March 13 2009
Dollhouse renewal "still possible" says TV Guide Magazine.
But a Fox network insider tells The Biz "It's going to have to make financial sense for us".
This thread has been closed for new comments.
You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.
That was the plan for the revival of the original BSG, before it fell apart and made room for Firefly: It would air on Fox and then on SciFi.
@theonetruebix | March 13, 12:38 CET
gossi | March 13, 12:48 CET
Tonya J | March 13, 12:54 CET
gossi | March 13, 12:55 CET
Septimus | March 13, 13:00 CET
zeitgeist | March 13, 13:02 CET
Sunfire | March 13, 13:03 CET
No shit, Sherlock
Caroline | March 13, 13:10 CET
This article is a whole lot of no new news wrapped up in exciting new ads.
And why I'm not excited?
Brasilian Chaos Man | March 13, 13:11 CET
crazygolfa | March 13, 13:12 CET
Sunfire | March 13, 13:14 CET
I'm assuming because the "exciting" part was sarcasm and you correctly failed to be excited by the ads, as did I.
Correct, if by us you mean those of us with Nielsen boxes ;) (though DVRs can't hurt).
zeitgeist | March 13, 13:15 CET
Or whatever deal they came up with. Please don't cancel Dollhouse, is really my point.
sumogrip | March 13, 13:17 CET
crazygolfa | March 13, 13:21 CET
gossi | March 13, 13:22 CET
Sunfire | March 13, 13:24 CET
Tonya J | March 13, 13:26 CET
Sunfire | March 13, 13:29 CET
FaithsTruCalling | March 13, 13:33 CET
IrrationaliTV | March 13, 13:55 CET
shambleau | March 13, 13:58 CET
Well, the eps are already written and produced (past tense), so really, its up to people to tune in.
Maybe Milo will help me out with some recoding of the post function that adds "In my opinion..." before every post :) If this gets cancelled, its possible that Joss won't feel like working on "something I actually enjoy watching". If you don't like it and don't have faith in it, its perfectly okay to stop watching. Maybe its just not for you?
ETA - everyone is totally entitled to their opinion, I just don't see the point in raining on the parade of folks who do enjoy it.
[ edited by zeitgeist on 2009-03-13 22:58 ]
zeitgeist | March 13, 14:02 CET
Brilliance does not mean people watch. Brilliance has very little to do with success on major network TV. Of course art and artists rely for the most part on money and patronage. It comes down more to who's going to put up the money and what they consider a success for that that they're patronizing. I'll say it till I'm blue in the face: Joss should be on some sort of cable network. Then he could be brilliant with less than 4 million viewers and still be allowed to make his art.
Oh, and amen, zeitgeist.
[ edited by phlebotinin on 2009-03-13 22:04 ]
phlebotinin | March 13, 14:03 CET
Oh...right. When they yanked "Firefly" all over the schedule & didn't bother to air it in correct order, when they canned "Drive" before it had a chance to find itself and when they didn't even promote "Dollhouse" until a month before it was supposed to premiere, and even then just a few quick scattered promos, but they'd promoted the HELL out of "Fringe" and "Lie to Me*" last year.
SIGH.
To paraphrase Ed Wood: "Stupid, stupid, stupid execs!"
Just hope "Dollhouse" doesn't turn into Plan 9 From Outer Space.
ShadowQuest | March 13, 14:22 CET
To be perfectly honest, I'm not impressed with what has been shown so far. I want to love it, but it's missing a certain bite that we so love Joss for.
Now, I'm truly looking forward to episode six which, according to cast members, will be the first time Joss had a free hand with the writing and directing. Can't wait!
And z, what was that all about :)
Madhatter | March 13, 14:32 CET
Dollhouse had a large presence at Comic-Con SEVEN months before it premiered. Promos were not "scattered" but actually pretty ubiquitous in the last few weeks before air. Lie to Me received little to no promotion until about 3 weeks before it began in January and Fringe got the normal fall build-up.
IrrationaliTV | March 13, 14:33 CET
Well there are those in the fandom who think Fox is a charity who should air Joss' stuff just cause it's Joss.
