off the bat.
Is FOX going to promote Dollhouse to the extent that they promoted The Sarah Connor Chronicles? Cause if they don't... maybe we, the fans, should figure out some way to promote it as well. Like an unofficial viral campaign.

xerox | May 13, 03:41 CET

xerox, I can't imagine a scenario in which they wouldn't promote it as least as much as Terminator.

TamaraC | May 13, 03:53 CET

Not to be the ultra-pessimist (also, this is my very first posting here at Whedon-of-Esque so... hi!) but to recap what Whedoncamp-related shows Fox has cancelled in the past...

- "Firefly" (2002)

- "Wonderfalls" (2004)

- "The Inside" (2005)

- "Drive" (2007)

... so, considering all of the above and the beautifully-dark (or gray-ish) plot and plight of "Dollhouse," I have a feeling there is going to be quite a fight ahead of fans and newcomers alike at least in the beginning to keep its' head above the Nielsen rapids.

If the King of Cancellation tries to pull a timeslot switch and swap with "Dollhouse" ala "Firefly" then color me all kinds of future-pissed! On the complete opposite side of the coin though, with a potential future lineup with the likes of "Dollhouse," "Fringe" and "Virtuality" I may very well become an avid 20th Century Television watcher like I've quite never been before.

J Linc | May 13, 05:06 CET

Contradicting what the article implies, I would like to think that the strong Whedon fan following can make this show a hit, regardless of the network it is shown on. Though, maybe I've just been waiting for this for so long that I've gone delusional.

missedith | May 13, 05:09 CET

FOX can't be so stupid that they completely ignore the influence fans can have over their network's image ... right?

quantum | May 13, 05:22 CET

Well, let's remember that FOX isn't a person, it's a business. While I think (and others have said) that a network may take certain types of fan support into account, in the end it's pretty simple: the show either gets enough viewers or it doesn't. If it doesn't, sentiment (and fan "influence") be damned. The question is how much is enough? (On Fox, that's going to be a larger number than it was on the WB). Another question might be, where will the non-hardcore Whedon viewers (let's call them the softcore . . .) come from? Let's also remember that nearly all shows end up canceled. It's the miraculous few that can choose to go out on top.

Truth be told, I'm only interested in the content. Scheduling and timing and networks and stuff give me a headache. Roll on mid-season.

SoddingNancyTribe | May 13, 05:49 CET

SoddingNancyTribe is correct on every score here. Most shows fail during their first season (if they're lucky enough to have a season at all). Admittedly, that's partly because most shows are - frankly - crappy. But it's also because this is a ratings driven business. If people aren't watching your shows, you aren't making money.

To reiterate a point, though - I don't think we Whedon fans are as many as we like to think. I think that's really worth keeping in mind.

The biggest thing we, the fans, can do - if you want to - is to tell people about the show. And not in a freaky 'conversion' way. If you see a Buffy fan you know, ask them if they know Joss Whedon and a lot of the old Buffy team have a new TV show coming out soon. I bet they don't know. We're hardcore fans; we know. Average joe? Probably not. Bring in that initial Buffy audience and you've got 4 million viewers for the first episode. Which isn't near enough, but it's a certain demographic and it would absolutely help this thing stick.

I'm guessing here, but prior experience with FOX suggests a show around the publicly quoted licensing fee needs around a 10% share of viewers or more. Ideally more. If you launch with less, it's gonna go like that CLASSIC Will Smith song, boom boom shake the room.

The biggest single impact on that is going to be down to FOX's marketing, and is entirely out of our hands. So let's not worry about it. Let's have sex instead!

It suddenly just went quiet.

On the plus side, I'm pretty sure the upfronts presentation tomorrow will include actual material about the show. You know, content. Not just scheduling. Huzzah!

gossi | May 13, 07:04 CET

The biggest thing we, the fans, can do - if you want to - is to tell people about the show. And not in a freaky 'conversion' way.

Agreed. As there was a backlash from fans promoting Serenity. We did come over as zealots.

