Dollhouse and the Metastory Trap.
Interesting article that challenges the conventional wisdom regarding the first season of Dollhouse. Was the fandom too impatient in wanting the show to get to the overlapping plot arcs?
John Seavey has also written some very good essays about Buffy and Angel and Firefly.
August 25 2009
This thread has been closed for new comments.
You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.
I appreciate the sentiment, but there's a very good reason the fandom wants a grand story arc and not just a load of oneshots.
MattK | August 25, 09:19 CET
I always had the feeling that this show got more fan-backlash than it deserved. But I agree that it's a weird mixture of fan's expectations in A Joss Whedon Thing and (mostly questionable) marketing-moves that lead to this sort of confusion. (I'm also starting to think that this show was basically not marketable in the first season, since studio, network and producers were all not so much sure what the show was about. So, it's not all "Stupid Marketing!" for me.)
And the idea of "Epitaph One" being the counter-argument to that inmarketability, to the lack of overall direction, theme and arcyness? Very nicely put.
wiesengrund | August 25, 09:23 CET
flugufrelsarinn | August 25, 09:26 CET
wiesengrund | August 25, 09:35 CET
flugufrelsarinn | August 25, 09:39 CET
The fact that the series started with a sudden and unexpected stand-alone mandate is hardly anyone rushing to get into the arc. If anything, the arc could have rolled out more smoothly without that stand-alone mandate.
Remember, it was the stand-alones that were causing so many people such consternation. Then, when in essence that mandate went away and FOX did their "we're just going to leave Joss alone now" thing, the writers only had half a 13-episode season left to tell a story -- and possibly the final chance they'd even have to tell a Dollhouse story at all.
None of that is the fault of fandom.
[ edited by The One True b!X on 2009-08-25 18:47 ]
@theonetruebix | August 25, 09:45 CET
I agree with you, though I think the standalone episodes could have worked. If Joss et al had gone the 'ruthless corporate efficiency' route, showing five flawless engagements. Instead, as far as I recall, at least two of the first five dealt with flawed imprints, etc and I saw a lot of style 'Why would anyone pay for something that has this high a failure rate?' complaints on the 'net, etc. Those episodes could have gone to servicing two larger ideas, first, the power of the dollhouse and second being why one would pay for their services. It's not surprising that 'Man on the Street', the first episode to truly attempt to answer either, was also the first re-watch worthy episode of Season 1.
And, really, the standalone episodes we got like 'Stage Fright' were perceived as poorly written and not particularly entertaining. Whether that was a result of Fox intervention, I don't know. But, I think fan discontent can be traced more to a perceived lack of quality than anything else.
[ edited by Dirk on 2009-08-25 19:04 ]
Dirk | August 25, 10:02 CET
Yeah, that's the problem with some defences of (some people's) issues with the first 5 episodes - when you watch 'Echo' and listen to Joss/Tim Minear/etc. now, that metafictional commentary on television and the nature of the industry or deliberately playing with plot conventions or with how we relate to characters just doesn't seem to be what they were trying to do. Rather, if they'd had their druthers, we'd (apparently*) have connected with the characters much earlier, the arc would've appeared much earlier, Echo herself would've appeared much earlier and more fully (rather than what I originally thought was the well-handled deliberately gradual emergence we actually saw), fewer standalones etc.
Or maybe they're really screwing with us and even these comments are all part of some intricate and beautifully twisted long game (nah, me neither ;).
* I say apparently cos it's dodgy watching 'Echo' and extrapolating from there to an entire season, for all we know everything that was clearly stated and set up in the pilot might've been entirely subverted in episode 2 (it might even have been so clearly stated because it was going to be subverted in upcoming episodes).
Saje | August 25, 10:27 CET
I'm not sure that it's necessarily the fault of a fandom when fans complain, not about standalone episodes, but about standalone episodes which don't seem to contribute much of value.
meloukhia | August 25, 11:02 CET
Now, I realize those aren't exactly the same as story arcs in the Whedonesque sense. While X-Files bounced in and out of mythology episodes, dropping in standalones in a chaotic fashion, Whedon shows have (almost) always done an excellent job at furthering the "overall" story even in "standalones." This is exactly why I like Whedon shows so much.
....And it's exactly why so much of Dollhouse has been so frustrating. I don't blame this all on Joss -- the network deserves its fair share of blame -- but I haven't felt the same organic process of interweaving one-episode stories with storylines that bridge several episodes.
Ultimately, that wouldn't be a huge issue if the standalones were all really, really good. They weren't. Face it, the first half of the re-shot first episode is a total WTF experience, as if it's some insane parody of a cheesy Fox action show. And "Stage Fright," while it did have a few good moments, overall seemed like a ridiculous waste of this talented cast and crew.
But re-watching the episodes on DVD also reminds me of what a great job Whedon and his staff did steering this semitrailer back onto the highway without jackknifing. This rapidly went from being a very questionable show on a very shaky foundation to being something that -- at times -- approaches the best stuff Mutant Enemy has produced. "Briar Rose" is as entertaining an hour of TV as I've seen in a long time.