Simon | March 13, 14:36 CET
Yes I'd love a season 2. But Fox execs have a responsibility to their shareholders to maximize profits. If Dollhouse isn't the vehicle to deliver those profits then Fox execs are obligated to try another solution. As fans we may not like that outcome, but it's business... and that same business it what gave Fox the money to invest in Dollhouse in the first place.
Artists always have the option of going solo... (See Dr. Horrible.)
SteveP | March 13, 14:37 CET
gossi | March 13, 14:51 CET
ETA - I tend to disagree with rich and plentiful. Nice that they were during AI, but still... not much until the last few weeks.
zeitgeist | March 13, 14:56 CET
Me, I have no idea whether the promos for Dollhouse have been adequate or not. But I have to say I'm getting a little tired of all the "all hail the Great and Wondrous Business People!" rhetoric. Yeah, the Fox execs are business people. It doesn't mean they know what they're doing or that they've made the right decisions any more than the creatives have. Being a "Business Person" does not mean you have more firing synapses. It doesn't mean you have some inner track to wisdom. The creatives have a responsibility to produce and so do the all-wise "business" geniuses. Perhaps the Fox business people made a poor choice in funding Dollhouse - they certainly sound as if they weren't prepared for what they got. They knew they were dealing with Joss Whedon, cultmeister. What did they expect, Heroes?
Perhaps the poor viewership is partly their fault, too. Just a thought. As for their marketing department, I'm no "revisionist," but I can't say with a straight face that Fox dealt with "Firefly" in an intelligent and rational manner if they indeed wished it to catch on and succeed. Preempting it, airing it out of order - I'd say the revisionism is in arguing that "Firefly" was treated with anything approaching rationality.
Artists also have the option of going to places that fund the kind of work that they do. *cough*Cable*cough.*
phlebotinin | March 13, 15:03 CET
[ edited by The One True b!X on 2009-03-13 23:06 ]
@theonetruebix | March 13, 15:06 CET
I don't think Fox should be a charity. I'm not a deranged Fox-owes-it-to-us fan. That's not what I'm arguing. I'm merely arguing that I'm not sure we can automatically assume that their business folk did their jobs right or that we can blame Dollhouse's lack of success only on the creative side.
phlebotinin | March 13, 15:10 CET
I did rag on the network for the overtly sexual nature of the promos. And I still hate that angle. But, the truth is, both the network and Joss+Eliza were on board with that. It's not like they did the kind of promo those two hated.
Both Joss and Tim were instrumental in reordering many episodes of Firefly. Not many people seem to remember that, but it's actually true.
I'm not saying FOX is perfect. Far from it; the notes they gave on DOLLHOUSE were never exactly going to make the show artistically better, and some of the promotional mistakes were bad (the handling of the Friday night move, for example, was extremely poor from a PR point of view). I am saying they put out a good number of Dollhouse promos and have kept it on the air as promised, and the only way for the show to now find it's audience is if it makes people tune in.
gossi | March 13, 15:13 CET
Madhatter | March 13, 15:14 CET
The timeline
Joss expresses a desire to come back to network tv.
Fox welcomes him back with open arms.
Fans go "Eh? Once bitten and all that".
Reviews of the first Dollhouse pilot script are stellar.
Fox goes "oh shit this is brilliant but it's commercial suicide".
Joss reworks the pilot to suit Fox.
The suits damn it with faint praise but decide to go with it.
For some ungodly reason the first five episodes are regarded as pilot episodes. Reviewers and fandom aren't quite sure what to make of this.
Episode 6 regarded as the turning point for the show.
Detractors go "ummmm why should we wait till episode 6 before the good stuff kicks in?".
Fandom gets faintly embarrassed with backlash, splits occur as each episode airs.
Though praise for each episode grows as the show goes on.
All bets are off for what happens after episode 6 airs.
Simon | March 13, 15:22 CET
Wait, did I do that right ?
Saje | March 13, 15:23 CET
zeitgeist | March 13, 15:33 CET
IrrationaliTV | March 13, 15:33 CET
@theonetruebix | March 13, 15:35 CET
I could do a sequel and go with a fourteenth line.
Simon | March 13, 15:36 CET
p.s. - Simon, just release a Special Edition later!
zeitgeist | March 13, 15:36 CET
@theonetruebix | March 13, 15:37 CET
Saje | March 13, 15:40 CET
@theonetruebix | March 13, 15:41 CET
zeitgeist | March 13, 15:42 CET
(and I am totally not ticking 'Face' on my organ donor card. That's just weird)
Saje | March 13, 15:44 CET
ETA a "damn it, Saje".
