AOQ Dollhouse Review 2-1: "Vows"
Arbitrar Of Quality
review threads.
DOLLHOUSE
Season Two, Episode 1: "Vows"
(or "Moving forward/We don't know where we're going, but we're on our way")
Writer: Joss Whedon
Director: Joss Whedon
I never know quite how to judge beginnings. I tend to love seeing an arc
resolved, even it doesn't quite totally fit together, but my comments when
opening a new chapter are mostly "well, that was pretty interesting, I
guess. My brain is still sort of in knots. Can't judge till I see where
they go with it." Maybe I'm not the best person to be evaluating a
serialized story episode by episode.
The first thing that struck me about "Vows" was that the show is fully in
its own world now. Not much attempt at exposition to fill in potential new
viewers on what's going on, we just pick up where we left off and move on.
Maybe the attempt to grab the casual viewers has been abandoned; the show's
small but devoted faithful is the only audience we'll ever have. Or maybe
the plan is to show the series's strong side rather than the somewhat
unsatisfactory attempts to make it more episodic at the beginning of S1.
Anyway, _Dollhouse_ trusts its core ensemble enough to pretty much spend an
entire first act sitting around the House doing stuff like developing the
Boyd/Whiskey relationship. Also notable that the show's star doesn't really
become an important player until midway through the season premiere. My
overall feeling as a non newbie was that the opening idling was interesting
enough, things sagged a bit in the middle, and then picked up with the
typical Joss acceleration of twists and reversals towards the end. But I
don't know entirely what to make of it, so let's review.
I do like the new opening sequence. Less moodiness and less L.A., but it
more concisely shows Echo wearing a lot of hats in a short time.
Good to see that Amy Acker will still be spending plenty of time guest
starring, based on how much Whiskey/Saunders is emphasized. I'm continually
impressed with her acting chops even amongst a strong cast. That's
something I want to point out to those going nuts about how versatile Dichen
Lachman is. I'm sorry to be harping on this point, since I like Lachman,
but all last year folks were going on and on about her amazing ability to
show many faces, based on a bunch of ninety-second cameos (usually as a way
to set up a chance to criticize Dushku, who has to actually carry the show).
Well, people, *this* is how to prove that you're an amazingly versatile
actor (as if we didn't already know if from _Angel_). We see Whiskey as
creepy and potentially violent, wisecracking as a defense mechanism for an
identity crisis, angry at the world, dead sexy, shattered and vulnerable but
still with a bit of steel, and in all that, she's never not convincing.
Acker is too good not to get showcase episodes like this one.
[Post-hoc edit: Apparently, some people think her driving off at the end is
a way of mostly or totally writing Whiskey out of the series due to the
actor's limited availability. If so, that's a damn shame.]
First impression of her messing with Topher is how scary she can look. But
the big thing that impressed me about their phone conversation is that, by
playing off Topher's arrogance (if there's something wrong with her, it's
her fault, not his), the show forces him into a situation in which he's
forced to see a doll as a person rather than a product of programming.
Meanwhile, despite being leads, Victor and Sierra continue their trend of
getting very little screen time. Sierra's role in particular seems like a
throwaway, although her discomfort with "Orientals" and musing about being
tied down and spanked work mostly because of some great reaction shots from
Ivy.
Probably worth maybe talking about Echo and Paul at some point, right?
Well, I'll start with a sort of criticism. Actually, first I'll mention
that the rapport between Echo/Roma and Paul as detective partners flows
well, giving me reassurance (along with their great scenes together in the
unaired pilot and "Epitaph One") that the two actors will not have the total
anti-screen chemistry together that we saw in "Needs."
Okay. So Paul is all conflicted and broody and such about seeing Echo/Roma
get intimately involved with arms dealer Martin (the always smooth Jamie
Bamber, our first credited Special Guest Star). At first he seems to be
using her as a way to crack a case he couldn't using normal channels. Those
of us who watch these kinds of shows will know that there's more to his
motivations than that, because that's just how Joss writes. Waking up
Caroline seems to be an ultimate goal. My problem is that this doesn't
mitigate the fact that he's basically whoring her out en route to his goals.
The viewer may or may not see hiring a doll as prostitution or rape, but we
know from "Man On The Street" that Paul Ballard does. I get that the show
likes to compromise our would-be white knights, so Paul can't play the
"Helo" role (a moral center). I just don't see what, if anything, his
principles even are at this point. He's still the character that the show
doesn't really seem to have figured out to my satisfaction yet, which is a
shame given that he's so central to _Dollhouse_. Viewing the original
persona as the only one who's "real" is at least somewhat consistent with
how he dealt with Mellie after learning that she wasn't "real."
Another wrinkle to the ongoing discussion of identity comes in the
Topher/Whiskey bedroom sequence. Granted, it's a masterful sequence with a
lot going on. There's "ew" at the thought of Topher getting laid, the
"relief" that it's Whiskey messing with him (and nice to see a guy not have
his argument defeated by a sleep-erection), and her interesting but totally
wrong theorizing about why her creator made her what she is. Topher's
outburst that he wants her to be "better than me!" and his explanation that,
giving someone the opportunity, she chooses to despise him makes him
marginally sympathetic in the whole thing. There are some clever reversals
in dialogue, especially "you're human." "Don't flatter yourself." And yes,
as already mentioned, the sequence highlights that Acker is just smoking
hot. But one of the functions of this scene is to clearly show a long-term
engagement as having its own identity. Whiskey/Saunders refuses to be
wiped, even if gives her back her original self, because she doesn't want to
"die." Certainly seems like a sentient person who has her own rights now
that she's been created.
In the engagement of the week, things heat up when Martin first finds out
that his wife isn't who he thinks she is. What I like about this part is
the way Echo, as a spy, is so committed to her persona before her imprint
starts to break down. She manages to put Martin on the defensive even
though she's the one who's been photographed with an enemy, to the point
where he looks like he half believes that she's the one being used to get at
him. And then we go to "wait. what'd they make me this time?" which is a
great note to go to commercial on.
The ending is a bit of a confused mess after that, as often happens when
this show switches to action scenes, but at least they get to blow up a car.
I don't notice the reduced budget very much.
Shorter takes:
-Okay, so on this show, Apollo doesn't have to pretend to be American, and
Wesley doesn't have to pretend to be British.
-The show continues with the comparison of Boyd and Paul, to the point where
they try to paint each other as equally likely to have introduced Senator
Perrin into the plot. Don't know where they're going with that element.
-Voyeurs get (a brief glimpse of) Echo and Whiskey ready to make out.
Satisfied yet?
-"Go 'be your best.'" "No one is their best in here."
-Adelle on working an angle: "With the exception of the very special and the
comatose, have you ever met someone who wasn't?"
-So, how exactly *did* Echo's erstwhile handler miss such an obvious sign of
action? Actual plot point, or just a throwaway to justify getting Paul in
place?
-Easy visual joke, but you gotta love Whiskey getting acquainted with a
flask.
-"Special agent in charge of bugger-all" is a very Spike line.
-Since it's not too important, the show doesn't bother explaining exactly
what happens to Martin at the end. He "got nabbed," but by whom? Paul
doesn't have any official status anymore.
-Maybe Echo will have more success secretly building an identity if she
doesn't let every single person in the House know about it.
Echo keeps compositing. Caroline was always trying to set people free, and
that includes the dolls. What could be important about this iteration is
that this time it's Echo who takes up Caroline's goal, without being
directly influenced by her. We (or I, at least) may look back on it as the
show passing the "central character" torch from the one who appears in brief
flashbacks to our present-day protagonist.
A question that I'm sure will be asked by some viewers is why we weren't
here from the beginning. Echo trying to free the actives from the inside is
pretty much where you'd expect a typical TV show to start; Echo would be at
exactly this point after one episode, not after one season. And I'm not
convinced yet that the story is all that much richer having taken its time
getting here. But quibbling about the pacing presumes that there's only one
"correct" path for the _Dollhouse_ narrative to take, and I don't feel the
need to do that. It was, for the most part, an entertaining enough ride.
It is what it is.
So.
One sentence summary: The usual intriguing jumble.
AOQ rating: Good
.
.
[Season Two so far:
1) "Vows" - Good]
~as of this writing, _Dollhouse_ has been on the air for two hundred
twenty-five days without being cancelled (to my knowledge). Wow!~
David Brewer
> The first thing that struck me about "Vows" was that the show is fully
> in its own world now. Not much attempt at exposition to fill in
> potential new viewers on what's going on, we just pick up where we left
> off and move on. Maybe the attempt to grab the casual viewers has been
> abandoned; the show's small but devoted faithful is the only audience
> we'll ever have. Or maybe the plan is to show the series's strong side
> rather than the somewhat unsatisfactory attempts to make it more
> episodic at the beginning of S1.
I expect to see a short series of "Alias" episodes. The S1 Alias
set-up is that Wiggy works for baddies, but she thinks they're
goodies - until the end of the pilot. Then she starts up as a
double agent for the CIA, working missions for the baddies while
keeping her cover in the organisation. Then she cries for two
minutes every episode.
S2 Dollhouse appears have started up so as to map fairly directly.
Her "cover" is that they don't know that she is compositing, which
Ballard will be covering up with her. There will be missions. This
will ease in the new viewers. The spin is that where Alias was
Non-Government Shadowy Organisations = Evil and Government CIA =
Good, this is quasi-government organisation/group needs vs
individual needs- much like Firefly. Or like anything else JW
does. I expect less crying, and more sex. Fewer wigs, more hats.
And then we branch from there to, I guess, Joss "Atheist" Whedon's
odd commentary on what the soul is and what that means. So, like
anything else JW does. With darkness! And snark, etc.
There were lots of little set ups in the episode. Why does Boyd
work for the Dollhouse?
--
David Brewer
One Bit Shy
news:h9lrnh$km3$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> DOLLHOUSE
> Season Two, Episode 1: "Vows"
> The first thing that struck me about "Vows" was that the show is fully in
> its own world now. Not much attempt at exposition to fill in potential
> new viewers on what's going on, we just pick up where we left off and move
> on.
I was struck by the same thing. On the other hand I'm also wondering if I'm
under-estimating the abilities of new viewers to catch on. Too much hand
holding can be obvious and boring too. You sure don't want to sacrifice the
episode at hand for a remedial course in Dollhouse basics. My own awareness
of the past may cloud the true coherency of the depicted present. Maybe.