But the general notion that Whedon fans -demand- a over-arching storyline, and that it could be a bad thing, strikes me as off-point.
I think we want to see great stories, great writing and great writing. We want to watch sexy people we care about kick the shit out of each other, emotionally and physically. We want people to not say the obvious thing, not do the obvious thing, and not be the obvious someone.
That's what I think Dollhouse S1 really lacked in its first half. And that's what Dollhouse S1 really started providing in its second half. And that's why I'm looking forward to Sept. 25.
Rick Gershman VII | August 25, 11:09 CET
mjwilson | August 25, 11:26 CET
(And flugufrelsarinn, you're definitely not alone.)
[ edited by deird on 2009-08-25 21:01 ]
deird | August 25, 11:29 CET
Dollhouse had a couple of great standalones. I loved Needs and Echoes. The problem with the early episodes was more that they weren't terribly good. The fandom seemed to decide that this was because they were standalones rather than arcs, but it was actually just because they were a bit pants.
curlymynci | August 25, 12:01 CET
@theonetruebix | August 25, 12:17 CET
curlymynci | August 25, 12:30 CET
flugufrelsarinn | August 25, 12:39 CET
"Meta engagements" which are actually about the dollhouse maybe count less ('Needs' doesn't have an engagement at all - or kind of doesn't anyway, in 'Echoes' it's not about the engagement after about the first 5 minutes, "Man on the Street" has a nice mix in that it's about the engagement but from the client's perspective and also a lot about the dollhouse too, "Spy in the House of Love" has two narratively central engagements but the episode itself isn't about them - you could actually make a case that only the first 5 are strict standalones and even then i'd hesitate over "Gray Hour". And not just because I keep wanting to spell it "wrong" ;).
But Stage Fright is still Stage Fright.
It's a bit ironic I think, given what Joss has said about his shame over some of the early episodes not saying anything, that the one episode most people seem (usual caveats) to agree wasn't great is 'Stage Fright', which says pretty much everything, having more or less every idea and theme the show's exploring crammed into it.
[ edited by Saje on 2009-08-25 21:42 ]
Saje | August 25, 12:42 CET
@theonetruebix | August 25, 12:52 CET
Saje | August 25, 13:02 CET
Ultimately I don't care whose 'fault' it was so much as I care that it gets fixed.
Factual error department:
The article got something wrong. 'Ted Ritter as a killer robot?'
The actors name was John Ritter. Ted was the name of the character.
wouldestous | August 25, 13:03 CET
@theonetruebix | August 25, 13:05 CET
I like the fight scene there because it's the second bit of the reveal that Adelle's baited Ballard with a fake mafia connection but sent him to the real mafia. We see the bait and then the very real hook nearly kills him. It's elegant and terrible.
But yeah the diva/stalker thing was pretty bad. I don't mind missions of the week, these were just not very good missions. I'm skipping "Gray Hour" in my rewatch because it's just such a terrible caper that the episode centers on.
Sunfire | August 25, 13:25 CET
(as to that 'Stage Fright' scene with Lubov/Ballard, it's well enough written and nicely played but I haveta admit, as a sentiment it struck me as a bit obvious, facile even)
Saje | August 25, 13:44 CET
My viewing experience was actually quite close to the opposite of the one the article describes. Based on the original trailer and the first released scene, I was expecting to love the engagements and dislike the ongoing stories containing Ballard and Echo's growing self awareness. I was so focussed on the stand-alone engagements that I wanted to be spectacular (because I agree with the writer of the article that the mechanism should be able to allow for some spectacular stories) that I paid only little attention to the very pleasently surprising arc stuff like the Alpha opening in The Target and all the scenes containing Ballard.
However I did not dislike the stand-alone stories in the first episodes because they weren't arc, but just because they weren't very creative or interesting, didn't sell me on the neccesity of the involvement of the Dollhouse, and were very repetitive: like dirk points out, they all seemed to center on Echo misfunctioning because the Dollhouse tech couldn't wipe her soul away.
(I was quite dissapointed by the lack of creativity and obedience to bad television cliches Joss showed when he commented on the "Echo" commentary about the fan complaints about the repetitiveness of a faulty engagement every episode, with something along the line of: what do you expect, it's TV (only then funny, cause he's still Joss :).))
And I strongly agree with dirk’s suggestion that the show should have started with a couple of more or less flawless engagements, if only to mix it up a bit, though it also was important in selling the usefullness of the Dollhouse. The fact that it started with a series of succesfull (and fun to watch) engagements also is one of the main reasons I really liked "Echo" (that it contained more of the "real story" wasn't among them).
the Groosalugg | August 25, 13:49 CET
True but it's early in the series. Being more on the nose about some stuff like that doesn't bother me, as long as it's a starting point and things evolve as the story progresses. Plus there's that verbal playfulness going on to keep it interesting.