Simon | May 13, 07:20 CET

At times, yeah. Like the period where every reviewer was getting hate mail for saying Wash looked funny (he does!) was pretty grim. But, hey, that movie did much better than Speed Racer.

gossi | May 13, 07:27 CET

The notion that there's an essential sadness pervading the script has me intrigued and happy; the review sounds like it could be kissing cousins with one of my favorite Joss-written episodes ever, "Objects in Space". Philosophical, melancholy, centering on a lost, mind-crazy young girl. I can't wait.

dottikin | May 13, 07:32 CET

There really is nothing than a melancholic Joss episode. I never was too much of a fan of the "funny" ones (The Zeppo). Come to think about it I was never too much of a fan of Xander-centric episodes. I hated the way he just seemed to get over the fact Anya died suddenly and started quipping about shopping. (Yes, I do realize there was no time for mourning. But why the quip?) Thankfully they are now addressing it with the Dracula arc in the comics. Wait? Is this a Dollhouse forum? Sorry, I guess I just needed to get that out. Anyway, here's to a thought provoking new show, one of the few sure to be out there at the time. I can't wait to find out why the Eliza character is allowing this to happen to her. Or is she?

fakename29 | May 13, 07:58 CET

Personally, I liked the funny episodes of Buffy more. Although when they did The Big Drama, they tended to do it well.

gossi | May 13, 08:04 CET

I love the "funny" episodes of Buffy. But darkness is great, if done well. And I would bet my house that Joss, and the team he has so far assembled, will do this very well in. In the same way that IMHO RTD's Doctor Who fails to do, for example. His idea of darkeness is a quick scene of the Doctor being really angry and shouting, with no depth behind it, usually in a clear-cut "Whie Hat Good, Black Hat Bad" situation.
If Dollhouse is going to be dark then bring it on!

zz9 | May 13, 09:05 CET

I wonder if Fox is planning on Eliza Dushku rather than, or as much as, Joss bringing in the ratings, and also wondering if they delayed 'til mid-season to allow more of her movies to come out first. None of them look like blockbusters, but they'll at least get her more exposure. She's already more famous than any of the leads of the previous shows were before them.

dreamlogic | May 13, 09:17 CET

It's slightly worrisome because Joss's non-linear work is sometimes less than enthusiastically received, even among the faithful. "Restless" has its lovers and its detractors, and "Objects in Space" is somewhat of the same beast. I love both those episodes now, but not the first times I saw them. Each re-watch deepened the pleasure I got out of each episode, and usually I'm the kind of person who can watch something three times and then no more.

If Dollhouse is a melancholy exploration of identity and self, I wonder if it has a place on network TV. It would be great paired with AMC's Mad Men, or could shore up a sinking HBO brand. I guess the only thing to do is wait and see.

dottikin | May 13, 09:47 CET

Reading Zap2it piece has actually depressed me. The more excited I get about the show, the more worried that it wouldn't catch with the wider public.

A lot will depend on Fox's promotion; but an over-the top fan campaign can actually put off more people than it can attract.

Effulgent | May 13, 10:29 CET

""Restless" has its lovers and its detractors, and "Objects in Space" is somewhat of the same beast."

Huh, I didn't know those two episodes where controversial with Joss fans. I think they're both brilliant, among the best of their respective shows, but to each their own of course.

Also, I agree, the structure just sounds to, um, sophisticated (shrug, lack of better words) for the FOX network. Hopefully there is enough of a sci-fi element to keep the more mainstream, less Joss loving, television viewers interested. Even still, FOX has the annoying tendency of fucking over (are we allowed to swear here, will edit with frak if needed) the occasional good show, so yah, I'm still worried. The content sounds fascinating, I just hope Whedon's right about the new network executives, and they give this show every chance to succeed. It"s going to need it.

[ edited by RCM on 2008-05-13 12:20 ]

RCM | May 13, 10:40 CET

I've got to join in with RCM. The Wikipedia entry mentions what "... led to (Restless) becoming a favorite among Buffy fans..." And the Whedonesque link What's your favorite Firefly episode has OiS and Out of Gas running for the lead.

I think the author is trying to point out how Dollhouse is different than what we are used to seeing (from Joss, or the networks), rather than making an absolute statement. So saying that the show will be darker and more existential than, say, "The A-Team", doesn't mean we won't get humor and explosions.

OneTeV | May 13, 12:03 CET

Yeah, the show is still very Jossy, you don't need to worry about that. There's still the wit and cleverness that we've come to expect, but it is definitely a little darker than what he's done in the past.

I don't think it'll be too hard for mainstream audiences to get into, but then again I'm not any kind of television journalist. Just a fan.

Oh, and Objects and Restless are also among my favourite episodes from their respective series's.

[ edited by Racoon Boy on 2008-05-13 12:18 ]

Racoon Boy | May 13, 12:16 CET

"Yeah, the show is still very Jossy, you don't need to worry about that. There's still the wit and cleverness that we've come to expect, but it is definitely a little darker than what he's done in the past."