Still, the episode comes across to me as the least contextually independent
season opener ever by Joss. When Saunders tells Echo that Alpha cut
Whiskey/Saunders up so that Echo could be number one, does anybody who
didn't see Omega have any idea what she's talking about?
> Maybe the attempt to grab the casual viewers has been abandoned; the
> show's small but devoted faithful is the only audience we'll ever have.
> Or maybe the plan is to show the series's strong side rather than the
> somewhat unsatisfactory attempts to make it more episodic at the beginning
> of S1.
I assume the latter. I just hope they didn't go overboard the other way.
Most of Whedon's shows - even most of Angel - was IMO more episodic than
serial. One of his past strengths has been the ability to support strong
serial aspects without sacrificing the episodic baseline.
> Anyway, _Dollhouse_ trusts its core ensemble enough to pretty much spend
> an entire first act sitting around the House doing stuff like developing
> the Boyd/Whiskey relationship. Also notable that the show's star doesn't
> really become an important player until midway through the season
> premiere.
But did you notice that this year's title images are all Dushku?
> Good to see that Amy Acker will still be spending plenty of time guest
> starring, based on how much Whiskey/Saunders is emphasized.
Psyche! 3 episodes is the word. I think her drive outside will prove to be
a long one.
On the other hand that's 3 of 12. Who knows what'll happen if Dollhouse
gets extended this season, let alone for the future.
> I'm continually impressed with her acting chops even amongst a strong
> cast. That's something I want to point out to those going nuts about how
> versatile Dichen Lachman is. I'm sorry to be harping on this point, since
> I like Lachman, but all last year folks were going on and on about her
> amazing ability to show many faces, based on a bunch of ninety-second
> cameos (usually as a way to set up a chance to criticize Dushku, who has
> to actually carry the show).
Still going on in the thread above this.
> Well, people, *this* is how to prove that you're an amazingly versatile
> actor (as if we didn't already know if from _Angel_). We see Whiskey as
> creepy and potentially violent, wisecracking as a defense mechanism for an
> identity crisis, angry at the world, dead sexy, shattered and vulnerable
> but still with a bit of steel, and in all that, she's never not
> convincing. Acker is too good not to get showcase episodes like this one.
Yeah, Acker is great. Again. I can't get over how hot she is crawling over
Topher, but somehow not sacrificing the Euww! factor while doing it. (I
mean - Topher? <shudder> Biggest laugh of the episode for me was how she
couldn't stand his smell.)
> First impression of her messing with Topher is how scary she can look.
> But the big thing that impressed me about their phone conversation is
> that, by playing off Topher's arrogance (if there's something wrong with
> her, it's her fault, not his), the show forces him into a situation in
> which he's forced to see a doll as a person rather than a product of
> programming.
I think he was already on his way in Omega, but here's where it really comes
forth. The interesting thing about your comment, though, is that Claire
evidently doesn't believe she's a real person, while that's what Topher was
aiming at. I think the exchange where Topher calls her human and Claire
retorts that he shouldn't flatter himself is one of the more powerful of the
episode.
> Meanwhile, despite being leads, Victor and Sierra continue their trend of
> getting very little screen time. Sierra's role in particular seems like a
> throwaway, although her discomfort with "Orientals" and musing about being
> tied down and spanked work mostly because of some great reaction shots
> from Ivy.
Go Ivy! I think I'm going to adopt her this season as the under-appreciated
character who deserves more.
But, yeah, I suppose Victor and Sierra really ought to get more themselves.
For some reason their hand holding scene didn't work for me. It felt
artificially inserted I guess. I liked the short scene of Adelle
unconsciously stroking Victor's face - doubly nice because they really
turned on the cold manipulating DeWitt this episode. Sierra was just perve
doll of the week - practically pandering. Although, again, go Ivy!
> Probably worth maybe talking about Echo and Paul at some point, right?
> Well, I'll start with a sort of criticism. Actually, first I'll mention
> that the rapport between Echo/Roma and Paul as detective partners flows
> well, giving me reassurance (along with their great scenes together in the
> unaired pilot and "Epitaph One") that the two actors will not have the
> total anti-screen chemistry together that we saw in "Needs."
Good scene - the best of theirs. The rest are actually pretty good in
themselves, but don't feel well founded. I'm really struggling with how
deeply connected they make Echo appear to be with him by the end. It
doesn't feel earned to me.
> Okay. So Paul is all conflicted and broody and such about seeing
> Echo/Roma get intimately involved with arms dealer Martin (the always
> smooth Jamie Bamber, our first credited Special Guest Star). At first he
> seems to be using her as a way to crack a case he couldn't using normal
> channels. Those of us who watch these kinds of shows will know that
> there's more to his motivations than that, because that's just how Joss
> writes. Waking up Caroline seems to be an ultimate goal. My problem is
> that this doesn't mitigate the fact that he's basically whoring her out en
> route to his goals. The viewer may or may not see hiring a doll as
> prostitution or rape, but we know from "Man On The Street" that Paul
> Ballard does. I get that the show likes to compromise our would-be white
> knights, so Paul can't play the "Helo" role (a moral center). I just
> don't see what, if anything, his principles even are at this point. He's
> still the character that the show doesn't really seem to have figured out
> to my satisfaction yet, which is a shame given that he's so central to
> _Dollhouse_. Viewing the original persona as the only one who's "real" is
> at least somewhat consistent with how he dealt with Mellie after learning
> that she wasn't "real."
Well, he had already compromised his morals with Mellie. Setting her free
probably helped his sense of self worth, but I'm pretty sure that part of
the idea here is that he's convinced himself that he's at least partly
corrupted already. I also think the idea with Echo is that he thinks
(hopes) that working with her as a partner will make compromises like
sleeping with the target tolerable. It's police under-cover work as opposed
to prostitution. That may be why he resists taking on the job of Echo's
handler. That would make him a pimp - the way Boyd saw it all along. I
think the scenes of conflicted Ballard are largely about his
rationalizations not really working.
And I think we were shown his escape hatch at the end of the episode when
Echo asked him to join her in her cause. I don't know how they'll develop
it, but the sense I get is that's where he's going to find himself.
Oh, and somewhere in this mix is just making something of himself. This
episode seemed to make a point of emphasizing how much of a failure he had
been in the FBI. Echo is also an opportunity to finally make a difference.
So, maybe his first idea of how to do that wasn't quite right. But with
Echo as a real partner, maybe that'll finally change.
I'm OK with most of this, but again, I'm struggling with the personal
connect between the two. It doesn't quite feel real to me yet - not earned.
And in the meantime, what about the already established connection between
Echo and Boyd? Why didn't Echo go to him with her plea?
> Another wrinkle to the ongoing discussion of identity comes in the
> Topher/Whiskey bedroom sequence. Granted, it's a masterful sequence with
> a lot going on. There's "ew" at the thought of Topher getting laid, the
> "relief" that it's Whiskey messing with him (and nice to see a guy not
> have his argument defeated by a sleep-erection), and her interesting but
> totally wrong theorizing about why her creator made her what she is.
> Topher's outburst that he wants her to be "better than me!" and his
> explanation that, giving someone the opportunity, she chooses to despise
> him makes him marginally sympathetic in the whole thing. There are some
> clever reversals in dialogue, especially "you're human." "Don't flatter
> yourself." And yes, as already mentioned, the sequence highlights that
> Acker is just smoking hot. But one of the functions of this scene is to
> clearly show a long-term engagement as having its own identity.
> Whiskey/Saunders refuses to be wiped, even if gives her back her original
> self, because she doesn't want to "die." Certainly seems like a sentient
> person who has her own rights now that she's been created.
Color me relieved. Now I can get off that hobby horse. With the way they
were developing the role of the Caroline identity late last season, I was
starting to get worried they'd never address this.
> In the engagement of the week, things heat up when Martin first finds out
> that his wife isn't who he thinks she is. What I like about this part is
> the way Echo, as a spy, is so committed to her persona before her imprint
> starts to break down. She manages to put Martin on the defensive even
> though she's the one who's been photographed with an enemy, to the point
> where he looks like he half believes that she's the one being used to get
> at him. And then we go to "wait. what'd they make me this time?" which is
> a great note to go to commercial on.
I liked that moment too. I remember puzzling at the name she gave herself,
thinking that didn't sound right, but not even sure what I heard. Then -
poof - blown cover.
I was thinking about the way she serially adopted her different personas in
search of the proper one, and wondered if this might turn out to be a way to
limit the problems of constantly bringing in new characters for Dushku to
play. Hell, maybe some of the past characters might even be developed as
ongoing.
> The ending is a bit of a confused mess after that, as often happens when
> this show switches to action scenes, but at least they get to blow up a
> car. I don't notice the reduced budget very much.
I hadn't thought about it. But in retrospect I don't think there was much
on location shooting, and the fight sequence didn't seem complex. I'm
thinking it was shot pretty quickly without much or difficult stunt work.
> -Okay, so on this show, Apollo doesn't have to pretend to be American, and
> Wesley doesn't have to pretend to be British.
I sure struggled getting used to Denisof's voice. Not much character in it
yet either. But then not much opportunity either.
> -The show continues with the comparison of Boyd and Paul, to the point
> where they try to paint each other as equally likely to have introduced
> Senator Perrin into the plot. Don't know where they're going with that
> element.
Hell if I know. With all the powerful people that know of the Dollhouse, I
don't see any good reason for either to be singled out. Maybe there isn't
any good reason and it's just the two sniping at each other because they're
rivals for Echo's attention and fought hand to hand once in a context that
may not feel settled for either.
They do seem to have similar bad taste in clothes though.
> -Voyeurs get (a brief glimpse of) Echo and Whiskey ready to make out.
> Satisfied yet?
Without the payoff? You're kidding, right? That'll just raise the noise
level calling for it.
> -So, how exactly *did* Echo's erstwhile handler miss such an obvious sign
> of action? Actual plot point, or just a throwaway to justify getting Paul
> in place?
He doesn't know how to read the graph or isn't motivated enough to look
closely when he already "knows" what it must be? I think the point is
strictly to establish that Echo needs a better handler. His existence also
allowed for Echo's amusing offhand rendition of, "with my life," during the
trust ritual with him.
> -Maybe Echo will have more success secretly building an identity if she
> doesn't let every single person in the House know about it.
Maybe it's her way of recruiting people to her team. In any case, she
revealed a whole lot more to Paul than to anybody else.