[ edited by The One True b!X on 2009-03-13 23:45 ]
@theonetruebix | March 13, 15:44 CET
But it would seem that that if one dares to question Fox here, one is crying corporate evil and blaming the faceless and taking the easy way out. Not so.
Simon, your timeline suggests that the suits should have pulled out when they didn't like the reworked pilot and first eps. Why put on something you don't think works?
phlebotinin | March 13, 15:45 CET
Beat you by a nose ;).
Saje | March 13, 15:47 CET
Simon, your timeline suggests that the suits should have pulled out when they didn't like the reworked pilot and first eps. Why put on something you don't think works?
Because they made a big hooha about Joss coming back and that Dollhouse was one of their new premium (for want of a better word) shows. Cancelling would have led to huge egg on face. Burying it on a Friday and praying it gets an audience was seen as the least worst alternative. Personally I think Fox gave up on Dollhouse late last year and from episode 6 onwards they just let Joss get on with it.
I think come June this is what will happen. Episodes 6-13 will rivet the fandom. We will go "my god that was amazing". Critics will change their tune but by that time the audience will have reduced to a trickle. So we don't get a second season. Which is a shame cause the finale will be talked about for years to come.
Simon | March 13, 15:54 CET
phlebotinin | March 13, 15:55 CET
@theonetruebix | March 13, 15:56 CET
sumogrip | March 13, 15:58 CET
The initial agreement was 7 episodes guaranteed, wasn't it?
hacksaway | March 13, 15:59 CET
It's May now but don't forget the clocks go forwards at the end of the month.
Do you know what's in the finale, Simon? :)
Probably not, but he knows us (and how long we talk about stuff ;).
Saje | March 13, 15:59 CET
phlebotinin, network TV is a game of chance. Every network orders several new shows every year, throws them all out on air and prays that 1 out of 3 sticks. There isn't a whole lot of science or "business sense" about it. It is 99.9% luck.
IrrationaliTV | March 13, 16:02 CET
Saje | March 13, 16:05 CET
spikeangellover | March 13, 16:07 CET
Madhatter | March 13, 16:09 CET
Squishy | March 13, 16:10 CET
So I don't see episode 6 saving the show, I just see it as potentially rocking the world of those of us that've watched from the start.
If nothing can survive there, perhaps FOX should just cancel their Friday lineup.
Well the effectively did that previously by having reality TV on there, that's pretty much a tacit admission that you've lost the night surely ?
(it's so cheap that it doesn't matter if you're 3rd or worse in the ratings)
Saje | March 13, 16:14 CET
Simons thing above is, I believe, how it'll play out. Unless lots of people jump on the joey train.
gossi | March 13, 16:22 CET
I've seen very brief mentions of what the finale is about and I think it sounds most intriguing.
Simon | March 13, 16:25 CET
Well, depends how you define "game changer" but Eliza said:
ED: Honestly, yes. I understand it from a business perspective, and from Fox’s view, but at the same time, we’ve now done 13 episodes, and people have said that the show took off once they finally realized that Joss is best off left alone to do his thing. That happens around episode six—six through 13 are just extraordinary. I love one, two, three, four, and five, but Joss’ first script that he did after the pilot is number six, which is called “Man On The Street,” and it is just unbelievable. From that point on, the world unfolds in Joss’ way, with Joss’ speed, and it’s really remarkable.
Sounds like a definite "turning point", if you prefer that phrase gossi. Maybe not straight from the horse's mouth but surely at least horse adjacent ?
Saje | March 13, 16:28 CET
But that will take six generations, Saje. I for one can't wait that long, and I don't suppose Joss has that many generations left, himself.
fanbuoyant | March 13, 16:28 CET
Which, as much as it could be debated, is a lot of why reviewers call it the "game changer" episode.
ETA yet another "damn it, Saje".
[ edited by The One True b!X on 2009-03-14 00:29 ]
@theonetruebix | March 13, 16:29 CET
Psst Saje. I figured out our confusion of Ep 4. Go check.