Racoon Boy, you speak as if you've seen it. Have you read the pilot or something?

RCM | May 13, 12:33 CET

The great thing about Dollhouse is the premise is very wide. If you think things are getting too serious, you could imprint Echo and the gang with musical skills and have them be a band. (Challenge to Tim Minear: make THAT a workable script). Or if it's getting too sappy, you can have an actiony episode, where the gang rob a bank, a top secret Russian facility - you name it.

That's why Dollhouse rocks. The characters can be anything; and so can your episodes. Joss ain't stoopid. I, on the other hand, just said stoopid.

[ edited by gossi on 2008-05-13 13:08 ]

gossi | May 13, 12:50 CET

I'm getting more and more excited about the whole premise of Dollhouse. The shift towards darker material worked well in Angel (relative to Buffy) and produced some of the best TV in a long while. Having said that keeping some of the humour is a must - especially as we're now aiming at a mainstream audience.

DreamDancer | May 13, 12:57 CET

Where there are no happy endings, where the only good things that happen to our characters just set them up for a further fall.

Well you could always just rewatch Six Feet Under ;). Very much looking forward to seeing what Joss brings us come midseason. I also feel compelled to point out for the billionth time that this is not the same Fox that cancelled all of your favorite shows. Fox is now headed by a really good guy named Kevin Reilly. What has Kevin done? Glad you asked:

Early in his career at NBC, Reilly supervised Law & Order in its first season and developed ER. After his first stint at NBC, Reilly was President of Brad Grey Television, the television production arm of Brillstein-Grey Entertainment. He joined Brillstein-Grey in 1994 and helped build the television studio into one of the most successful independent suppliers of television programming. He was responsible for shepherding some of television’s top shows, such as the pilot for The Sopranos, and the NBC comedies Just Shoot Me and NewsRadio.

Before rejoining NBC in May 2004, Reilly served as President of Entertainment for FX, where he developed and launched the cable network's first original drama, The Shield. He also developed and programmed Nip/Tuck and the Denis Leary show Rescue Me for the network. [1]

At NBC, Reilly's vocal support of The Office helped it survive its low-rated first season. [2] He is credited with developing hits such as My Name Is Earl, Heroes, 30 Rock, and Friday Night Lights.[3] Despite having received a new three-year contract at NBC in February 2007, he and NBC mutually agreed to terminate the partnership in late May 2007, and Reilly departed soon after.[4]. Approximately one month later, Reilly was hired as President of Entertainment at FOX.

Does that mean it will go on to frolic in the dark places for 7 seasons? No, but I believe it will get a fair chance to find its audience with Mr. Reilly watching over it.

zeitgeist | May 13, 14:35 CET

That was quite a resume, that guy has. Sounds very promising. Thanks for posting that zeitgeist. Looking forward to the official word from FOX on thursday.

Garim | May 13, 14:42 CET

Thanks for the info, zeitgeist. ER and Newsradio rank highly among my favorites of television past.

Truth be told, I'm only interested in the content.

It's all about the content. And the content sounds amazing from the bits that have been leaked.

Sunfire | May 13, 15:01 CET

Whedon mixes elements of the conspiracy thriller with what threatens to become a profound meditation on identity.

Threaten away, Joss.

The thing about this statement, is that it's struck me before this that so much in the Buffyverse has been a meditation on the meaning of identity. So many characters undergo major shifts of personality - Angel ("you wouldn't like me happy") most spectacularly of course, but so many other characters become possessed in some way. Who are they then? Is Joyce still really Joyce when she's under a glamor that makes her willing to murder her own daughter? Is Dark Willow really Willow? Who is Buffy when she believes she is psychotic? To what extent are people responsible for their actions when they are "possessed" by other personalities? Why does Angel feel he needs to spend eternity atoning for his behavior as Angelus while Anya doesn't seem at all perturbed, nor does anyone else, about the murder rate she raked up?

Not that I expect answers to any of these questions. Just pointing out that these kinds of issues have been intrinsic to Joss' work all along. It sounds as though they are front and center to the new work.

barboo | May 13, 16:27 CET

If you think things are getting too serious, you could imprint Echo and the gang with musical skills and have them be a band.

To me, this actually suggests pretty clearly the danger of the show's premise: It's very susceptible to shark-jumping schtick, should inside or outside pressures demand it.

(Which is not to say that the above example couldn't be done well, necessarily. But honestly I prefer my television not be of the "huh we're getting too X, so let's throw in some Y" variety. I'd rather the creators decide what they want to be, and be it.)