> Echo keeps compositing. Caroline was always trying to set people free,
> and that includes the dolls. What could be important about this iteration
> is that this time it's Echo who takes up Caroline's goal, without being
> directly influenced by her. We (or I, at least) may look back on it as
> the show passing the "central character" torch from the one who appears in
> brief flashbacks to our present-day protagonist.
Maybe. But her first objective is finding Caroline.
> A question that I'm sure will be asked by some viewers is why we weren't
> here from the beginning. Echo trying to free the actives from the inside
> is pretty much where you'd expect a typical TV show to start; Echo would
> be at exactly this point after one episode, not after one season. And I'm
> not convinced yet that the story is all that much richer having taken its
> time getting here. But quibbling about the pacing presumes that there's
> only one "correct" path for the _Dollhouse_ narrative to take, and I don't
> feel the need to do that. It was, for the most part, an entertaining
> enough ride. It is what it is.
>
> So.
>
> One sentence summary: The usual intriguing jumble.
>
> AOQ rating: Good
I liked the episode. There are a number of intriguing things and one pretty
compelling scene (Whiskey, Topher and a minority vote), which adds up to a
Good rating from me. Not an especially high Good. It didn't feel much like
a season opener. A lot of people feel awkwardly placed. (Boyd's role is
what exactly?) I'm sure not sitting around going, "Wow!"
But one thing about it that I'm very happy about is that it did feel
comfortable - like the series has a self identity and is happy to follow its
path. Last season it almost always came across as confused by itself.
OBS
George W Harris
wrote:
>> In the engagement of the week, things heat up when Martin first finds out
>> that his wife isn't who he thinks she is. What I like about this part is
>> the way Echo, as a spy, is so committed to her persona before her imprint
>> starts to break down. She manages to put Martin on the defensive even
>> though she's the one who's been photographed with an enemy, to the point
>> where he looks like he half believes that she's the one being used to get
>> at him. And then we go to "wait. what'd they make me this time?" which is
>> a great note to go to commercial on.
>
>I liked that moment too. I remember puzzling at the name she gave herself,
>thinking that didn't sound right, but not even sure what I heard. Then -
>poof - blown cover.
The name (somethingorother Pell) was the hostage
negotiator imprint from "Ghost".
--
Doesn't the fact that there are *exactly* 50 states seem a little suspicious?
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'
One Bit Shy
news:tkctb5duptd3gdmjo...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 19:20:28 -0400, "One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry>
> wrote:
>
>>> In the engagement of the week, things heat up when Martin first finds
>>> out
>>> that his wife isn't who he thinks she is. What I like about this part
>>> is
>>> the way Echo, as a spy, is so committed to her persona before her
>>> imprint
>>> starts to break down. She manages to put Martin on the defensive even
>>> though she's the one who's been photographed with an enemy, to the point
>>> where he looks like he half believes that she's the one being used to
>>> get
>>> at him. And then we go to "wait. what'd they make me this time?" which
>>> is
>>> a great note to go to commercial on.
>>
>>I liked that moment too. I remember puzzling at the name she gave
>>herself,
>>thinking that didn't sound right, but not even sure what I heard. Then -
>>poof - blown cover.
>
> The name (somethingorother Pell) was the hostage
> negotiator imprint from "Ghost".
Penn. And, yeah, I know that now. I just like how originally it was only
mildly disorienting as my own mind tried to assume that she'd get the name
right. It's nicely played.
OBS
Pete B
tsm...@wildmail.com says...
> There are some clever reversals
> in dialogue, especially "you're human." "Don't flatter yourself."
>
The wrong kind of clever for primetime.
Pete B
> engagement as having its own identity. Whiskey/Saunders refuses to be
> wiped, even if gives her back her original self, because she doesn't want to
> "die." Certainly seems like a sentient person who has her own rights now
> that she's been created.
>
>
The Voyager syndrome: If you run the program for too long it starts to
think of itself as alive ;)
David Milligan
Did I miss it, or was there no explanation of how Echo got back to
the Dollhouse?
Someone mentioned that "Dollhouse" doesn't have the signature Joss
(jokes and zingers). I was rewatching "Serenity" today and realized that
"Dollhouse" has no Jayne-Cobb equivalent.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dollhouse_episodes
Season One summaries and Season Two "previews"
David E. Milligan
http://geocities.com/daviderl31/ElizaDushku.htm
http://daviderl31.blogspot.com/
Arbitrar Of Quality
news:MPG.2528dd59a...@news.usenetserver.com...
No one's watching TV on Friday nights anyway, so if you keep it under
budget, no harm in being clever.
-AOQ
~for the record, I categorically refuse to play the "my show isn't a hit
because people with differing tastes are stupid" card~
Arbitrar Of Quality
news:h9mhns$h9f$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> One question and a comment.
>
> Did I miss it, or was there no explanation of how Echo got back to
> the Dollhouse?
Which time? This week, they completed the engagement and presumably
meandered back at some point.
Arbitrar Of Quality
news:35im02....@integratelecom.com...
>>
>> -So, how exactly *did* Echo's erstwhile handler miss such an obvious sign
>> of action? Actual plot point, or just a throwaway to justify getting
>> Paul in place?
>>
>
> episode. We never did see who it was, and there was a scene of Adele
> holding Echo's hand while she was in the treatment chair.
We saw him briefly. I didn't bother to check, but I just assumed it was the
same mook introduced at the end of ASITHOL.
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
news:OMydnTLT56VYPCPX...@supernews.com...
> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
> news:h9lrnh$km3$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>> DOLLHOUSE
>> Season Two, Episode 1: "Vows"
>
>
>> The first thing that struck me about "Vows" was that the show is fully in
>> its own world now. Not much attempt at exposition to fill in potential
>> new viewers on what's going on, we just pick up where we left off and
>> move on.
>
> I was struck by the same thing. On the other hand I'm also wondering if
> I'm under-estimating the abilities of new viewers to catch on. Too much
> hand holding can be obvious and boring too. You sure don't want to
> sacrifice the episode at hand for a remedial course in Dollhouse basics.
> My own awareness of the past may cloud the true coherency of the depicted
> present. Maybe.
It sounds counter-intuitive, but a lot of times, the best way for a show to
hook new viewers is to do what it does best. If I can tell something looks
good, I'll either remember it as something to watch from the beginning
sometime, or make the effort to go along for the ride and figure it out as I
go along. Or both.
Actually, sometimes I'll dismiss a show based on a weak early episode, then
come back on a stronger episode, and then be inspired to start following
along (and eventually watch the early stuff too). nu_Battlestar Galactica_
and nu_Doctor Who_ are examples; I wasn't impressed by "Six Degrees Of
Separation" or "The End Of The World," but both shows eventually piqued my
interest when I happened to give them another chance during S2 episodes a
try ("Home" two parter, "The Satan Pit").
And some episodes are starters and some aren't. I flipped to a _Heroes_
rerun marathon (mid-S1) during "Six Months Ago" or whatever it was called,
and decided it was useless if I didn't know who these people were, but still
had the sense that the show was worth watching. I then tried a more
"typical" episode, and then just watched as I went along. And eventually
got bored and quit in later years, but the last third of S1 was quite
enjoyable even to a viewer who hadn't seen the beginning.
>> Maybe the attempt to grab the casual viewers has been abandoned; the
>> show's small but devoted faithful is the only audience we'll ever have.
>> Or maybe the plan is to show the series's strong side rather than the
>> somewhat unsatisfactory attempts to make it more episodic at the
>> beginning of S1.
>
> I assume the latter. I just hope they didn't go overboard the other way.
> Most of Whedon's shows - even most of Angel - was IMO more episodic than
> serial. One of his past strengths has been the ability to support strong
> serial aspects without sacrificing the episodic baseline.
Alls I know is, as I've said, when I tried watching a random _Angel_ rerun
("Couplet"), I basically said "I'm not even going to try. Sometime maybe
I'll watch the whole thing."
>>Also notable that the show's star doesn't really become an important
>>player until midway through the season premiere.
>
> But did you notice that this year's title images are all Dushku?
It was always that way. Well, now it's more Dushku, less cityscape. Makes
the show look more action-packed.
> Good scene - the best of theirs. The rest are actually pretty good in
> themselves, but don't feel well founded. I'm really struggling with how
> deeply connected they make Echo appear to be with him by the end. It
> doesn't feel earned to me.
[snip]
> > I'm OK with most of this, but again, I'm struggling with the personal
> connect between the two. It doesn't quite feel real to me yet - not
> earned. And in the meantime, what about the already established connection
> between Echo and Boyd? Why didn't Echo go to him with her plea?
I'd agree with that generally. Snipped most of your analysis of Paul, but
sure, sounds reasonable in theory, but the execution doesn't feel quite real
to me. And your last question is definitely worth asking. I still have no
idea where Boyd fits into the series's sense of itself (after starting off
so interesting, too), except that he'd probably disapprove of it.
>> The ending is a bit of a confused mess after that, as often happens when
>> this show switches to action scenes, but at least they get to blow up a
>> car. I don't notice the reduced budget very much.
>
> I hadn't thought about it. But in retrospect I don't think there was much
> on location shooting, and the fight sequence didn't seem complex. I'm
> thinking it was shot pretty quickly without much or difficult stunt work.
ME shows don't usually impress me with the complexity of their fight scenes
anyway, with a few exceptions.
> I liked the episode. There are a number of intriguing things and one
> pretty compelling scene (Whiskey, Topher and a minority vote), which adds
> up to a Good rating from me. Not an especially high Good. It didn't feel
> much like a season opener. A lot of people feel awkwardly placed.
> (Boyd's role is what exactly?) I'm sure not sitting around going, "Wow!"
>
> But one thing about it that I'm very happy about is that it did feel
> comfortable - like the series has a self identity and is happy to follow
> its path. Last season it almost always came across as confused by itself.
Higher Good than you, but otherwise more or less agreed on most points. Say
something blatantly wrong so we can have more of a discussion.
-AOQ
One Bit Shy
> "One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry> wrote in message
> news:OMydnTLT56VYPCPX...@supernews.com...
>> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:h9lrnh$km3$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>
>>> DOLLHOUSE
>>> Season Two, Episode 1: "Vows"
>>
>>
>>> The first thing that struck me about "Vows" was that the show is fully
>>> in its own world now. Not much attempt at exposition to fill in
>>> potential new viewers on what's going on, we just pick up where we left
>>> off and move on.
>>
>> I was struck by the same thing. On the other hand I'm also wondering if
>> I'm under-estimating the abilities of new viewers to catch on. Too much
>> hand holding can be obvious and boring too. You sure don't want to
>> sacrifice the episode at hand for a remedial course in Dollhouse basics.