What might happen is we'll (fans & reviewers & critics) will get so vocal about Episode 6 that others will join the party a couple of hours before close. At least we'll go out with a "huzzah!".
OR, if merging Fox, F/X, etc... is the way of their new business, maybe they'll ask us gentle viewers to follow them to their cable mate... *wonders off in hallucinogenic state*
korkster | March 13, 16:32 CET
fanbuoyant | March 13, 16:33 CET
We're working down and back. Do the math, I guess.
@theonetruebix | March 13, 16:34 CET
But that will take six generations, Saje. I for one can't wait that long, and I don't suppose Joss has that many generations left, himself.
Yeah, we also need to invent perfect cryogenic storage and/or time-travel peacemonger. I'll admit, the plan still has the odd kink to work out.
Saje | March 13, 16:36 CET
Of course, whether it would save the show depends on the size of the decisionmaking window I mentioned above, right?
[ edited by Squishy on 2009-03-14 00:42 ]
[ edited by Squishy on 2009-03-14 00:44 ]
Squishy | March 13, 16:41 CET
I think Needs is actually episode 8, not episode 7.
@theonetruebix | March 13, 16:42 CET
Squishy | March 13, 16:46 CET
I guess we'll have to come up with a more inspiring motto than "It's finally good!"
hacksaway | March 13, 16:51 CET
Why is it so crazy to think that news of the awesomeness will spread, by word of mouth, critical reviews, etc., and draw new people to the show? Didn't that kinda happen with Buffy?
I didn't say it was crazy, I said I personally didn't think it was going to happen. To me, the people who care that Joss is getting a chance to really do his thing will have watched from the pilot i.e. if you're not a Joss fan why would you care that "From that point on, the world unfolds in Joss’ way, with Joss’ speed ..." ? And if you are (a fan) surely you're likely to be watching already ?
Maybe i'm wrong (hopefully), guess we'll find out in about 2-3 weeks.
[ edited by Saje on 2009-03-14 00:52 ]
Saje | March 13, 16:51 CET
daylight | March 13, 16:54 CET
@theonetruebix | March 13, 16:55 CET
Squishy | March 13, 16:57 CET
Saje | March 13, 16:58 CET
UnpluggedCrazy | March 13, 16:59 CET
@theonetruebix | March 13, 16:59 CET
That is my kind of PR right there.
Sunfire | March 13, 17:02 CET
Sunfire | March 13, 17:04 CET
Squishy | March 13, 17:08 CET
Actually on further though I guess would say "Dollhouse: shit, or the shit?"
I dunno, there doesn't seem to be any impetus to watch it in that one, it's a bit neutral. How about "Dollhouse: Don't be a wanker, watch it !". The great thing being, in America that might actually be allowed on broadcast TV.
Saje | March 13, 17:12 CET
Simon | March 13, 17:14 CET
@theonetruebix | March 13, 17:14 CET
I think ETA means Edited Thereafter? LOL I just always assumed that.
picnicking = an alternative to panicking (or perhaps another word for panicking?)
shipping = when you prefer two characters together romantically and your posts sort of aggressively promote that pairing (not a good here).
squee = the sound fangirls (or fanguys, I suppose ;-) make when something excites them (i.e. James Marsters without a shirt)
ETA! Simon beat me, haha.
[ edited by ShanshuBugaboo on 2009-03-14 01:16 ]
ShanshuBugaboo | March 13, 17:16 CET
About the time Joss said some Dr. Horrible DVDs had been sent out with bees in them, it was more or less when the Dollhouse picnic-not-panic thing started. And I think I ended up throwing an "AAH, bees" into a picnic thread.
@theonetruebix | March 13, 17:17 CET
Sunfire | March 13, 17:17 CET
Sunfire | March 13, 17:17 CET
And Morgan Freeman really should be in everything.
ETA a "damn it b!x/Sunfire !" ;).
[ edited by Saje on 2009-03-14 01:18 ]
Saje | March 13, 17:18 CET
Simon | March 13, 17:20 CET
Saje | March 13, 17:21 CET
Simon | March 13, 17:23 CET
@theonetruebix | March 13, 17:23 CET
Squishy | March 13, 17:24 CET
ShanshuBugaboo | March 13, 17:24 CET
Lindsay: For your information I have a job.
Michael: Really? What kind of job?