[ edited by theonetruebix on 2008-05-13 17:00 ]

theonetruebix | May 13, 16:59 CET

Well, I think you're taking my example a leetle bit too seriously. I suspect if I went into a pitch meeting for Dollhouse and said "Let's have a rock band episode!" they would punch me in the face. Unless I was Ultimate Drew.

gossi | May 13, 17:31 CET

Rock band? Please. It will be a blues band. On a very special Dollhouse.

Sunfire | May 13, 17:42 CET

An electric blues band.

I'm actually more confident in its chances after reading about Reilly. I know I knew that before, but now I know it again.

UnpluggedCrazy | May 13, 18:43 CET

But gossi's point is well taken, especially as this reviewer seemed to think Dollhouse lacked stand-alone potential. I think it has it in spades, but will have nuggets of arc in it, too.

swanjun | May 13, 18:46 CET

i'm even more excited now, but i still sense some skepticism in the review, which doesn't excite me. sigh. :(

buffyfanatic18 | May 13, 18:49 CET

But gossi hasn't told us if he would still get punched in the face if he pitched a different idea. "Security, toss out the strange guy who broke into the writer's room."

I wonder if Echo's reaction will be similar to Connor's in Angel. "Yeah, they're mixed in there with the new ones. Kind of like, uh...a bad dream I had, I guess. A very strange and violent -- at times, inappropriately erotic -- dream.

OneTeV | May 13, 19:02 CET

I think despite the skepticism that might surround the review, the idea that this show can go in ANY direction is what makes it the perfect tablet for Joss to work on. If Echo can be imprinted in any way, then we should, as fans, be able to look forward to some crazy, sometimes campy, witty, over the top, and yet darkly clever story lines. At this point, nothing can break me of my enthusiasm for this show. Not even FOX. :)

missedith | May 13, 19:14 CET

If Echo can be imprinted in any way, then we should, as fans, be able to look forward to some crazy, sometimes campy, witty, over the top, and yet darkly clever story lines.

Is this true, though? Unlike the fantasy world of Buffy/Angel, and the future world of Firefly, Dollhouse is basically set in a more-or-less real world present. Something about the Buffy/Angel world in particular allowed some serious swings in tone. Firefly less so, but still to an extent.

I'm not yet convinced (which is not to say that I can't BE convinced) that Dollhouse can swing, say, campy, and not lose its center. The Buffyverse, by its nature, could swing over the top and yet somehow remain true to itself. I'm not so sure a more realistic setting lends itself to that.

theonetruebix | May 13, 19:34 CET

I wonder if Echo's reaction will be similar to Connor's in Angel. "Yeah, they're mixed in there with the new ones. Kind of like, uh...a bad dream I had, I guess. A very strange and violent -- at times, inappropriately erotic -- dream.

Another example of the theme of memory and the meaning of identity percolating throughout the Buffyverse.

barboo | May 13, 19:57 CET

If the Buffy 'verse can do human drama without a whiff of fantasy (The Body), yet still stay true itself, I think Dollhouse can go wacky, even without magic in the world. Firefly was based in a realistic--although future--world. Yet River was psycic, and it still managed to work.

I'm sure Joss has been smart enough to build enough flexibility into the world of Dollhouse to allow for the occasional flights of fancy without destroying the tone or contradicting the world.

Dizzy | May 13, 20:11 CET

If the Buffy 'verse can do human drama without a whiff of fantasy (The Body), yet still stay true itself...

That suggests that the question is bi-directional, and I don't believe it necessarily is. Fantasy can go real and yet maintain itself because the fantasy is layered atop a real world.

But I'm not sure that real can go camp (or over the top or wacky or whatever) and maintain itself in the same way.

theonetruebix | May 13, 20:36 CET

That suggests that the question is bi-directional, and I don't believe it necessarily is.

Geeky aside: A implies B does not mean B implies A. Such an obvious thing, yet when I first started doing mathematical proofs, it's easy to forget that, and then realise your proof is only half complete. So depressing. :/

Oh, and I completely agree. If you want gritty realism, you can't just inject a fun episode in there and hope to get away with it.

MattK | May 13, 21:10 CET

The problem here is that we're all projecting our own thoughts on what we think the thing is/should be.

Roll on January! Or Fall! Or Autumn!

gossi | May 13, 21:12 CET

I just re-read the original Dollverse thread, and it was pretty fun. I totally forgot about the Awesome Super Very Excited Club.