>> My own awareness of the past may cloud the true coherency of the depicted
>> present. Maybe.
>
> It sounds counter-intuitive, but a lot of times, the best way for a show
> to hook new viewers is to do what it does best. If I can tell something
> looks good, I'll either remember it as something to watch from the
> beginning sometime, or make the effort to go along for the ride and figure
> it out as I go along. Or both.
That's a lot better than what I said. People always have to catch up when
they join a series in the middle. Just make sure the episodes are good
enough to make people want to catch up. A lot more valuable than perpetual
explanations.
Still... This episode must have been tough for newbies.
> And some episodes are starters and some aren't. I flipped to a _Heroes_
> rerun marathon (mid-S1) during "Six Months Ago" or whatever it was called,
> and decided it was useless if I didn't know who these people were, but
> still had the sense that the show was worth watching. I then tried a more
> "typical" episode, and then just watched as I went along. And eventually
> got bored and quit in later years, but the last third of S1 was quite
> enjoyable even to a viewer who hadn't seen the beginning.
Well, my first reaction is that you started watching during the dead period
of S1 when even people already into the series wavered a bit. It just got
better towards the end of the season. As for later seasons - feh. I don't
think I'm going to watch it this year. I think Heroes is doomed to being a
one season classic that never should have continued.
>>> Maybe the attempt to grab the casual viewers has been abandoned; the
>>> show's small but devoted faithful is the only audience we'll ever have.
>>> Or maybe the plan is to show the series's strong side rather than the
>>> somewhat unsatisfactory attempts to make it more episodic at the
>>> beginning of S1.
>>
>> I assume the latter. I just hope they didn't go overboard the other way.
>> Most of Whedon's shows - even most of Angel - was IMO more episodic than
>> serial. One of his past strengths has been the ability to support strong
>> serial aspects without sacrificing the episodic baseline.
>
> Alls I know is, as I've said, when I tried watching a random _Angel_ rerun
> ("Couplet"), I basically said "I'm not even going to try. Sometime maybe
> I'll watch the whole thing."
Heh. That's sure not the random rerun I'd pick. But then I suppose that
wouldn't be random. Angel is the most serial of the bunch - especialy S3
and S4.
>
>>>Also notable that the show's star doesn't really become an important
>>>player until midway through the season premiere.
>>
>> But did you notice that this year's title images are all Dushku?
>
> It was always that way. Well, now it's more Dushku, less cityscape.
> Makes the show look more action-packed.
It's funny that I never noticed that. It doesn't feel as Dushku-esque.
Perhaps its the group shots that toned it down.
> I still have no idea where Boyd fits into the series's sense of itself
> (after starting off so interesting, too), except that he'd probably
> disapprove of it.
And with Amy Acker's limited air time this season, being Whiskey's suitor
won't be an adequate solution.
Incidently, in this episode Claire claims that Boyd didn't use to like her.
But I don't remember it that way. Hell, back in Stage Fright, as part of
pushing the friends help friends theme, it sure looked to me that Boyd
worked their friendship to get Saunders to OK returning him to the field
before his injuries were really healed. Did I miss an undercurrent between
those two?
>>> The ending is a bit of a confused mess after that, as often happens when
>>> this show switches to action scenes, but at least they get to blow up a
>>> car. I don't notice the reduced budget very much.
>>
>> I hadn't thought about it. But in retrospect I don't think there was
>> much on location shooting, and the fight sequence didn't seem complex.
>> I'm thinking it was shot pretty quickly without much or difficult stunt
>> work.
>
> ME shows don't usually impress me with the complexity of their fight
> scenes anyway, with a few exceptions.
Even by ME standards this struck me as short on continuous action. It was
very much an edited sequence of simple usually single action moves. In any
case, you know that Joss takes pride in his low cost production. I suspect
he genuinely doesn't care all that much for what high budget can get you.
He'd probably spend it on more actors and writers anyway.
> Higher Good than you, but otherwise more or less agreed on most points.
> Say something blatantly wrong so we can have more of a discussion.
Uh. OK. Don't you think it would have been better if Saunders picked up
the knife and went after Echo than play her little dominance game with the
lollipop?
Um. This is hard. But you know, I really was intrigued by the suggestion
of continued rivalry between Whiskey and Echo. They do seem to be
approaching their sense of active identity very differently. And catfights
within the Dollhouse ought to make sense somewhere. Maybe Mellie will come
back as a trouble maker.
OBS
Ken from Chicago
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
news:h9lrnh$km3$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
The general consensus amongst DH and Joss fans is that the show is much
better as an ensemble show, or at least have a different lead, preferably
not a doll. First season when it got away from featuring ED but everyone
that's when it went into high gear.
> overall feeling as a non newbie was that the opening idling was
> interesting enough, things sagged a bit in the middle, and then picked up
> with the typical Joss acceleration of twists and reversals towards the
> end. But I don't know entirely what to make of it, so let's review.
>
> I do like the new opening sequence. Less moodiness and less L.A., but it
> more concisely shows Echo wearing a lot of hats in a short time.
Here's where a narration or even a "previously" would be helpful to newbs.
> Good to see that Amy Acker will still be spending plenty of time guest
> starring, based on how much Whiskey/Saunders is emphasized. I'm
> continually impressed with her acting chops even amongst a strong cast.
> That's something I want to point out to those going nuts about how
> versatile Dichen Lachman is. I'm sorry to be harping on this point, since
> I like Lachman, but all last year folks were going on and on about her
> amazing ability to show many faces, based on a bunch of ninety-second
> cameos (usually as a way to set up a chance to criticize Dushku, who has
> to actually carry the show). Well, people, *this* is how to prove that
> you're an amazingly versatile actor (as if we didn't already know if from
> _Angel_). We see Whiskey as creepy and potentially violent, wisecracking
> as a defense mechanism for an identity crisis, angry at the world, dead
> sexy, shattered and vulnerable but still with a bit of steel, and in all
> that, she's never not convincing. Acker is too good not to get showcase
> episodes like this one.
> [Post-hoc edit: Apparently, some people think her driving off at the end
> is a way of mostly or totally writing Whiskey out of the series due to the
> actor's limited availability. If so, that's a damn shame.]
AA rocked da house, yall!
> First impression of her messing with Topher is how scary she can look.
> But the big thing that impressed me about their phone conversation is
> that, by playing off Topher's arrogance (if there's something wrong with
> her, it's her fault, not his), the show forces him into a situation in
> which he's forced to see a doll as a person rather than a product of
> programming.
Illyria showed that, as well as ALIAS.
> Meanwhile, despite being leads, Victor and Sierra continue their trend of
> getting very little screen time. Sierra's role in particular seems like a
Jennifer Morrison and Jesse Spencer of HOUSE could tell you about that.
Adele called it. Why'd he set her free and not Caroline (for in-story not
meta reasons)?
> Another wrinkle to the ongoing discussion of identity comes in the
> Topher/Whiskey bedroom sequence. Granted, it's a masterful sequence with
> a lot going on. There's "ew" at the thought of Topher getting laid, the
> "relief" that it's Whiskey messing with him (and nice to see a guy not
> have his argument defeated by a sleep-erection), and her interesting but
> totally wrong theorizing about why her creator made her what she is.
> Topher's outburst that he wants her to be "better than me!" and his
> explanation that, giving someone the opportunity, she chooses to despise
> him makes him marginally sympathetic in the whole thing. There are some
> clever reversals in dialogue, especially "you're human." "Don't flatter
> yourself." And yes, as already mentioned, the sequence highlights that
> Acker is just smoking hot. But one of the functions of this scene is to
> clearly show a long-term engagement as having its own identity.
> Whiskey/Saunders refuses to be wiped, even if gives her back her original
> self, because she doesn't want to "die." Certainly seems like a sentient
> person who has her own rights now that she's been created.
Once again demonstrating my point elsewhere that the dolls do have free
will.
> In the engagement of the week, things heat up when Martin first finds out
> that his wife isn't who he thinks she is. What I like about this part is
> the way Echo, as a spy, is so committed to her persona before her imprint
> starts to break down. She manages to put Martin on the defensive even
> though she's the one who's been photographed with an enemy, to the point
> where he looks like he half believes that she's the one being used to get
> at him. And then we go to "wait. what'd they make me this time?" which is
> a great note to go to commercial on.
Nice. Snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
> The ending is a bit of a confused mess after that, as often happens when
> this show switches to action scenes, but at least they get to blow up a
> car. I don't notice the reduced budget very much.
>
> Shorter takes:
>
> -Okay, so on this show, Apollo doesn't have to pretend to be American, and
> Wesley doesn't have to pretend to be British.
>
> -The show continues with the comparison of Boyd and Paul, to the point
> where they try to paint each other as equally likely to have introduced
> Senator Perrin into the plot. Don't know where they're going with that
> element.
Everyone has an angle.
> -Voyeurs get (a brief glimpse of) Echo and Whiskey ready to make out.
> Satisfied yet?
>
> -"Go 'be your best.'" "No one is their best in here."
>
> -Adelle on working an angle: "With the exception of the very special and
> the comatose, have you ever met someone who wasn't?"
>
> -So, how exactly *did* Echo's erstwhile handler miss such an obvious sign
> of action? Actual plot point, or just a throwaway to justify getting Paul
> in place?
He's not doing his best.
> -Easy visual joke, but you gotta love Whiskey getting acquainted with a
> flask.
>
> -"Special agent in charge of bugger-all" is a very Spike line.
>
> -Since it's not too important, the show doesn't bother explaining exactly
> what happens to Martin at the end. He "got nabbed," but by whom? Paul
> doesn't have any official status anymore.
Citizen's arrest! Citizen's arrest!
> -Maybe Echo will have more success secretly building an identity if she
> doesn't let every single person in the House know about it.
She's new at this. She was reborn yesterday.
> Echo keeps compositing. Caroline was always trying to set people free,
> and that includes the dolls. What could be important about this iteration
> is that this time it's Echo who takes up Caroline's goal, without being
> directly influenced by her. We (or I, at least) may look back on it as
> the show passing the "central character" torch from the one who appears in
> brief flashbacks to our present-day protagonist.
Interesting question: Where do they get the donor personas?
