(SPOILER)
TWoP Poster reviews the Dollhouse Pilot.
Very complimentary to the plot & cast. There's also an interesting tidbit about control of the memory wipe/imprint.
Gives big kudos to Enver Gjokaj, but thinks Dichen Lachman is still getting comfortable with Whedon material.
October 17 2008
You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.


This bugs me slightly. Why can't the same personality be imprinted into two actives at the same time? If, we assume, they start off on a computer then it's a file and should be able to be copied. The same thing bugged me on Voyager, for example, where they only had one Doctor. Why not just open the same file ten times and have ten identical Doctors to treat ten patients at once?
I can understand why it was done for plot reasons but it just made no sense technically. ( I realise I'm criticizing a minor point in Voyager for not making sense technically... )
Having a personality that can only exist in one body at a time is moving it into a "soul" thing and not merely a product of technology and memory implants.
I have got to stop reading these spoilers. Only three months to go...
zz9 | October 17, 16:33 CET
Jobo | October 17, 16:52 CET
It's entirely possible that this is the point. I imagine the restriction will be explained sometime during the show's run.
Besides, there can only be one slayer.
JMaloney | October 17, 16:52 CET
It is, however, all covered up in spoiler-text over there, so if you did want to follow the link, you wouldn't accidentally stumble over anything you didn't want to see, unless you go around highlighting parts of the page.
JMaloney | October 17, 16:57 CET
daevid | October 17, 17:14 CET
electricspacegirl | October 17, 17:36 CET
This was nice, not so spoilery that I minded reading. Good way to build my hype.
bobw1o | October 17, 17:42 CET
Getting back to the "soul" thing, remember what Adele DeWitt says in the trailer: "I know you've heard colorful rumors about what an Active is...robots, zombie slaves. They are, of course, quite the opposite. An Active is the truest soul among us.".
JMaloney | October 17, 18:04 CET
TamaraC | October 17, 18:04 CET
DaddyCatALSO | October 17, 18:07 CET
I didn't get that impression exactly... to me it came across as "Echo had personality X so she could do Y, but then that got accidentally wiped and couldsn't be reinstalled so Sierra got personality X so that she too could do most of Y and get them out."
But it wasn't very clear, no - the mythology could be either, so far.
skittledog | October 17, 18:29 CET
But accidental makes most sense, as remote-wiping would be awfully hard from a bank vault I imagine.
Sparticus | October 17, 20:38 CET
marvelknight616 | October 17, 20:47 CET
I didn't get the impression that it was only one person with that personality at a time.
5X5B | October 17, 23:22 CET
I think putting the same personality in all the dolls at the same time could lead to... much strangeness.
[ edited by gossi on 2008-10-17 23:42 ]
gossi | October 17, 23:34 CET
Rikardo | October 17, 23:44 CET
Maybe they did, once, put the same personality into two Actives at the same time while they were working together at the time and indeed it created problems. Not of the technical variety, but of the "wtf you're just like me" variety. After that, they knew not to try it again.
The One True b!X | October 18, 00:26 CET
TamaraC | October 18, 01:24 CET
Perhaps the built-in "expiration date" is necessary to prevent actives from wandering off and becoming rogues in their imprinted personalities.
Pointy | October 18, 01:45 CET
I'm the type of viewer where I really don't care either way. Sci-fi is sci-fi. You buy the premise or you don't.
Another reason I don't care is that, like anything in sci-fi (or fantasy; see Buffy), anything can be explained in any way the writers choose. "How did this happen?!" "Well, the gem of _____ reacted with the _____ and caused a _____." Ah! So that's the explanation. Delving too deeply into those rules doesn't make much sense when you consider they're all arbitrary.
dispatch | October 18, 03:44 CET
The One True b!X | October 18, 04:48 CET
And inconsistent with what? We know nothing about how it works (and how it works is arbitrary in the first place).
dispatch | October 18, 06:16 CET
Conversations evolve. That's why they are conversations. ;)
how it works is arbitrary in the first place
Yes, you'll note that I just agreed that it's arbitrary.
But the way you said it seemed to suggest that this arbitrariness precludes any examination, and that doesn't make sense to me -- because (surprise) I think that as arbitrary as they might be, the rules still need to have an internal consistency to them.
[ edited by theonetruebix on 2008-10-18 06:42 ]
The One True b!X | October 18, 06:40 CET
I was wondering if putting the same personality in two dolls at the same time might cause more technical problems along the lines of... well, resonance. Either you'd end up with two Actives who couldn't work together because they were too identical (although I've never been convinced by the whole 'opposites attract' thing), or... and this is the idea I like... they'd sort of feed off each other. On your own, you subject your own actions to scrutiny. In a group of different people, you let others rationalise your suggestions. But when you're with someone who thinks exactly the same way you do, don't you just egg each other on? You show off, you encourage each other, you forget about looking before you leap. I don't think that would be desirable in Actives.
And now I'm thinking about Cylons. Hmm. Ahh, I do enjoy a good pointlessly deep discussion before breakfast... :)
skittledog | October 18, 10:44 CET
Rikardo | October 18, 11:21 CET
TamaraC | October 18, 18:52 CET
That said, the previously-mentioned premise that what happens in this episode is they run up against the time limit makes the most sense to me right now.
The One True b!X | October 18, 19:00 CET
flugufrelsarinn | October 18, 19:09 CET
[ edited by skittledog on 2008-10-18 22:22 ]
skittledog | October 18, 22:22 CET
Where was the derision? Pointing out facts is not negative. It just is.
[ edited by TamaraC on 2008-10-18 22:36 ]
TamaraC | October 18, 22:35 CET
gossi | October 18, 22:44 CET
flugufrelsarinn | October 18, 22:58 CET
(FYI, I watch Hulu streams on my TV all the time and it's fine.)
The One True b!X | October 18, 23:00 CET
TamaraC | October 19, 00:18 CET
Personally the not available in your location message have turned me off Hulu in a bad way and my set up doesn't allow me to get streamed tv my tv screen either, but the Fey/Palin intro SNL sketch seems to be available worldwide on Hulu (at the moment at least), funny stuff.
ETA, for clarity.
[ edited by jpr on 2008-10-19 11:53 ]
jpr | October 19, 09:03 CET
flugufrelsarinn | October 19, 09:37 CET
Right, so, more random stuff interjected to make yourself sound smart? I get it it. Trust me, I get it. You're better at stalking Whedon show stars, bix-- you should stick to that.
[ edited by dispatch on 2008-10-19 10:12 ]
dispatch | October 19, 10:06 CET
Simon | October 19, 10:26 CET