Lindsay: Beads!
Gob: BEES?!
Lindsay: Beads.
Gob: BEADS?!
Michael: Gob's not on board.
Leaf | March 13, 17:25 CET
You're probably about to turn into Glory.
Saje | March 13, 17:28 CET
@theonetruebix | March 13, 17:28 CET
Saje | March 13, 17:31 CET
If this show was on HBO, or even the SciFi channel, it seems to me likely that the earlier episodes would not have been messed with, that we'd be looking at good chance for a second season,and there would be some respect for the size of audience. I'm really starting to love this show, and wish I could have seen it as it was intended to be seen, originally.
If the production company makes most of its money from the dvd sales, why not make Joss's shows and sell them for less, I guess, to a cable channel, where they have a real chance to build the audience, and add seasons, thus presumably increasing those dvd sales, and maybe making up the money that way?
As I totally lack any and all business acumen, I'm sure I'm missing something here. Can someone help me out?
[ edited by toast on 2009-03-14 01:34 ]
toast | March 13, 17:33 CET
Or hook up his purpleness with a vampire bite.
ETA: Duh. I guess we'd all need bites as well.
[ edited by peacemonger on 2009-03-14 01:35 ]
fanbuoyant | March 13, 17:34 CET
Squishy | March 13, 17:36 CET
I'm wondering if any one can explain to me why Joss isn't working on cable?
This has baffled me for years. I've always assumed that it's just because most of his business relationships are with studio type people so that there aren't too many open doors in the cable world. Or maybe he's put off by the low viewerships (he's said before that he likes reaching out to people en masse) ? Or maybe it's financial (i.e. do cable shows have lower budgets per episode ?) ?
Saje | March 13, 17:44 CET
Have you seen ep6, gossi? Alternately, "ah, there's the tipsy misanthropic pessimist we're all used to" :).
zeitgeist | March 13, 17:50 CET
If the newslies get excited by those review tapes, this CAN activate normal, non-Whedon-obsessed viewers. I can think of several past situations where it was that weird omnipresent buzz of the press in its various print/net/broadcast forms that clued me in to something I had not only ignored but actively dismissed. "Lost" is one example where I'd never even bothered to watch a single episode (why do I wanna watch that damn guy from Party of Five look all earnest?) despite being very aware the show was coming. Some number of episodes in, the buzz reached me that there was something a bit more unusual than I had assumed going on there. BSG is fairly similar -- I am old enough to have some memory -- and zero nostalgia -- for the original, and, as few of my friends seem to be big sci-fi fans, I doubt I'd still know about it (and I think I discovered it before I realized how much Joss likes to plug it.) Veronica Mars is sorta similar.
The point (and I do have one): The huddled masses yearning for TV do pick up on buzz from the media, and things like the TV guide column (Aussiolo?) and Minavich and similar are part of a huge chorus of big and small newsly voices that, collectively, seep into our consciousness even when we don't think we are listening.
doubtful guest | March 13, 17:51 CET
Squishy | March 13, 18:00 CET
@theonetruebix | March 13, 18:01 CET
The huddled masses yearning for TV do pick up on buzz from the media, and things like the TV guide column (Aussiolo?) and Minavich and similar are part of a huge chorus of big and small newsly voices that, collectively, seep into our consciousness even when we don't think we are listening.
Sure. The question in my mind isn't can it happen (one of my favourite shows of the last few years, 'House', built an audience gradually initially - largely due to positive press - then leapt up with the right lead-in), the question is will it in this instance. I'm not terribly hopeful.
That said, maybe Fox aren't sitting with their finger hovering over the kill button (the good thing about Friday is there's surely less pressure to make instant decisions) so if the numbers are up to e.g. 6.5 million (Live) by about episode 10 then I reckon there's a reasonable chance it'll be back (especially given how well it does in the DVR figures).
I don't know of course, only Fox do and only time will tell.
Saje | March 13, 18:06 CET
IrrationaliTV | March 13, 18:13 CET
Back to subject, this could get pretty sticky (heh, heh).