> A question that I'm sure will be asked by some viewers is why we weren't
> here from the beginning. Echo trying to free the actives from the inside
> is pretty much where you'd expect a typical TV show to start; Echo would
> be at exactly this point after one episode, not after one season. And I'm
> not convinced yet that the story is all that much richer having taken its
> time getting here. But quibbling about the pacing presumes that there's
> only one "correct" path for the _Dollhouse_ narrative to take, and I don't
> feel the need to do that. It was, for the most part, an entertaining
> enough ride. It is what it is.
Widely reported Joss and crew THEMSELVES didn't have a "handle" on the show
until around "Man on the Street". They struggled with the premise and the
storyline.
> So.
>
> One sentence summary: The usual intriguing jumble.
>
> AOQ rating: Good
> .
> .
> [Season Two so far:
> 1) "Vows" - Good]
>
> ~as of this writing, _Dollhouse_ has been on the air for two hundred
> twenty-five days without being cancelled (to my knowledge). Wow!~
-- Ken from Chicago
Ken from Chicago
"David Brewer" <david...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:wNwvm.98652$OO7....@text.news.virginmedia.com...
Ballard doesn't work for the house, he works for the doll.
-- Ken from Chicago
Ken from Chicago
"David Milligan" <david...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:h9mhns$h9f$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> Did I miss it, or was there no explanation of how Echo got back to
> the Dollhouse?
>
> Someone mentioned that "Dollhouse" doesn't have the signature Joss
> (jokes and zingers). I was rewatching "Serenity" today and realized that
> "Dollhouse" has no Jayne-Cobb equivalent.
That has been split between Ballard and Boyd.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dollhouse_episodes
> Season One summaries and Season Two "previews"
>
> David E. Milligan
> http://geocities.com/daviderl31/ElizaDushku.htm
> http://daviderl31.blogspot.com/
-- Ken from Chicago
Arbitrar Of Quality
"One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry> wrote in message
> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
> news:h9mjj4$rgo$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> And some episodes are starters and some aren't. I flipped to a _Heroes_
>> rerun marathon (mid-S1) during "Six Months Ago" or whatever it was
>> called, and decided it was useless if I didn't know who these people
>> were, but still had the sense that the show was worth watching. I then
>> tried a more "typical" episode, and then just watched as I went along.
>> And eventually got bored and quit in later years, but the last third of
>> S1 was quite enjoyable even to a viewer who hadn't seen the beginning.
>
> Well, my first reaction is that you started watching during the dead
> period of S1 when even people already into the series wavered a bit. It
> just got better towards the end of the season. As for later seasons -
> feh. I don't think I'm going to watch it this year. I think Heroes is
> doomed to being a one season classic that never should have continued.
That's the popular theory.
-AOQ
Michael Ikeda
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers/discussion of unaired episodes
> in these review threads.
>
>
> DOLLHOUSE
> Season Two, Episode 1: "Vows"
> (or "Moving forward/We don't know where we're going, but we're
> on our way") Writer: Joss Whedon
> Director: Joss Whedon
>
>
> -Since it's not too important, the show doesn't bother
> explaining exactly what happens to Martin at the end. He "got
> nabbed," but by whom? Paul doesn't have any official status
> anymore.
>
Exploding cars and gunshots tend to attract law enforcement
attention, especially if someone's been tipped off beforehand.
The tricky part is arranging things so that Paul and Echo don't get
pulled in for questioning.
--
Michael Ikeda mmi...@erols.com
"Telling a statistician not to use sampling is like telling an
astronomer they can't say there is a moon and stars"
Lynne Billard, past president American Statistical Association
Don Sample
Michael Ikeda <mmi...@erols.com> wrote:
> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in
> news:h9lrnh$km3$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
> > A reminder: Please avoid spoilers/discussion of unaired episodes
> > in these review threads.
> >
> >
> > DOLLHOUSE
> > Season Two, Episode 1: "Vows"
> > (or "Moving forward/We don't know where we're going, but we're
> > on our way") Writer: Joss Whedon
> > Director: Joss Whedon
> >
>
> >
> > -Since it's not too important, the show doesn't bother
> > explaining exactly what happens to Martin at the end. He "got
> > nabbed," but by whom? Paul doesn't have any official status
> > anymore.
> >
>
> Exploding cars and gunshots tend to attract law enforcement
> attention, especially if someone's been tipped off beforehand.
>
> The tricky part is arranging things so that Paul and Echo don't get
> pulled in for questioning.
Echo might be easy enough to extract, assuming she got away from the
scene before the cops arrived. She was working under a totally
manufactured identity, and will be very hard to trace. Ballard on the
other hand will be very easily identified.
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
Marc Espie
Arbitrar Of Quality <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers/discussion of unaired episodes in these
>review threads.
>
>
>DOLLHOUSE
>Season Two, Episode 1: "Vows"
From my point of view, they mispelled the title, it reads "Wow!!!!" to me.
More stuff happens in this episode than in the first 6 or 7 episodes of season
1.
>[Post-hoc edit: Apparently, some people think her driving off at the end is
>a way of mostly or totally writing Whiskey out of the series due to the
>actor's limited availability. If so, that's a damn shame.]
Big bad at end of season ? (idle speculation). In any case, we got our
money's worth.
>First impression of her messing with Topher is how scary she can look. But
>the big thing that impressed me about their phone conversation is that, by
>playing off Topher's arrogance (if there's something wrong with her, it's
>her fault, not his), the show forces him into a situation in which he's
>forced to see a doll as a person rather than a product of programming.
Topher looks 80% of the way there to "Epitaph One"... I loved the bed scene.
And Topher is still incredibly confused (not program--strike that--CREATE her
to hate him, but still to hate his smell, talk about tortured).
I got a lot of the same vibes as Illirya, very much same estrangement and
total despair at not ever regaining what she had.
>-Okay, so on this show, Apollo doesn't have to pretend to be American, and
>Wesley doesn't have to pretend to be British.
Not really care for Alexis's character so far. Let's hope it picks up...
seems incredibly bland and uninteresting except as a plot device.
Doesn't look very likely to interact a lot with the other characters, but
hey, we'll see. I would have loved to see more Denysof/Acker chemistry ;-)
>A question that I'm sure will be asked by some viewers is why we weren't
>here from the beginning. Echo trying to free the actives from the inside is
>pretty much where you'd expect a typical TV show to start; Echo would be at
>exactly this point after one episode, not after one season. And I'm not
>convinced yet that the story is all that much richer having taken its time
>getting here. But quibbling about the pacing presumes that there's only one
>"correct" path for the _Dollhouse_ narrative to take, and I don't feel the
>need to do that. It was, for the most part, an entertaining enough ride.
>It is what it is.
Well, I could throw away, or summarize about half of season 1, and be happy
with the beginning of season 2. Let's hope the pace keeps up, and that it's
not just the first episode that's THAT good.
>One sentence summary: The usual intriguing jumble.
>
>AOQ rating: Good
>.
>.
>[Season Two so far:
>1) "Vows" - Good]
Oh yeah, that's me, but I loved Adelle's long skirt. Not too fond of her
new haircut, on the other side.
Opus the Penguin
> Not really care for Alexis's character so far. Let's hope it picks
> up... seems incredibly bland and uninteresting except as a plot
> device.
I thought so too. He just did not carry himself like a confident,
ambitious politician. He seemed hesitant, unsure. Unless that's a plot
point, which would contradict the exposition we were given, it's just
bad acting or direction.
--
Opus the Penguin
She gave him that disgusted look that women give to men who have
utterly failed in their gossip responsibilities. - Lisa Ann
phil k.
> "Dollhouse" has no Jayne-Cobb equivalent.
Why does it need one?
Fallen
Because Whedon's strength is humour and emotion and his weakness is
plotting. When Buffy was at it's worst it was still funny and the
characters could still make you care about them. Dollhouse at it's best
is barely funny and all the characters are either evil or change on a
weekly basis.
Fallen.
Fallen
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers/discussion of unaired episodes in
> these review threads.
>
>
Hijacking yours rather than create an extra thread.
Didn't anyone else get the feeling that they'd missed something? Like a
bunch of stuff had changed that it might have been relevant to actually see?
So now Ballard has taken over from Boyd in the role of 'man who sits
there while Echo is raped/pimped out'. In fact they take it one step
further and have it be his idea this time. Not only has this completely
trashed any chance of his redemption as a character but Joss even has
Adelle mock him about it repeatedly.
I can't be arsed to rewatch season 1, once was enough, but is Whiskey's
whole new character out of the blue?
Victor and Sierra may as well not have existed (Judging by the new title
sequence, the makers agree).
To me the episode was a whole bunch of nothing with no payoff. The main
imprint storyline led nowhere except a mild chase scene followed by an
offscreen arrest by 'someone' for 'something'. It's not like the kind of
lawyer an international arms dealer can afford isn't going to be able to
get him off that one. A double episode premiere and the only meaty
ongoing plot elements are a minute long appearance by Wesley and Echo's
memories are getting worse/better.
The only interesting bit was Whiskey/Topher and as I said above the
Whiskey part seems out of nowhere and if you havent' seen Epitaph One
then Topher is acting very odd too.
The most annoying niggle for me was yet another bit of Whedon
lampshading where Whiskey points out Boyd had no interest in her prior
to it being made public she was a Doll. This is immediately handwaved
away despite being a legitimate point. Whedon always does this when he
doesn't have a good reason for a random plot change. Incredibly annoying.
All in all though it was slightly better than most episodes of season 1.
It's still ridiculous rapey and there's still not a single decent person
in sight but Acker saved about 15 minutes of it.
Fallen.
himiko
I agree with your basic reasoning, but it doesn't really answer the
question. Buffy had no Jayne Cobb equivalent and it was funny. Angel
ditto. Why does a show need a Jayne Cobb to be funny? Or to make you
care about the characters.
One of the big things I liked about Vows was that it was funny...or at
least funnier than S1. It's still a very dark show, but it had a lot
of funny lines. And I did, by the end of the episode, care about what
happened to Topher and Saunders. I also care about Sierra and Victor
who are sweet, about Boyd who is sinking fast into corporate evil, and
even about Adele who has already sunk. Echo and Ballard? Not so
much. But then I never could rouse much interest or concern in Buffy
and Angel, and that didn't stop me from enjoying the show. Whedon's
secondary characters are often (always?) more compelling than his
leads.
himiko
phil k.
> Not so
> much. But then I never could rouse much interest or concern in Buffy
> and Angel, and that didn't stop me from enjoying the show. Whedon's
> secondary characters are often (always?) more compelling than his leads.