Sunfire | May 13, 21:36 CET

Me and Kiba didn't forget.

gossi | May 13, 21:45 CET

That's not anything like the Super Adventure Club, is it?

theonetruebix | May 13, 22:30 CET

It sounds disturbingly like that, B!X - let's hope LRH's folks never find out! Sidenote: gossi, drunk?! What is this world coming to? Oh, same as yesterday, you say? Funny, that ;).

zeitgeist | May 13, 23:00 CET

*ponders what a "This is what Awesome Super Very Excited Club actually believes" video would be like*

theonetruebix | May 13, 23:10 CET

I would dance in it.

No, I'm not going to make it. Whilst sober.

Also, extra amusement - people might remember Sarah Fain and Elizabeth Craft moved to Dollhouse from Women's Murder Club. They were let go of from WMC, so that new show runners could come in. Well, ABC have just canceled WMC anyway. So I think Sarah and Elizabeth kinda got the best deal out of this.

gossi | May 13, 23:16 CET

Yeah, I thought that was pretty poetically fittin' when I read about it, gossi. I think I gave a little sorta nasty chuckle, in fact - and gave a little inner cheer for Sarah and Elizabeth ("You go, girls! Write the hell out of it! Or... into it. Whichever.")

And oh, and in our Dollverse reminiscing (ah, those were the days, huh? I myself was so much younger then...) leave us not forget the original original Dollverse thread, which boasts a whopping 447 comments and bonus Jossian smooches.

QuoterGal | May 14, 01:43 CET

This is obviuosly a stupid question but I'm gonna to ask it anyone and no one can stop me!
Would it be worth having Britney Spears appear on Dollhouse once or twice, if it guaranteed that there would be four seasons of the show?
And it would be more of a cameo... she could appear as an earlier doll that doesn't seem to work right... and they keep her locked away in the basement... and someone finds her down there...

xerox | May 14, 02:37 CET

Not being a fan of anything campy the majority of the time (to me, being campy just automatically equals a ticket to cheesyville), I personally never found "Buffy," "Angel" or "Firefly/Serenity" to be at all of the camp-oriented variety... so, I certainly hope "Dollhouse" won't fit into that mold one bit.

J Linc | May 14, 03:10 CET

I believe, and I'm only half-joking, that I would boycott Dollhouse if it ever put Britney Spears into the show.

theonetruebix | May 14, 05:30 CET

I was in the same boat as theonetruebix, but I suppose that depends on what they had in mind. If it was a "girl getting her teeth checked by Badger" or "mutant shark eats Sam Jackson" type of role, I wouldn't get too upset. (Also fine if she plays the mutant shark instead of the person getting chomped.) But somehow I doubt that would guarantee four seasons.

OneTeV | May 14, 07:48 CET

theonetruebix, why? Because Joss is so susceptible to stunt casting? Or because Britney Spears can't act? I thought she did ok on HIMYM.

dreamlogic | May 14, 07:54 CET

Britney? I do sincerely hope that the things never get desperate enough for Dollhouse to bring in Britney. Not that I have anything against the girl, but mixing something as depressingly mainstream as Britney with a Joss show... Like oil and another kind of oil.

Effulgent | May 14, 09:08 CET

There are persistent rumours that Britney was supposed to play April in "I Was Made to Love You" so it wouldn't be that off the wall, would it?

moley75 | May 14, 10:02 CET

Wow, it's funny that we're already talking about this when the show hasn't even started yet. But anyway, considering that Britney was a huge pop star all over the world when Buffy was in season 5, I think her guest spot would've brought a lot of attention to the show. And, like it or not, The WB aimed Buffy pretty much at the same people who were into Britney at the time. I think I have this old brazilian magazine - called Sci-fi News - with an interview in which Joss says that The WB was in talks with her to guest star in one of their shows. You probably can't find this online because it was an exclusive interview translated for Sci-fi News. I remember he even jocked about it, when the interviewer first asked about Britney he said "We're just good friends". I remember parts of it were terribly translated though, Joss mentioned Emma Caulfield was going be in the opening credits, and they switched her name to Amber Benson.

danielgm86 | May 14, 10:42 CET

Fantasy can go real and yet maintain itself because the fantasy is layered atop a real world.
But I'm not sure that real can go camp (or over the top or wacky or whatever) and maintain itself in the same way.
theonetruebix | May 13, 20:36 CET

I can't really agree. It may be more difficult to pull off, but we're talking Joss here.

Well you could always just rewatch Six Feet Under ;).
zeitgeist | May 13, 14:35 CET

And zeitgeist rests my case. ;-)

Shey | May 14, 10:50 CET

I'm pretty sure the Britney Spears thing was talked about by producers and such at the time.