Madhatter | March 13, 19:01 CET
Believe me, Squishy, I've been here awhile and I still have no idea and am not reading the explanations. There's some stuff I just don't need to be up on. Nor do I get the repeated Coby (Cobey?) Smulders references which make think of Smucker's Jam, every time. Oddly though, I've always gotten the Lifeforce references, being a cinephile, but not the I laughed, I cried, it was better than Ice Pirates one. Eh, sometimes it's funner to look at all the eccentrics and just play along while laughing to myself.
Tonya J | March 13, 19:02 CET
If I'm not mistaken, FX is the home of Damages, with Glenn Close doing an amazing acting job, a cast of characters not one of whom is on the level, a season long story arc, and a narrative style that repeatedly jumps back and forth in time. You have to pay close attention to follow it, but once you catch on, it draws you in.
I wouldn't think that this sort of series draws a large audience, but it's in its second season. If FX bought a show from Joss, I don't believe they would dumb it down.
janef | March 13, 19:10 CET
doubtful guest | March 13, 19:12 CET
hacksaway | March 13, 19:23 CET
doubtful guest | March 13, 19:25 CET
UnpluggedCrazy | March 13, 20:49 CET
Let Down | March 13, 21:14 CET
Unplugged, I just don't see Joss doing racy to be racy as I see some of showtime and HBO. I adore True Blood but can't see Joss doing that much naked. Maybe I don't watch enough HBO and showtime, but I don't see the need for Joss to go there. I think there are plenty of ad supported cable stations that would sell their soul for a Joss Whedon show. Why pitch to the premium channels that cuts viewership so drastically? I know they do quality stuff, but if they were interested in Joss we would have heard of it before now.
IrrationaliTV | March 13, 23:16 CET
gossi | March 14, 05:43 CET
(or, more seriously, if you've earned an 8 figure amount doesn't that make you pretty much sorted for life ? So does that mean he might consider cable now that he pretty much doesn't need to earn a wage - assuming that's accurate information ? On a slight tangent BTW, does anyone else feel a bit weird talking about someone's salary in this way ? It's not something i'd even consider asking someone I met in real life...)
Saje | March 14, 05:59 CET
gossi | March 14, 06:03 CET
And I know they're published it still just feels weird to me. If Variety published Marti Noxon's "vital statistics" I doubt i'd be happy talking about that either, just seems ... private.
(not having a pop at anyone BTW, just making an observation ;)
Saje | March 14, 06:07 CET
Needless to say, the likes of Joss, Tim and Marti deserve every cent they earn, as it's a lot of responsibility.
gossi | March 14, 06:14 CET
(assuming that's what '8 figures' means, people sometimes seem to use it differently to my understanding)
Saje | March 14, 06:20 CET
doubtful guest | March 14, 06:50 CET
I would really like to see Joss work on a show for FX, sci-fi or USA (agree with TamaraC on HBO and Showtime, don't know much about TNT except that I think they aired Babylon 5 which on the one hand would be a good thing, but on the other hand the series wasn't always handled that well by the channel that broadcasted it.
Dr. Horrible I think on the one hand shows Joss is willing to work on a bit lower scale. On the other hand, having that alternative it may mean that if he wants to work on that lower scale he'd rather take the Web way.
Looking forward to watching Dollhouse ep. 5 tonight.
the Groosalugg | March 14, 07:06 CET
Well, they're quite right to complain - where's my 8 figure deal with 20th ?
Do leading zeroes count?
fanbuoyant | March 14, 07:14 CET
gossi | March 14, 07:16 CET
It all depends what they lead to ;).
Saje | March 14, 07:30 CET
UnpluggedCrazy | March 14, 09:04 CET
I don't see Joss ever going to the SciFi channel. No reason, I just don't think they will go there. It seems like too good of a fit and SciFi never makes the logical choice.
FX has Damages, Nip/Tuck, The Shield etc. They kind of rock. AMC is even in the (high end) game with Mad Men and Breaking Bad. USA's Burn Notice is a revelation and I really like In Plain Sight and Psych. Ad supported cable is where the quality shows are and increasingly will be.
I simply don't watch HBO or Showtime. I've never seen the Sopranos or Deadwood or Rome or Weeds or Dexter. Eventually I will catch up with them all on DVD like I did with 6 feet under and Sex in the City. I only got HBO for the first time this last fall for True Blood. Maybe Joss would be a fit there but I just think he would rather have a bigger audience.
IrrationaliTV | March 14, 12:52 CET