Let's say they often were on a par with each other. Only with Dollhouse I
feel that the lead doesn't raise much interest in me.
Dollhouse is more like Firefly, where the whole ensemble is the star,
while Buffy and Angel are determed by the leads. Another reason I believe
that Dollhouse was marketed wrong as an Eliza-Dushku-show.
Fallen
I'd say it's just Buffy for me. I thought Angel as a character was a
decent protagonist, probably because he started as a secondary character
whereas Buffy was far and away the most annoying character on her show
(until Dawn turned up seemingly just so Buffy wouldn't occupy that role
any more).
And Captain Mal was great character. I suppose square jawed hero type
aren't exactly thrilling but neither Angel or Mal bugged me as much as
Buffy.
As I've said before though, it's a common problem with American
television. If there's a female lead in an ensemble cast she is quite
often a horrendously annoying person while those around her are the true
reason for watching - Buffy, Meredith Grey and Ally McBeal come flying
to mind. Sookie in True Blood is way down the list of reasons to watch,
although she has got better in latter episodes.
It seems that writers can't differentitate between 'strong independent
woman' and 'annoying harridan who is always right just by writers fiat.
They also quite often act slutty just to make some kind of statement.
Fallen.
One Bit Shy
news:Fc1wm.229053$AC5.1...@newsfe06.ams2...
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> Didn't anyone else get the feeling that they'd missed something? Like a
> bunch of stuff had changed that it might have been relevant to actually
> see?
Well the timeline jumped ahead some from Omega - I'd guess a few months, but
not a year. So people have settled into whatever their post-Omega roles are
a bit, which we've missed. We've especially missed what's going on between
Boyd and Ballard, but then I don't know that their friction and rivalry
really requires a lot of explanation. Most notable to me is that Alpha
doesn't appear to be on anybody's front burner. I suppose we have to assume
that they have no lead on finding Alpha and that enough time has passed
that the Dollhouse has unavoidably moved on.
So, anyway, I feel like we've missed some things, but personally I'm
surprised how much the episode just picks up from Omega - absent follow
through on Alpha.
> So now Ballard has taken over from Boyd in the role of 'man who sits there
> while Echo is raped/pimped out'. In fact they take it one step further and
> have it be his idea this time. Not only has this completely trashed any
> chance of his redemption as a character but Joss even has Adelle mock him
> about it repeatedly.
AOQ and I talked about this a little from a slightly different angle.
Ballard has actually resisted taking on Boyd's old role and has attempted to
handle her function differently by working with Echo as an undercover
partner (more volition from the active, less remote control), further
rationalized by the accomplishment of cracking cases he couldn't before.
But he (and the show) know that this really isn't good enough - that it is
indeed morally corrupt. Ballard's discomfort with Echo; how unsettled he is
while Echo is screwing the arms dealer; and the awkward attempt to apologize
to Echo at the end all illustrate that this really isn't working for him.
Adelle's barely disguised taunts are her message to him to get over it -
that he's already beyond redemption as you put it.
I'm not convinced the above effort works all that well, though I'm more
bothered by the weak foundation for Echo's connection to Ballard shown at
the end.
Be that as it may, I think you're missing how the show tried to show how
unsatisfactory this state of affairs was, and how everything changed at the
end when Echo enlisted Ballard into her battle rather than the other way
around. Now Ballard is a real partner with Echo rather than the fake
partnership of the arms dealing sting. Now he has an objective truly in the
self interests of the actives rather than just another way of using them.
That's why he's now willing to take on the handler role when he resisted
before. And just for kicks, he gets to do this undercover like the cop he
is at heart.
So even as you give up hope for his redemption, he takes the biggest step to
date towards it.
> I can't be arsed to rewatch season 1, once was enough, but is Whiskey's
> whole new character out of the blue?
In detail yes. It's the first extended opportunity we've had to see it in
action. But it's the product of the events in Omega, which impacted her
enormously. We're watching her cope (poorly) with the discovery that she's
"just" an imprint. She doesn't believe she's truly human anymore. The
realization that she's subject to erasure at any time has her scared of
dying. And her former vague dislike for Topher has erupted into an
obsessive loathing for the man who did this to her - that created her.
I think the events of Omega by itself are enough to explain the change, but
there were some earlier clues too. A couple of notable examples are the her
never leaving the Dollhouse and not having anything done with her scars.
> Victor and Sierra may as well not have existed (Judging by the new title
> sequence, the makers agree).
As was pointed out to me, last year's title credits visuals were all Eliza
too. It just seems more obvious this year for some reason. The actors
still get named though.
> To me the episode was a whole bunch of nothing with no payoff. The main
> imprint storyline led nowhere except a mild chase scene followed by an
> offscreen arrest by 'someone' for 'something'. It's not like the kind of
> lawyer an international arms dealer can afford isn't going to be able to
> get him off that one.
I don't know about that, but then that's the problem isn't it - not knowing.
I agree that the biggest weakness of the episode was the tepid arms dealer
story and lack of follow-through on same. Similar problems with engagement
stories showed up sometimes last season too.
Of course the engagement of the week is intended merely as a device to
reveal important things about Echo's development, her new relationship with
Ballard, and other broader Dollhouse story elements. That's fine. Indeed,
some of that is quite good. But the series structure falters (be it
episodic or serial) if the engagement stories keep getting sacrificed for
other objectives. They need to be strong in themselves too.
It may also be deadly to attracting new viewers. The engagement of the week
is the part of the episode that a new viewer can most easily understand
absent knowledge of prior events. If the part they understand doesn't
engage, why would they return?
> A double episode premiere
Double? I saw a normal single 43 minute episode.
> and the only meaty ongoing plot elements are a minute long appearance by
> Wesley and Echo's memories are getting worse/better.
I commented earlier on how this didn't feel like a season opener -
especially not a Whedon season opener. Still, I think there's a lot more
support for ongoing stories than you give it credit for. Surely much of
that will become clearer as the stories develop, but even at this early
stage some stand out. Most notably, I think, is Echo's story, which is
considerably more than just expanding memories. (Though the extent of that
is quite a revelation.) Echo has laid out an objective to recover her
original identity (Caroline) and that of all the actives in the Dollhouse -
and enlisted Ballard as co-conspirator. At first blush, that appears to be
the central campaign of the season. A big deal.
We're also seeing a brewing rivalry between Ballard and Boyd. There's a lot
that could be done with that, but I imagine it will also tie into Echo's
campaign eventually. My first guess would be that it will come to a head at
some point as a personal crisis for Boyd, when he must choose loyalties
between Adelle and Echo. There's room for other choices too - and fun
conflict on the path to wherever. At the least I hope that it will be used
to give some focus to Boyd's character, which has languished for a while.
We didn't see a lot of Victor and Sierra this episode, but we were pointedly
shown the continuation of their attraction. I don't know how, but I kind of
expect their love affair to be an important story element of the season.
We got a big dose of self doubt from Topher this episode. What will be done
with that I have no idea, but surely that will have big plot implications.
In the meantime I think it has fairly obvious thematic meaning. From the
beginning the series has criticized unthinking pursuit of science absent of
consequence. The series has already used the atom bomb comparison - a story
itself filled with the growing self doubt of scientists. The show may not
be going so far as a J. Robert Oppenheimer parallel, but the thought of such
a possibility seems natural fair game on a thematic level. Topher is
starting to feel the responsibility for the consequences of the thing he's
helped so much to create.
Whiskey/Saunder's story is considerably more mysterious, but I don't believe
it's just a way to write Amy Acker out of the series. She's still scheduled
for two more episodes - which is all that Alpha got last season. I'd be
surprised if they aren't intended to be major season impacting stories. The
possibilities are endless - that's why we have to watch shows to find out.
But I expect that important seeds have been planted this episode. As
observation I'll note that her part of this episode went beyond her
relationship with Topher. We also saw the brief tease of interest from
Boyd. I wouldn't be surprised if that arises again later at some critical
juncture. Much bigger than that, I think, is the establishment of a rivalry
with Echo - at least in Whiskey's mind. Perhaps a good dose of jealousy and
envy both for flavor. That could lead to all sorts of big things. I
wouldn't, for example, count out the possibility of her as season big bad -
perhaps even aligned with Alpha. (Right now I'm imagining Alpha being
somehow responsible for healing her scars.) Or maybe something wildly
different. But, somehow, this episode sure looks to me as establishing a
foundation for a future story centered on Whiskey/Saunders.
> The only interesting bit was Whiskey/Topher
Consensus sure seems to be that's the most interesting part. The only
interesting part... well, that's personal taste. I assure you that some
people find other things interesting as well.
> and as I said above the Whiskey part seems out of nowhere and if you
> havent' seen Epitaph One then Topher is acting very odd too.
Epitaph One tells you something of where Topher is headed. It's much harder
to get a handle on Whiskey from that source, though it occurs to me that
we're being reminded this episode of one possible reason for Whiskey being
the one who stays behind in Epitaph One. Whiskey as Saunders evidently is
agoraphobic and feels linked to the Dollhouse.
The foundation for both of their behaviors this episode, however, is very
strongly the events of Omega. Some earlier stuff too, but mostly Omega. In
Topher's case you can see the beginning of his behavior too that episode.
His confrontation with Saunders (and reaction to it) began that episode -
not this one. And look again at his final encounter with Echo that episode.
> The most annoying niggle for me was yet another bit of Whedon lampshading
> where Whiskey points out Boyd had no interest in her prior to it being
> made public she was a Doll. This is immediately handwaved away despite
> being a legitimate point. Whedon always does this when he doesn't have a
> good reason for a random plot change. Incredibly annoying.
How can it be hand waving away when he brought it up unprompted? Whedon
didn't have to write in Claire questioning Boyd's motives. (Actually, for
me, the premise of Boyd previously disliking Saunders is what's
questionable.) Yet he did.
Have you considered the possibility that he raised the question as something
to be resolved in later episodes?
> All in all though it was slightly better than most episodes of season 1.
> It's still ridiculous rapey and there's still not a single decent person
> in sight but Acker saved about 15 minutes of it.
Well, we agree on Acker being terrific. And, for that matter, the arms
dealer story being kind of weak.
OBS
Marc Espie
One Bit Shy <O...@nomail.sorry> wrote:
>"Fallen" <fal...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>news:Fc1wm.229053$AC5.1...@newsfe06.ams2...
>> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>
>
>> Didn't anyone else get the feeling that they'd missed something? Like a
>> bunch of stuff had changed that it might have been relevant to actually
>> see?