But, you know, this show isn't Buffy. And I don't think Buffy was camp at all, either, for 99% of the time.

And to be quite honest, I'm not going to worry about Britney Spears appearing in season 4 episode 12, before I've even seen the first one. I might not even like the show, yo.

gossi | May 14, 10:59 CET

I never actually considered the possibility of not liking it... it's Joss and Eliza!!!!! Elizaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!! Is there any way this could be bad??? Kidding aside, I didn't like Firefly at first, but after I saw Serenity I decided to rent the DVDs 'cause I loved the movie so much, and after watching the show again, episodes in the right order and all, I loved it too :D

danielgm86 | May 14, 11:05 CET

If anybody fancies a journey back in time, it's Firefly's premiere on Whedonesque.

gossi | May 14, 12:06 CET

RCM: Yeah, I have the pilot script. Or, at least, a draft of it. It's actually quite fantastic, and you all have nothing to worry about.

Racoon Boy | May 14, 13:10 CET

Holy crap Gossi! The premier of Firefly got only seven comments on Whedonesque! I suppose it was early days for the site, but still.

I suspect Dollhouse episode one will get more comments here. Double that number at least!

zz9 | May 14, 13:19 CET

Nobody likes the "River" character, though.
My, how things change.

Actually, since I'm a "discovered Joss on DVD" person, I've wondered what it will be like to see just one episode of the new show. There's no way I could have predicted from the first episode of Buffy, Angel or Firefly how much I would come to love the series. But of course Joss has got so much credibility with me now that I would keep watching even if I didn't like it at first.

And yes, zz9 I think you could be right about the more-than-seven comments thing.

jcs | May 14, 14:05 CET

just wanted to say i personally can't wait for the new show. my first post! yea! glad i finally caught open registration.

aleister.crowley.sings | May 14, 14:18 CET

I for one welcome the Doll played by Britney Spears throughout season 4. Especially her appearance in the infamous musical haiku episode. It's going to be legen--

Sunfire | May 14, 14:26 CET

I'm so sorry you got banned, Sunfire.

gossi | May 14, 14:58 CET

Just a reminder, for readability, lets try to capitalize (or capitalise, your choice!) correctly. All we have are our words and how they are presented to get across our ideas, so its important that we are as clear as possible. When in doubt, use extra smileys so people think you are just kidding or insane ;)

Alas, poor Sunfire, we knew him well. Banned, midsentence even (can we do that with AJAX?).

zeitgeist | May 14, 14:58 CET

--dary.

Banned? But my grammar is good! Mostly. Often. Whatever.

Sunfire | May 14, 15:21 CET

:) You're very chatty for someone who was (totally! seriously! I'm not kidding!) banned!

(This banning by voluntarily abstaining from posting thing isn't working out so well. Except for Lynch!)

[ edited by zeitgeist on 2008-05-14 15:40 ]

zeitgeist | May 14, 15:37 CET

Sunfire likes to flirt with danger.

; > ; >; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; >
; > ; >; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; >
; > ; >; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; >
; > ; >; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; >
; > ; >; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; >
; > ; >; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; >
; > ; >; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; > ; >

(aleister.crowley.sings, I love your name - one of my all-time favorite lines. It's the phrase I wish I'd written, and the recording I hope will never come to light.)

QuoterGal | May 14, 16:51 CET

When I am dictator, that freaking line everyone keeps using will be banned. Also, lolcats, they'll be banned as well.

[ edited by theonetruebix on 2008-05-14 17:05 ]

theonetruebix | May 14, 16:55 CET

I oppose bix's election or coup as supreme dictator. I support the banning of all things lol, however. I might feel more leniently about LOLhouse once the show gets going.

Sunfire | May 14, 17:06 CET

I ban both Sunfire and b!X on general principles, and also because it's meaningless, and also because no one will pay the slightest attention to this thread anymore...

; > :-( ;P _|￣|○ :-*

ET: to add some different emoti-mileys. It seemed important at the time... now, one minute later, it just seems vulgar and excessive. Things change fast on the internet.

(:

[ edited by QuoterGal on 2008-05-14 20:08 ]

QuoterGal | May 14, 18:48 CET

By the by, again... h-i!

J Linc | May 15, 01:04 CET

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.

« Older Serenity: Better Days #3 (of 3) sh... | (SPOILER) An Interview With Alyson Hannigan! Newer »

May 13 2008