Sunfire | August 25, 13:57 CET
I'd also add - like I have in previous threads on this subject - that there was a problem with the pilot. In previous Joss shows the first seasons are all pretty much heavy on the standalone episodes early on. Buffy S1, Angel S1 and Firefly all feature much more standalones than arc episodes and we've never heard anyone complain about those (maybe some comments in hindsight with Buffy and Angel's first seasons, but those were mostly background noise when airing I'd say. Although, of course, there probably wasn't much of a fandom yet during Buffy S1's original run ;)). So, obviously, something is different here.
The biggest differences I can see are twofold. First there's the fact that these episodes are dissapointing in the engagements themselves, like has been discussed. The second reason for the difference in perception is, imho, that we didn't get introduced to the characters, their motivations and their world very extensively. Welcome to the Hellmouth/The Harvest and Serenity were non-standalone starts to their standalone heavy seasons, taking time to introduce our main characters. 'City Of' was slightly less so (but still more so than 'Ghost'), but in that case we already knew most of the characters and their world because Angel was a spin-off show. With 'Ghost' none of this happened.
So I think that's the double whammy at the core of the problem with these early standalones. They just weren't up to the level we've come to expect from Joss - and like bix mentions, he himself has said so on record very clearly - and we were not introduced very effectively to the characters and world, although such an introduction ('Echo') was planned initially.
GVH | August 25, 14:07 CET
As to the question of fault, there is no fault. People like what they like. Some like DH and others do not. Is this the fault of Fox for altering the first show? Does it matter? I have not yet invested in this show; it does not move me like Buffy did and it raises questions it does not seem to know how to answer. But that's me.
Dana5140 | August 25, 14:10 CET
Although that was repurposed content from the ditched pilot. It's a great scene, but it's really only repurposed here in order to get Ballard shot, which they had to accomplish somehow.
@theonetruebix | August 25, 14:23 CET
And there's definitely arc stuff in them, too. After all, who hired the fake client in "Target"? Who wiped Echo in "Gray Hour"? Without question, Alpha: so what was he up to there?
Also... of course the Dollhouse has to have glitches and problems. A show about something -- anything -- running perfectly smoothly will last exactly one episode. Conflict and problems is what all story relies on.
[ edited by ManEnoughToAdmitIt on 2009-08-25 23:55 ]
ManEnoughToAdmitIt | August 25, 14:52 CET
While true, that's not a get out of jail free card for failing at some point to explain why the setting of your series seems to suffer so many problems. Dollhouse does reasonably well in this regard, I feel. But it does irk me when Joss, or any other writer, just gives the glib "because otherwise there's no show" answer, because ultimately that's not good enough. The story should give some sort of hook -- and, really, it only has to be just enough of one -- to explain it.
@theonetruebix | August 25, 14:58 CET
Just as Terminator II was clearly meant to keep the fact that Arnie is the good guy a secret until he and John Connor met up, but was totally spoilt by every interview and review, it would have been so much better to have been a surprise.
Problem is of course, that many people would have said "An Alias rip off? I won't bother watching"
zz9 | August 25, 16:38 CET
The thing is, because I watched all 5 back to back, it didn't bother me. But I can see where someone who watched them for the first time and had to wait one week for the next one could have gotten extremely annoyed.
azzers | August 25, 16:46 CET
thrillingheroics | August 25, 18:45 CET
It'll only take you so far at least. To the question "Why is everyone not happy ?" yep, or in the extreme to "Why can we hear background music but not see any musicians ?" yep. But to the question "Why are the plots a bit hackneyed ?" or "Why does the episode hinge on an oft-stated genius being catastrophically wrong nearly every week ?" I don't think it's a good enough answer - you can have both those things but you have to carry it in the story. Otherwise, as Annie Wilkes might say, you're cheating.
And agreed with above that a couple of explicitly flawless engagements might've been a better way to start it. I was happy to accept why people would use the dollhouse (with sex engagements for instance it hinges - either in a sinister way or out of need - on the actives "genuinely" wanting to be there) but early on we weren't really shown why, it required a bit of suspension of disbelief (maybe they just felt they didn't have time with only 13 episodes).
(just to re-state BTW, all these criticisms aside, I still liked 1, most of 2, parts of 3, 4 and especially 5 so if Joss feels most of them didn't work then I just plain disagree with him. Let's not fall into the trap of calling the episodes bad when before they worked for us as a whole but had bad bits)
Saje | August 25, 22:03 CET
Especially since I didn't enjoy and therefore didn't bother watching Alias: TOS beyond the first ten or so episodes. :-).
Building on that thought, I think it's possible some people knew too much about what was supposed to happen, and anticipation of what was going to be possibly tainted enjoyment of what was. Then again, I'm not sure that's really true - first, we all know that a Whedon show will have a solid arc, so we would have all been expecting *something*. Second, I managed to remain unspoiled to quite a degree by not reading any of your links or comments during the year (so I didn't know that Lubov or Mellie were actives, didn't know Tudyk would be Alpha, didn't have much idea about what the thrust of the season would be); and yet . . . I still didn't love it, for many of the reasons discussed above.
Nevertheless, there's a lot to like.
SoddingNancyTribe | August 25, 22:30 CET
Ningjing | August 26, 07:35 CET