>
>Well the timeline jumped ahead some from Omega - I'd guess a few months, but
>not a year. So people have settled into whatever their post-Omega roles are
>a bit, which we've missed. We've especially missed what's going on between
>Boyd and Ballard, but then I don't know that their friction and rivalry
>really requires a lot of explanation. Most notable to me is that Alpha
>doesn't appear to be on anybody's front burner. I suppose we have to assume
>that they have no lead on finding Alpha and that enough time has passed
>that the Dollhouse has unavoidably moved on.
Exact same situation as from the start of the series, which happens some
indeterminate time after the Alpha incident, with no-one being too worried
about him...
himiko
I think that's an on-going problem both for Whedon and for TV
generally. The suit side of things seems to be committed to a star
system, probably because that seems easier to control for marketing
purposes: cast the right actor and ratings are assured. That isn't
really true, of course. Whedon writes ensemble pieces even when he
seems to have a lead (Buffy was as much about the Scoobies as it was
about Buffy), and the rising percentage of ensemble driven scripted
dramas overall suggests that audiences prefer this model too.
himiko
Ben Morrow
Quoth "One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry>:
> > imprint storyline led nowhere except a mild chase scene followed by an
> > offscreen arrest by 'someone' for 'something'. It's not like the kind of
> > lawyer an international arms dealer can afford isn't going to be able to
> > get him off that one.
>
> I don't know about that, but then that's the problem isn't it - not knowing.
> I agree that the biggest weakness of the episode was the tepid arms dealer
> story and lack of follow-through on same. Similar problems with engagement
> stories showed up sometimes last season too.
Jamie Bamber was credited as a 'Special Guest Star' (and Amy and Alexis
were only 'Guest Star's), so presumably the non-resolution indicates we
will get more of this story sometime soon. Hopefully this is the point
where the engagements start to become a little more serial along with
the background story: I always find it a little hard to care about an A
story I know will go no further than the current episode.
Ben
William George Ferguson
>
>Quoth "One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry>:
>> "Fallen" <fal...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>>
>> > To me the episode was a whole bunch of nothing with no payoff. The main
>> > imprint storyline led nowhere except a mild chase scene followed by an
>> > offscreen arrest by 'someone' for 'something'. It's not like the kind of
>> > lawyer an international arms dealer can afford isn't going to be able to
>> > get him off that one.
>>
>> I don't know about that, but then that's the problem isn't it - not knowing.
>> I agree that the biggest weakness of the episode was the tepid arms dealer
>> story and lack of follow-through on same. Similar problems with engagement
>> stories showed up sometimes last season too.
>
>Jamie Bamber was credited as a 'Special Guest Star' (and Amy and Alexis
>were only 'Guest Star's), so presumably the non-resolution indicates we
>will get more of this story sometime soon.
I think you're reading too much into a negotiated warm fuzzy. All 'Special
Guest Star' indicates is that's what Bamber's agent negotiated for his
credit. We already know that both Acker and Denisof will appear in other
episodes, there's no particular evidence that Bamber will be other than a
one-off (although there is nothing preventing his reappearing).
To pick on another Whedon show for examples;
On Buffy, John Ritter was listed as 'Special Guest Star' for 'Ted', he did
not recur (although I always suspected that Willow used some of the Ted
parts she kept, when she repaired the Buffybot).
Kristine Sutherland was never credited as either Guest Star or Special
Guest Star, but she got the final guest credit in the opening 'and Kristine
Sutherland as Joyce Summers'. Dushku got the same treatment (except she
came next to last if both she and Sutherland were in the same ep).
All that, the labeling and placement of the credit in the opening credits,
is negotiated between the actor's agent and the production studio, and
doesn't indicate anything except how the actor thinks he/she is best
presented. It is used by the studios as a perq in place of money.
Another Buffy example, in the main cast opening credits, all the credit
placements were negotiated. For the first five seasons, Anthony Stewart
Head had the final credit ("Anthony Stewart Head as Giles"). Starting with
season six, Alyson Hannigan got that slot, and the character name ("Alyson
Hannigan as Willow" instead of just "Alyson Hannigan" as it had been the
first 5 seasons). That was, at least in part, in lieu of a bigger raise
than Fox and/or UPN could afford, when she was coming off her third $100
million grossing film and had made more for the 2nd and 3rd American Pie
movies than she would from the entire Buffy series.
--
... and my sister is a vampire slayer, her best friend is a witch who
went bonkers and tried to destroy the world, um, I actually used to be
a little ball of energy until about two years ago when some monks
changed the past and made me Buffy's sister and for some reason, a big
klepto. My best friends are Leticia Jones, who moved to San Diego
because this town is evil, and a floppy eared demon named Clem.
(Dawn's fantasy of her intro speech in "Lessons", from the shooting script)
Arbitrar Of Quality
"One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry> wrote in message
news:cJSdnarQc491YF3X...@supernews.com...
What he said.
>> I can't be arsed to rewatch season 1, once was enough, but is Whiskey's
>> whole new character out of the blue?
>
> In detail yes. It's the first extended opportunity we've had to see it in
> action. But it's the product of the events in Omega, which impacted her
> enormously. We're watching her cope (poorly) with the discovery that
> she's "just" an imprint. She doesn't believe she's truly human anymore.
> The realization that she's subject to erasure at any time has her scared
> of dying. And her former vague dislike for Topher has erupted into an
> obsessive loathing for the man who did this to her - that created her.
What he said. And same with Topher too. Pretty much everything involving
Whiskey and/or Topher follows directly from "Omega."
> >> To me the episode was a whole bunch of nothing with no payoff. The main
>> imprint storyline led nowhere except a mild chase scene followed by an
>> offscreen arrest by 'someone' for 'something'.
That depends on how one feels about the pacing. The engagaent of the week
is indeed a means to an end, getting us to where we are at the end of the
episode. But like I talked about in my original review, some people will
definitely find the ongoing storyline to be too slow and repetitious to feel
like much.
>> A double episode premiere
>
> Double? I saw a normal single 43 minute episode.
We established last year that Fallen's Fox affliate transmits a different
version of the episode than yours does.
To Fallen: Not trying to bait, I am legitly curious - why did you go to the
effort of tracking down "Epitaph One" given that you don't enjoy the show?
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
"William George Ferguson" <wmgf...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:d7h2c5hdceq9r3q19...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:12:19 +0100, Ben Morrow <b...@morrow.me.uk> wrote:
>>Jamie Bamber was credited as a 'Special Guest Star' (and Amy and Alexis
>>were only 'Guest Star's), so presumably the non-resolution indicates we
>>will get more of this story sometime soon.
>
> I think you're reading too much into a negotiated warm fuzzy. All
> 'Special
> Guest Star' indicates is that's what Bamber's agent negotiated for his
> credit. We already know that both Acker and Denisof will appear in other
> episodes, there's no particular evidence that Bamber will be other than a
> one-off (although there is nothing preventing his reappearing).
>
> To pick on another Whedon show for examples;
>
> On Buffy, John Ritter was listed as 'Special Guest Star' for 'Ted', he did
> not recur (although I always suspected that Willow used some of the Ted
> parts she kept, when she repaired the Buffybot).
>
> Kristine Sutherland was never credited as either Guest Star or Special
> Guest Star, but she got the final guest credit in the opening 'and
> Kristine
> Sutherland as Joyce Summers'. Dushku got the same treatment (except she
> came next to last if both she and Sutherland were in the same ep).
By S7, Dushku had graduated to "Special Guest Star" on BTVS, while being in
the same credit-position on _Angel_.
Sometimes credits mean more than other times. On some of shows like _Deep
Space Nine_, "[ACTOR] as [CHARACTER]" credits were very frequently given to
semi-regulars, and not to very many others. ME never worked that way, where
relatively minor players like the nurse in "Go Fish" could get the "as
[CHARACTER]" credit.
-AOQ
dogs...@yahoo.com.invalid
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers/discussion of unaired episodes in these
> review threads.
>
>
> DOLLHOUSE
> Season Two, Episode 1: "Vows"
> (or "Moving forward/We don't know where we're going, but we're on our way")
> Writer: Joss Whedon
> Director: Joss Whedon
.
> The first thing that struck me about "Vows" was that the show is fully in
> its own world now. Not much attempt at exposition to fill in potential new
> viewers on what's going on, we just pick up where we left off and move on.
They plunge straight in, but teaser is structured to be as clear as
possible to a newcomer. We see Echo get in the chair, we hear people
talking about her mission, then we see her on the mission. If the
viewer is paying attention, he should at least get the one fundamental
idea that the chair turns Echo into someone else. And that's the one
idea that the viewer *has* to get to have a hope of following along. By
sticking to the basics, this rapid approach might still be a better
introduction than a lot of careful exposition would have been.
> I do like the new opening sequence. Less moodiness and less L.A., but it
> more concisely shows Echo wearing a lot of hats in a short time.
I like 'em too. These new opening credits repeat some of the teaser's
lesson: we see Echo in the Dollhouse, then Echo in the chair, then Echo
being a bunch of different people having adventures. Our mythical new
viewer would have to be pretty attentive to pick up the show's concept
from just this sequence, but it should at least help. Were all the
clips from Vows and season 1? There were at least a couple that I
didn't recognize.
> [Post-hoc edit: Apparently, some people think her driving off at the end is
> a way of mostly or totally writing Whiskey out of the series due to the
> actor's limited availability. If so, that's a damn shame.]
Alas, it seems to be so. On the plus side, this might mean that when
Whiskey does return, it will be a special event, giving us a nice
Whiskey-heavy episode. Because Amy Acker is awesome.
> Meanwhile, despite being leads, Victor and Sierra continue their trend of
> getting very little screen time.
And we also get very little time with non-imprinted Dolls before Echo's
final scene with Ballard. This is probably the most important element
that would confuse the mythical new viewer mentioned above, who might
just think Victor in the teaser and Echo in the checkup scene were
simply drugged or something.
> Sierra's role in particular seems like a
> throwaway, although her discomfort with "Orientals" and musing about being
> tied down and spanked work mostly because of some great reaction shots from
> Ivy.
Was that the same outfit we saw her wearing in the unaired pilot?
> Okay. So Paul is all conflicted and broody and such about seeing Echo/Roma
> get intimately involved with arms dealer Martin (the always smooth Jamie
> Bamber, our first credited Special Guest Star). At first he seems to be
> using her as a way to crack a case he couldn't using normal channels. Those
> of us who watch these kinds of shows will know that there's more to his
> motivations than that, because that's just how Joss writes. Waking up
> Caroline seems to be an ultimate goal. My problem is that this doesn't
> mitigate the fact that he's basically whoring her out en route to his goals.
> The viewer may or may not see hiring a doll as prostitution or rape, but we
> know from "Man On The Street" that Paul Ballard does. I get that the show
> likes to compromise our would-be white knights, so Paul can't play the
> "Helo" role (a moral center). I just don't see what, if anything, his
> principles even are at this point.
Which raises the question, if you willingly violate your own principles,
does that mean they aren't your principles anymore? ... I think Vows is
trying to show us that Paul still believes everything he did last
season. However, he's more pragmatic now, willing if not exactly happy
to use one of his enemies against the others, at least for the time
being. (Maybe this could be seen as an extension of the old cop trick
of using a criminal informant against other criminals.) This works in
theory, but a lot will depend on how it develops. Doing the things he
does will have to take an emotional toll. (He not only pimps Echo out,
he beats her to save her. Necessary though it might have been, ugh.)
Setting it up in Vows is fine. But in future episodes either Paul must
start losing his principles, or keep himself sane by plotting to end the
Dollhouse from within, or some outside force must intervene. Continuing
this same tormented act unchanged would get lame fast. Of course,
Epitaph One's Russian Girl scene points toward the "take solace in
plotting to bring the Dollhouse down" option.
The Roma persona apparently thought she was a real cop or FBI agent, and
Paul her non-kicked-out-of-the-FBI partner. Or were they supposed to be
a team of private detectives or something? Either way, I'm curious how
she would work the marriage thing. Does signing a fake name to a
marriage license automatically render it null and void, or would she
have to get an annulment or divorce afterwards?
> He's still the character that the show
> doesn't really seem to have figured out to my satisfaction yet, which is a
> shame given that he's so central to _Dollhouse_. Viewing the original
> persona as the only one who's "real" is at least somewhat consistent with
> how he dealt with Mellie after learning that she wasn't "real."
And one can see plenty of room in that for future conflict. Will Paul
be willing to kill Taffy, Eleanore, Crystal and the others to bring
Caroline back? Looks that way. But will Echo feel the same?
> Another wrinkle to the ongoing discussion of identity comes in the
> Topher/Whiskey bedroom sequence. Granted, it's a masterful sequence with a
> lot going on. There's "ew" at the thought of Topher getting laid, the
> "relief" that it's Whiskey messing with him (and nice to see a guy not have
> his argument defeated by a sleep-erection), and her interesting but totally
> wrong theorizing about why her creator made her what she is. Topher's
> outburst that he wants her to be "better than me!" and his explanation that,
> giving someone the opportunity, she chooses to despise him makes him
> marginally sympathetic in the whole thing.
At first I wouldn't have been surprised if they played it as another
humorous Saunders prank, with Topher screeching in horror much as he did
with the rats. Instead, they took it in a completely different
direction with Topher's very seriously played "What the hell?!" The
result was probably the best scene in the episode. Amy is awesome, as
mentioned above. And look at the wonderfully doomed position Topher has
put himself in: either Saunders will die or the original inhabitant of
Whiskey's body will be stuck in limbo forever, and either way he's
responsible. Dog help him if he starts seeing every wipe of a persona
as another death, or rather another murder.
This scene also answered one minor question I had from Omega: when
Saunders broke into Topher's computer, did she actually see what
ingredients went into her making? Apparently not. She just knew that
she hated Topher and *assumed* that that was a deliberate part of his
design. That puts a new spin on Topher's reaction in Omega: until that
moment, he probably didn't realize that she actually hated him.
> In the engagement of the week, things heat up when Martin first finds out
> that his wife isn't who he thinks she is.
This is as good a place as any to point out that while Jamie Bamber
plays his role with skill and enthusiasm, the A-story here is pretty
thin. It's just a perfunctory framework to hang scenes between our
regular and recurring cast on. Fortunately, those scenes are much
better.
> The ending is a bit of a confused mess after that, as often happens when
> this show switches to action scenes, but at least they get to blow up a car.
> I don't notice the reduced budget very much.
Klar and his minions feel so confident that they can indulge themselves
in watching Paul berate Roma instead of just shooting them both
immediately, something I found illogical in an entirely believable way.
Note that when Echo displays several different personas in rapid
succession (almost as if Joss and Eliza wanted to answer critics who
said all of Echo's imprints come out the same), this is the first time
Ballard realizes what's going on in her head.
> -Okay, so on this show, Apollo doesn't have to pretend to be American, and
> Wesley doesn't have to pretend to be British.
Aww, and I was going to crack lame jokes about how unconvincing their
accents were.... Hopefully Denisof will get to do more interesting
acting than in the press conference we see here. (Which, judging from
the monuments and buildings in the background, is being held somewhere
atop the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Bridge.)
> -Voyeurs get (a brief glimpse of) Echo and Whiskey ready to make out.
> Satisfied yet?
Never!
> -So, how exactly *did* Echo's erstwhile handler miss such an obvious sign of
> action? Actual plot point, or just a throwaway to justify getting Paul in
> place?
He just didn't care enough. Whereas Paul, who cares so much, was able
to figure out what was going on even when Topher said the readings were
"all over the place." I wouldn't go so far as to call it a plot point,
but this reinforces Adelle's character as someone who genuinely cares
about her Dolls. Also as someone who recognizes the danger with a
handler who doesn't respect his Active, but has enough of a blind spot
to not wonder why so few really good people are lining up to take the
job. (Paul, for his part, is cagey enough to not mention what exactly
happened, even before he gets the complete story from Echo herself.)
> -Since it's not too important, the show doesn't bother explaining exactly
> what happens to Martin at the end. He "got nabbed," but by whom? Paul
> doesn't have any official status anymore.
They stop the bad guy and leave him in a compromising position with the
police on their way. It works for Batman and Spider-Man, doesn't it?
> -Maybe Echo will have more success secretly building an identity if she
> doesn't let every single person in the House know about it.
Ah, but who is she going to have a serious conversation with other than
Paul Ballard and Dr. Saunders? Actually, I'm wondering if Echo is
starting to learn discretion, even stealth, from her various personas.
Was it an accident that she had her final talk with Paul under the
stairs, safe from eavesdroppers without obviously hiding?
> Echo keeps compositing. Caroline was always trying to set people free, and
> that includes the dolls. What could be important about this iteration is
> that this time it's Echo who takes up Caroline's goal, without being
> directly influenced by her. We (or I, at least) may look back on it as the
> show passing the "central character" torch from the one who appears in brief
> flashbacks to our present-day protagonist.
I hadn't thought of that, but it's plausible. Maybe we'll also look
back on this as the moment when Echo became not just the center of the
story but the protagonist. She, not Paul, seems to be the one taking
the lead in their little conspiracy.
> One sentence summary: The usual intriguing jumble.
>
> AOQ rating: Good
I'll give it a Good too. The weakness of the main plot keeps it from
aproaching Excellent territory; but a series of fine individual scenes
between various pairs of characters made it a thoroughly enjoyable hour
and a good launching point for this season's angst and conflict. Now
let's hope they make good use of it.
--Chris
dogs...@yahoo.com.invalid
Fallen <fal...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Didn't anyone else get the feeling that they'd missed something? Like a
> bunch of stuff had changed that it might have been relevant to actually see?
Nope. There are changes but they all flow naturally from season 1.
Take the developments of Omega, let them stew for a few months, and you
get Vows.
> The only interesting bit was Whiskey/Topher and as I said above the
> Whiskey part seems out of nowhere and if you havent' seen Epitaph One
> then Topher is acting very odd too.
Epitaph One shows where Topher is headed; but his behavior in this
episode is rooted in his last couple of scenes in Omega, when he's
clearly starting to feel belated doubts about his work. A viewer who
had seen Omega but not Epitaph One would have no trouble following
along.
--Chris
dogs...@yahoo.com.invalid
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> > I got the imporession that Adele was acting as Echo's handler in this
> > episode. We never did see who it was, and there was a scene of Adele
> > holding Echo's hand while she was in the treatment chair.
>
> We saw him briefly. I didn't bother to check, but I just assumed it was the
> same mook introduced at the end of ASITHOL.
I just checked; it's a different mook.
--Chris
Arbitrar Of Quality
<dogs...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:dogsquid-97120F...@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <h9lrnh$km3$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> > Which raises the question, if you willingly violate your own
>> > principles,
> does that mean they aren't your principles anymore? ... I think Vows is
> trying to show us that Paul still believes everything he did last
> season. However, he's more pragmatic now, willing if not exactly happy
> to use one of his enemies against the others, at least for the time
> being. (Maybe this could be seen as an extension of the old cop trick
> of using a criminal informant against other criminals.) This works in
> theory, but a lot will depend on how it develops. Doing the things he
> does will have to take an emotional toll. (He not only pimps Echo out,
> he beats her to save her. Necessary though it might have been, ugh.)
> Setting it up in Vows is fine. But in future episodes either Paul must
> start losing his principles, or keep himself sane by plotting to end the
> Dollhouse from within, or some outside force must intervene. Continuing
> this same tormented act unchanged would get lame fast. Of course,
> Epitaph One's Russian Girl scene points toward the "take solace in
> plotting to bring the Dollhouse down" option.
I think of this bit as having pretty much reached its endpoint. Throughout
"Vows" Paul does stuff that violates his professed codes of morality as seen
in MOTS et. al. At the end he seems to be losing whatever self-assuredness
he had during the rest of it. But now after that last scene, Echo's the one
driving the story, and he's along for the ride because he has the same
agenda. I imagine he'll have a much easier time convincing himself that
he's not so compromised.
In other words, he's helped make Echo into someone who can give him what he
"needs."
> Note that when Echo displays several different personas in rapid
> succession (almost as if Joss and Eliza wanted to answer critics who
> said all of Echo's imprints come out the same), this is the first time
> Ballard realizes what's going on in her head.
That kinda makes sense out fo the fact that waking up Caroline was Ballar'd
ultimate plan, yet he's still legitimately surprised on "it's not an act."
-AOQ
Pete B
@q40g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, himi...@gmail.com says...
Perhaps that's also part of his overall strategy of sneaking something
better across the border of mediocrity - the setting is faux and the
leads are faux as well to appease the networks craving lowest common
denominator fare and the real subversive stuff happens on the sidelines.